3-4 Defense

[Old Man Mike]

The Bears scoring on the "psycho-millaround" chaos defense is funny. Diaco tried it once in the second or third game, I think, and it didn't work then either. But I HAVE seen it work multiple times in the pros, at least twice causing the QB to call timeout. If used as a surprise, with a few guys reading strong keys and having some well-timed "break" or "go" signal, then I like the concept and hope Diaco will have it as a gimmick defense he can call.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

I think we see Johnson and KLM and we like that they are good at taking on blockers, but neither have good/great pass rushing skills, at least that we've seen. Lynch seems like the kind of talent that is going to be bringing both facets to the table and that is a great thing to think about right now.

I think we also look at EJ and KLM and with them both at or close to 300 pounds and think all of our defensive linemen are going to be that size. I would suggest the coaching staff realizes their limitations as pass rushers (EJ more than KLM) and thought it wise to bulk them up as much as possible without losing speed, so they are effective at controlling their gaps.

But I don't think that means Lynch and other DE's we recruit in the future are going to be like that. In fact, I'd venture to say the coaching staff would prefer having a set of big space eating defensive ends, and another set of more athletic/pass rushing defensive ends. That gives them a ton of flexibility and is basically what has us drooling right now, right? So, we'll probably see Tuitt and possibly Sprigmann be the ones who are inching closer to 285-290 as youngsters, while Lynch and possibly Niklas are going to be 265-270 as youngsters, but likely never going over 280 or 285.

You see a lot of elite NFL Defensive End's around 270, so I would say since we run a 3-4 and want a little more bulk with our players at that position, but we won't see Lynch get too big. He's already gained 15 pounds and is at 260, I would say there's a good chance he never gets over 275 (which is the weight Justin Tuck plays at in the NFL) in his time at Notre Dame. I know a lot of people think he's skinny, but I think he's pretty well filled out already for someone his age. I also think that perception has to do with, again, seeing our older DE's who are just mammoth's right now.

Fantastic point! Never thought of it this way . . .

 

[Whiskeyjack]

I think it's legitimate to have some concerns right now. On the face of it, Lynch doesn't particularly fit our 3-4 system perfectly.

However, I think we should also expect that he's going to be more of a playmaker that doesn't simply rush the passer all the time. In other words, after his freshman season (in which we will probably see a lot of him strictly coming off the edge or going after the quarterback) he's going to be making plays in stopping the run, eating up blockers, and getting out in space at times and being disruptive.

I think we see Johnson and KLM and we like that they are good at taking on blockers, but neither have good/great pass rushing skills, at least that we've seen. Lynch seems like the kind of talent that is going to be bringing both facets to the table and that is a great thing to think about right now.

I think we also look at EJ and KLM and with them both at or close to 300 pounds and think all of our defensive linemen are going to be that size. I would suggest the coaching staff realizes their limitations as pass rushers (EJ more than KLM) and thought it wise to bulk them up as much as possible without losing speed, so they are effective at controlling their gaps.

But I don't think that means Lynch and other DE's we recruit in the future are going to be like that. In fact, I'd venture to say the coaching staff would prefer having a set of big space eating defensive ends, and another set of more athletic/pass rushing defensive ends. That gives them a ton of flexibility and is basically what has us drooling right now, right? So, we'll probably see Tuitt and possibly Sprigmann be the ones who are inching closer to 285-290 as youngsters, while Lynch and possibly Niklas are going to be 265-270 as youngsters, but likely never going over 280 or 285.

You see a lot of elite NFL Defensive End's around 270, so I would say since we run a 3-4 and want a little more bulk with our players at that position, but we won't see Lynch get too big. He's already gained 15 pounds and is at 260, I would say there's a good chance he never gets over 275 (which is the weight Justin Tuck plays at in the NFL) in his time at Notre Dame. I know a lot of people think he's skinny, but I think he's pretty well filled out already for someone his age. I also think that perception has to do with, again, seeing our older DE's who are just mammoth's right now.

So, valid concerns, but I think Lynch stays relatively "light" in comparison to EJ and KLM but brings so much playmaking ability to the table that he will be a force and able to play every down after his freshman year.

Excellect post.

If you're correct, and Diaco develops Lynch (and maybe Niklas) as more traditional 4-3 DEs, do they get many reps in our base 3-4 front? As long as we're expecting a run, I would guess not.

Which I really don't have a problem with. As I mentioned earlier, I have faith that Kelly's staff will utilize all of our D-line to maximum effect. The point of my post though, is that many people expect our "starting" D-line to be Lynch - Nix - Tuitt in the near future, and I don't think we'll actually see that.

If I had to guess, I'd say that we'll probably have a 3-4 front with big space-eating DEs to stop the run, and a different personnel package for our hybrid 4-3 fronts on passing downs.

 

[Rocket89]

Excellect post.

If you're correct, and Diaco develops Lynch (and maybe Niklas) as more traditional 4-3 DEs, do they get many reps in our base 3-4 front? As long as we're expecting a run, I would guess not.

Which I really don't have a problem with. As I mentioned earlier, I have faith that Kelly's staff will utilize all of our D-line to maximum effect. The point of my post though, is that many people expect our "starting" D-line to be Lynch - Nix - Tuitt in the near future, and I don't think we'll actually see that.

If I had to guess, I'd say that we'll probably have a 3-4 front with big space-eating DEs to stop the run, and a different personnel package for our hybrid 4-3 fronts on passing downs.

It all depends on what kind of versatility guys like Lynch can bring. If he's really just a pass rusher, then yeah he's probably not going to be an every down guy.

But just because he'll be playing at 270 (guesstimate for his sophomore year) doesn't mean he won't be able to both fill his gap and be a pass rusher too. Sure he'd be a little undersized to eat up blockers, but sometimes the really special players can dominate in all facets without being the biggest. Lynch strikes me as the type of player who will obviously be a hell raiser off the edge as a pass rusher, but also someone with the strength and instincts to be a run stopper and effective player within the system.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

Wasn't the reason for a 3-4 was how hard it was to attract top d-line talent? Now with that myth mercifully put out of its misery, what are the prospects of running a 4-3 more regularly?

 

[Zibby32]

Wasn't the reason for a 3-4 was how hard it was to attract top d-line talent? Now with that myth mercifully put out of its misery, what are the prospects of running a 4-3 more regularly?

You just spent two recruiting cycles building 3-4 personnel and now you want to switch to a 4-3...um ok?

 

[rtrn2glory]

no need to switch to 4-3 imo...the flexibility of a 3-4 allows you to have certain 4 man fronts, but the 4-3 doesn't allow you that flexibility...i like the direction we're going i don't see any reason to switch as of now.

 

[Zibby32]

the defense will be fine, still havent officially transitioned to the 3-4 yet.

Look at it this way...our only true Nose Tackle on the roster hasnt even taken a snap yet. keep things in perspective please.

 

[Old Man Mike]

The true reason for the slow evolution of defenses to things like the 3-4 has been, in my understanding, the development of the quick-dart passing game and pass-oriented spreads and shotguns. It is considered by many d-analysts to provide more opportunity for flexibility and quarterback confusion about reads. Blitzing is a little more "creative" out of this formation, usually.

The lack of many DT monsters to go around, and its partial "solution" by having only one NT, is a side-effect of this defensive philosophy shift rather than the driving force. It can be a pseudo-solution, however, as true NTs are even rarer than DTs, probably by more than the 2-to-1 numbers count which would make such shifts equal. Also, the incredible jump in speed and field coverage of the linebackers and safeties has reduced the running games markedly. [watch the pros for all these trends].

21st century "rocket-fast offenses" demand a great imagination for d-coordinators to keep under control. They are reaching out for whatever they can do to mess with the QBs and the key blockers' minds. If you don't have a destroyer like Suh who can just power into the backfield every second play, you have to win by legerdemain rather than by mere physicality. And, to mention again things like the "psycho-millaround", ideas like that would never be dreamt of if the d-coordinators weren't a bit desperate for a psychological edge.

 

[Zibby32]

Well said Old Man Mike...

I am a die hard 4-3 man myself, man-blitz system. I find that the 3-4 is gaining traction in the pros more and more...and its trickling down through the college ranks.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

Quote:
Wasn't the reason for a 3-4 was how hard it was to attract top d-line talent? Now with that myth mercifully put out of its misery, what are the prospects of running a 4-3 more regularly?

You just spent two recruiting cycles building 3-4 personnel and now you want to switch to a 4-3...um ok?

I am not advocating anything, I was just asking a question. So, is the answer to my question that we don't have the inside tackles for it?

Also, that part about the only true nose tackle, and not having taken a snap, exclude Sean Cwynar for a reason, other than body type?

 

[Zibby32]

Also, that part about the only true nose tackle, and not having taken a snap, exclude Sean Cwynar for a reason, other than body type?

Is that a rhetorical question? Sorry, not a true 3-4 NT.

 

[irish1958]

I seem to recall that BK said that we played 3-4 and 4-3 about equally last year, with the 3-4 occurring slightly more often.

 

[Old Man Mike]

Because of the size and power of some of our DEs [think EJ and Kona for instance], we can easily jump in and out of the 4-3 if Diaco wants to. Also, Kelly's "power" category of recruiting tends to not sweat some of this "everyone-knows" imagery, and he thinks flexibility [particularly think Springman, Hounshell, Niklas, Tuitt]. I don't see rotating into 4-3s as much of a difficulty. It's in the 3-4, where it seems to me that the tackle is a sort of special character, that I worry about our depth in classes beyond Big Lou.

 

[Zibby32]

Exactly why we need a big body NT in this class OMM, good call.

I seem to recall that BK said that we played 3-4 and 4-3 about equally last year, with the 3-4 occurring slightly more often.

Correct: you saw a four man front.

Incorrect: classifying it as a 4-3.

I hate to nitpick but although you did see a 4 man front, its still within the realm of the 3-4 defense. In fact, its not uncommon to see 4 "down" lineman with 3-4 principles.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

Quote:
Also, that part about the only true nose tackle, and not having taken a snap, exclude Sean Cwynar for a reason, other than body type?

Is that a rhetorical question? Sorry, not a true 3-4 NT

.

No, that is my question, not rhetorical, is the distinction you are making with Sean only body type? Because it seems to me his last four games, statistics are staggering. And trust me; though I am not an expert on the 3-4 defenses, I am an expert at staggering. I was only trying to engender conversation, as blogging is, and learn a little, (knowledge transfer.)

Exactly why we need a big body NT in this class OMM, good call.


Quote:
I seem to recall that BK said that we played 3-4 and 4-3 about equally last year, with the 3-4 occurring slightly more often.

Correct: you saw a four man front.

Incorrect: classifying it as a 4-3.

I hate to nitpick but although you did see a 4 man front, its still within the realm of the 3-4 defense. In fact, its not uncommon to see 4 "down" lineman with 3-4 principles.

Exactly what I was trying to get at in earlier posts. Two questions:

In a four man front in a 3-4 defense, are the assignments of the four down men different than a 4-3, particularly the interior linemen? Or is it just as simple as the same assignment, moving a CAT linebacker to a down position to get a better pass rush?

no need to switch to 4-3 imo...the flexibility of a 3-4 allows you to have certain 4 man fronts, but the 4-3 doesn't allow you that flexibility...i like the direction we're going i don't see any reason to switch as of now.

What flexibility does the 4-3 not allow? To have the reciprocal, 3 man fronts? To be better against the short pass game or the quick hit running game?

 

[rtrn2glory]

.

No, that is my question, not rhetorical, is the distinction you are making with Sean only body type? Because it seems to me his last four games, statistics are staggering. And trust me; though I am not an expert on the 3-4 defenses, I am an expert at staggering. I was only trying to engender conversation, as blogging is, and learn a little, (knowledge transfer.)



Exactly what I was trying to get at in earlier posts. Two questions:

In a four man front in a 3-4 defense, are the assignments of the four down men different than a 4-3, particularly the interior linemen? Or is it just as simple as the same assignment, moving a CAT linebacker to a down position to get a better pass rush?



What flexibility does the 4-3 not allow? To have the reciprocal, 3 man fronts? To be better against the short pass game or the quick hit running game?

4-3 usually requires you to switch personnel when you move to a 3 man front, tipping your hand to the opposition, while the 3-4 allows you to do multiple things with the same personnel on the field.

 

[Zibby32]

I shope that image works...better than explaining

 

[Zibby32]

I dont doubt Sean Cwynars abilities. Without watching video of said 4 games, I cant really comment on how well he did on those games. Stats are troubling, and can be misleading. 280 pounds is very light for a 3-4 nose. i would feel more comfortable with someone considerably heavier manning that post. Can he physically do it? sure..maybe. Can someone else do it better? sure...maybe. Is he playing out of position? ya I think so. I see him as a perfect candidate for the strong-side DE. We will see how it ALLLLLLLLL unfolds....ahah

 

[Who'saWildManNow]

Just as long as we are 4-3 come NAVY.

 

[Zibby32]

to the contrary Wild Man...3 man fronts are far more success against the spread option than 4. Believe it or not...

 

[Bogtrotter07]

Thanks for all the info, so far! About the goats: My understanding is that our linemen efectively took themselves out of the play by trying to run around the double team blocks, allowing one of the doubleteamers to scrape off and pop our linebacker, who was too far down field anyhow. Is that accurate?

 

[Zibby32]

Never run around blocks...particularly in the interior!!! Enormous gaps open up when that happens!

 

[rtrn2glory]

Regardless of what scheme your in...as a d lineman your job is to get blocked plain and simple, especially on the interior. the good thing about the 3-4 is that the guys up front are usually more understanding of this fact. get blocked and let the LB's do their job.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

Regardless of what scheme your in...as a d lineman your job is to get blocked plain and simple, especially on the interior.

Not sure that's accurate. In a 4-3, the DEs are basically trying to get past the OT on every play to either blow up the RB or the QB in the backfield; if they get blocked, they've failed.

the good thing about the 3-4 is that the guys up front are usually more understanding of this fact. get blocked and let the LB's do their job.

I'd go a few steps further and say that if your D-linemen aren't keeping blockers off the LBs, your defense is in for a long day.

 

[rtrn2glory]

i'm talking about in regards to running the ball...every defense nowadays is predacated on stopping the run...and the general consencus on doing this is to have your d line get blocked so your LB's can tackle...obviously you're right in regards to if a d lineman reads pass set, he needs to get after the QB, but day one when a Def coordinator is drawing up a scheme its objective is to stop the run.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

i'm talking about in regards to running the ball...every defense nowadays is predacated on stopping the run...and the general consencus on doing this is to have your d line get blocked so your LB's can tackle...obviously you're right in regards to if a d lineman reads pass set, he needs to get after the QB, but day one when a Def coordinator is drawing up a scheme its objective is to stop the run.

I'm open to correction on this, but even on running downs, I'm pretty sure a 4-3 DE is never looking to take on an OT's block. They're usually shooting through a B or C gap trying to hit the RB in the backfield.

It's one of the biggest differences between the 3-4 and 4-3, and it's mainly why this thread got started.

 

[Zibby32]

I'm open to correction on this, but even on running downs, I'm pretty sure a 4-3 DE is never looking to take on an OT's block. They're usually shooting through a B or C gap trying to hit the RB in the backfield.

It's one of the biggest differences between the 3-4 and 4-3, and it's mainly why this thread got started.

Good god that is incorrect....You cant just let the OT get to the next level without putting a hand on him!

Its called "frictioning," the end needs to engage the tackle so that he doesnt have free reign to down block or get to the linebacker with ease.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

Good god that is incorrect....You cant just let the OT get to the next level without putting a hand on him!

Its called "frictioning," the end needs to engage the tackle so that he doesnt have free reign to down block or get to the linebacker with ease.

Fair, but a 4-3 DE is never going to stand there and wrestle with the OT on running down, is he?

He chips the OT, reads the flow of the play, and tries to make the tackle if it's coming his way, no?

 

[rtrn2glory]

i've always been under the impression that d linemen are there for a reason...they can't tackle as well in space so let's keep the guys who can free from contact allowing them to do what they do better than the guys up front who are doing what they do best...get blocked and defeat the block...d linemen are trained at the college level from day one to defeat a block and get blocked...LB's have a few more things on their plate...identify run or pass, drop to my zone, stay in my cut back lane, etc. d linemen must do their part to keep the LB's job as simple as possible.

and i'm not a former LB by no means i'm just stating facts.