3-4 vs. 4-3 on Defense

mjmartin1970 said:
I think a 3-4 can be very effective at stopping the run IF you have at least two D-lineman who can eat up two blocks and allow the LB's to make plays. However, IF we were going to switch to a 3-4, last year would have been the year. We had the perfect linemen to do this and didn't. Thus, I think we will only see it once in a while this year.
Click to expand...

Good point. Timing is everything.

 
:w00t On playstation, I run a 4-3. I still blitz the 2 OLB's down the middle. I make sure that I have OLB's that have at least an 85 rating on speed. I get about 8 sacks a game. :box :corndance
 
Axl_sued_me said:
:w00t On playstation, I run a 4-3. I still blitz the 2 OLB's down the middle. I make sure that I have OLB's that have at least an 85 rating on speed. I get about 8 sacks a game. :box :corndance
Click to expand...
Well, there we have it.

Bring six every time and rack up the sacks.

Why haven't you told Cos?

 
Now while this is an article about the NFL Defenses, the principles hold true for the style of Defense.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/writ...ends/index.html

The decline of the Tampa Two in favor of the more flexible 3-4

"Since Tampa Two defenses places a premium on speed instead of bulk and power, teams featuring big offensive lines and a power running game are successful pounding the ball between the tackles. It takes time for the toll of the running game to be effective, but teams that run the ball 30 or more times eventually wear down the defense and force an opponent into more eight-man fronts.

Additionally, the success of the running game opens up big plays in the passing game off play action. Holding the middle linebacker with strong running action, creates a hole about 15-20 yards down the middle of the field, which is easily exploited by a tight end or slot receiver. Once teams establish the ability to attack the defense in multiple ways off the run and play action, the benefits of using the Tampa Two coverage are nullified."

"While the 4-3 needs four 300-pounders up front to work, the 3-4 defense is built around athletic linebackers with speed and quickness."

The more I read sometimes, the more the 3-4 looks better to me. Maybe the rumor mill isnt as crazy as it sounds.

 
Axl_sued_me said:
:w00t On playstation, I run a 4-3. I still blitz the 2 OLB's down the middle. I make sure that I have OLB's that have at least an 85 rating on speed. I get about 8 sacks a game. :box :corndance
Click to expand...
I run a 4-3 as well (on Xbox). I don't even need to blitz :) . I have Carriker and myself coming off of the ends (myself being only an 85 overall at this point), and we combined for 7 sacks, with 2 more from my linebackers when I did decide to blitz 'em. If you can recruit even a decent D-line, you should barely even need to blitz :box .

I'm big on the speedy LB's as well, I'll take a faster LB over a higher rated one most of the time.

Back to the topic at hand...

I'm very much an old school, 4-3 guy myself. It's just too good against the run for me to go against it. That being said, I have started to gain respect for the 3-4, particularly when we ran it in our inter-dorm football game this year. We only lost because of one lucky pass... :angry: . Anyway, the 3-3 w/ a Joker actually sounds really appealing to me, makes the defense so much more versatile.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top