Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
TGHusker

3/4 vs Base D

Do you prefer the 3/4 D over the Base 4 down lineman D  

56 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, SFW said:

And if so what does that say about Chinander?  

That our defense improved but our offense regressed so much that our defensive improvements weren’t what they could have been do to the stupid amount of 3 & out drives our offense had

Share this post


Link to post

32 minutes ago, Gorillahawk said:

That our defense improved but our offense regressed so much that our defensive improvements weren’t what they could have been do to the stupid amount of 3 & out drives our offense had

Ah...there it is more of the same.

 

Blame and Excuses 

 

It’s talent...It’s the offense...it’s what we inherited.

Share this post


Link to post
39 minutes ago, Gorillahawk said:

That our defense improved but our offense regressed so much that our defensive improvements weren’t what they could have been do to the stupid amount of 3 & out drives our offense had

 

Some defensive stats improved slightly, some decreased slightly. No real significant change from year 1 to 2.

 

There is a lack of real improvement on areas they strongly focused on, such as rush defense and red zone defense. In the preseason I discussed the importance of stopping the run on first down, citing specifically how teams can really open their playbook on 2nd and 5 and shorter. An offense is deemed “successful” by statisticians if held to 50% of the needed yards on first down. We certainly saw with our offense how impactful it is on playcalling when you can’t reach that level consistently running on first down.

 

The result: A change from 5.63 rushing yards per carry to 5.22.

 

Red zone defense is another area of emphasis, and largely related to run defense. T121st in the country at 91% conversion rate allowed. Even worse in conference play where teams converted 32 of 34 attempts. Only 7 of those were field goals.  This was not a good area last year, and actually got worse.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, Ocean said:

https://fishduck.com/2016/02/i-fell-in-love-with-a-defensive-system/

this sums it up decently well and its just 1 of the first few articles I just now googled. It's a little aged so the defense has changed a little bit. Brent Venables runs a lot of cover 1 out of it with 4/3 over, but I think its based on the same alignments.

 

As a side note. If you search up quarters high match-up zone you will get a whole lot of pat narduzzi, but there are quite a few really good breakdowns too. Some good videos on youtube breaking down fronts, personnel groupings, stunts, etc. 

From the article it really speaks circular and says almost nothing.  It reminds me of reading the student rag on campus, sometimes almost sounds like something.  However, if you look at the pictures, the author cannot even be bothered to choose pictures with 11 players on the field most of the time.  It makes the pictures have no context in this regard.

 

I googled 'quarters high match-up zone' and didn't find anything academic.  Most football writing on the internet is not technical in nature.  I certainly hope you were not advocating a 4-deep alignment on every play.  That would be good at stopping very little except long throws at the safeties.  I don't think it is ever wise to leave soft corners with backed off linebackers to give an offense plenty of room.  On second thought, that is kind of what Chinander likes to run...

Share this post


Link to post
20 hours ago, TGHusker said:

I have yet to warm up to the 3/4 D. I have not been impressed by the results under SF or MR.   My understanding of the concept is that you need premium line backers to make it work - esp Outside LB who can be both great pass rushers and be able to cover RBs and TE on pass plays as needed.  My understanding is that the D line is to be stout enough to defend against the run but basic responsibility is to plug the holes so the LB can mop up either with pass rushing or stopping running plays.  It seems to me, that it takes more elite athletes to make it work.  We haven't had those elite guys on D as linebackers or great rush ends either.  So, maybe it is a good D if / when we have better athletes.  Correct me if my understanding is incorrect.

I would like us to discuss the merits of the 3/4 vs the base 4 DL defense.   

 

I believe only 3 teams in the Big 10 run the 3/4 D.  Is this the right D for the Big 10 - which is heavy on great runners and great OLs??

How is it better or worse for NU in our current situation vs a base D in your opinion. 

 

Vote in the poll and then elaborate why yes or no.

I have no preference.  They both work.

 

So many people on here are confused about the 3-4 because they saw the banker, diaco mess.

 

Both systems require elite athletes,  the more elite athletes the better the defense.

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, SFW said:

Ah...there it is more of the same.

 

Blame and Excuses 

 

It’s talent...It’s the offense...it’s what we inherited.

Not to completely disagree with the excuse thing, the one thing that is so hars about chinander is we dont know what the actual ceiling on the defensive personnel is. Is there ceiling 50 overall? 60 overall? 20?

 

The best indicator that i can think of is nfl draft picks, and undrafted guys. He probably has one 3rd or 4th rounder and 4 undrafted guys (davis×2, daniels and jackson) 

 

With those players, whats his expected defensive supposed to look like? 

 

That said, if defenders keep filling the wrong gaps year 3, theres your problem.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, madrat said:

From the article it really speaks circular and says almost nothing.  It reminds me of reading the student rag on campus, sometimes almost sounds like something.  However, if you look at the pictures, the author cannot even be bothered to choose pictures with 11 players on the field most of the time.  It makes the pictures have no context in this regard.

 

I googled 'quarters high match-up zone' and didn't find anything academic.  Most football writing on the internet is not technical in nature.  I certainly hope you were not advocating a 4-deep alignment on every play.  That would be good at stopping very little except long throws at the safeties.  I don't think it is ever wise to leave soft corners with backed off linebackers to give an offense plenty of room.  On second thought, that is kind of what Chinander likes to run...

The article is just decent. It's an opinion piece from a student or somebody trying to get into sports writing I'd imagine.

 

The defense, itself, is what Pat Narduzzi ran at Mich State and what he runs now at Pitt.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3tT6wS1eC4&list=PLN6nh81grVQT3MUJY2aHMYy4Dzt57VNKF&index=3

 

A good playlist here. The video above is a short breakdown of a passing scenario. There are also run defense and alignments videos and core concept videos.

image.png.6cbc2b165b2259d4c77f91422b342f2b.png

 

image.png.ad752019962288e06d3e8b120a98d940.png

Share this post


Link to post

Seen great 4 - 3 defenses and great 3 - 4 defenses throughout my time watching college and pro football (since '82) so I don't think either is really better than the other.  What makes either great is having great players and a great coordinator, right now, we know we don't have the former and the later is still to be determined (need the great players).  

Share this post


Link to post
17 hours ago, Ocean said:

In today's game I think running a quarters high match up zone is the way to go. The 4/3 gives you the luxury of going wide 9 and easily switching in nickel and dime personnel without having to mix up the responsibilities of the down lineman. I do like the quarters high look out of a 3/4 nickel pack squeezing the ends down and replacing the nose guard. So much you can do out of the 3/4, if only you had a guy that could rush passer. 

The bold is so important.  Who was our last very good, consistent  pass rusher?  Gregory?  The lack of pressure on the QB has allowed so many of those 3rd and 8 or 4th and 8 becoming 1st and 10.

 

The great NU Ds of the past have always had an outstanding pass rusher.  Sometimes it wasn't a DE but an OLB. 

Bo as Frank's DC, had D Williams coming from the OLB spot and he was a terror.  Or we had SUH or Crick rushing from the middle. 

Share this post


Link to post

 

14 hours ago, Gorillahawk said:

That our defense improved but our offense regressed so much that our defensive improvements weren’t what they could have been do to the stupid amount of 3 & out drives our offense had

 

The O was certainly disappointing but to be fair we played against WAY more quality defenses than offenses. Against the four offenses we faced that were in the top50 we averaged over 40pts given-up. 

Share this post


Link to post

If it were me outside of a few exceptions I am only recruiting LBs who were LBs in high school. Davis, Nelson and Tannor were DEs and now are stand up LBs - not a major issue, just pointing it out. Miller mostly played DE as well and is ILB. JoJo was a safety. Now if we can get another Randy Gregory (Jimari Butler) I am okay with that to get a pass rush. 

 

Wisconsin on the other hand only recruits LBs to play all 4 spots in their 3-4 defense. 

Share this post


Link to post
20 minutes ago, BIG ERN said:

If it were me outside of a few exceptions I am only recruiting LBs who were LBs in high school. Davis, Nelson and Tannor were DEs and now are stand up LBs - not a major issue, just pointing it out. Miller mostly played DE as well and is ILB. JoJo was a safety. Now if we can get another Randy Gregory (Jimari Butler) I am okay with that to get a pass rush. 

 

Wisconsin on the other hand only recruits LBs to play all 4 spots in their 3-4 defense. 

 

It's pretty common to recruit 4-3 ends as 3-4 outside backers if they're athletic enough. Not their fault their high school team runs a 4-3, and a big part of recruiting is projecting how they fit your scheme, not finding guys who happen to play in a similar one in high school. Wisconsin has actually had pretty good luck with high school QB/athletes who also play LB. Baun was recruited as an LB all the way, but he was a great high school QB. TJ Edwards and TJ Watt both played QB in high school too.

Share this post


Link to post
13 minutes ago, Husker in WI said:

 

It's pretty common to recruit 4-3 ends as 3-4 outside backers if they're athletic enough. Not their fault their high school team runs a 4-3, and a big part of recruiting is projecting how they fit your scheme, not finding guys who happen to play in a similar one in high school. Wisconsin has actually had pretty good luck with high school QB/athletes who also play LB. Baun was recruited as an LB all the way, but he was a great high school QB. TJ Edwards and TJ Watt both played QB in high school too.


You can be a 4-3 LB and still play LB in a 3-4....I think we try and get too cute getting weakside DEs to convert into 3-4 OLB

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, Lightfighter214 said:

So many people on here are confused about the 3-4 because they saw the banker, diaco mess.

 

Banker ran a 4-3 and was quite a bit better than Chinander.

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
7 minutes ago, The Dude said:

 

Banker ran a 4-3 and was quite a bit better than Chinander.

......with the help of some talent left to him such as Maliek Collins, Nathan Gerry and Vincent Valentine.

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.










×
×
  • Create New...