4-3 defenses vs 3-4 defenses (1 Viewer)

[Weiner Dog]

First...who are the teams that consistently run the 3-4 D??

SF

DAL

OAK

SD

HOU

CLE

PIT

NE

** NOTE: I did not include teams like MIN and MIA who "tinkered" with the 3-4 D.

Collectively, the teams running a 3-4 D have a 51-58 overall record. 5 of the 8 teams are already mathematically eliminated from the playoffs. Worst yet, teams running the 3-4 were below average from a statistic standpoint.

SF: #32 in yards allowed/game

DAL: #11

OAK: #23

SD: #13

HOU: #31

CLE: #19

PIT: #3

NE: #27

Average ranking = 19.9 (outperformed by 62% of the NFL)

Only 3 of the 8 teams finished in the top-half of the NFL in yards allowed/game, and only 1 of the 8 teams finished in the Top-10.

SF: #30 in points allowed/game

DAL: #12

OAK: #25

SD: #13

HOU: #31

CLE: #11

PIT: #3

NE: #17

Average ranking = 17.8 (outperformed by 55% of the NFL)

As you can see, the picture gets a little rosier with points allowed/game. 4 of the 8 teams were in the top-half of the NFL in points allowed/game. However, again, only 1 of the 8 teams cracked the Top-10.

Why did I crunch these numbers?? Well...it seems as if NFL teams are slowly migrating (or attempting to migrate) to the 3-4 D. If the above-listed statistics are the norm, as opposed to an exception, why fight the trends and attempt the 3-4??

 

[Bloom]

But you have to ask yourself - is the problem the 3-4 D itself, or not having the right personnel to make it work?CLE clearly needs an overhaul upfront and at least 1 more solid LB, if not 2.HOU needs everything.SF needs help up front and in the secondary.OAK needs LBs and DBsNE lost just about every DB over the course of this season.The 3-4 is still the better D vs. the run - its no coincidence that SD and PIT are 1-2 in the NFL vs. the run. Minnesota's run defense also completely turned around when they switched to the 3-4 because of injuries up front. I think thats why the league is migrating to it, along with more players coming up that fit the 3-4 roles better than the 4-3 roles.

 

[inbreeder]

Nice posts fellas.Couple of small points to add to Bloom's post, which is dead on. The most successful 3-4 teams have at least one solid pass rushing OLB and very good NTs.PIT and SD fit that bill for sure. DAL will soon. NE would as well if it weren't for the decimation of that secondary.

 

[msommer]

Nice posts fellas.

Couple of small points to add to Bloom's post, which is dead on. The most successful 3-4 teams have at least one solid pass rushing OLB and very good NTs.

PIT and SD fit that bill for sure. DAL will soon. NE would as well if it weren't for the decimation of that secondary.

so what you are saying is that a decent secondary is needed as well?That brings it down to a good DL, good Lbs and a decent secondary.

How is this different than the 4-3 then?

 

[Tick]

I think a second year in the system should be allowed for the teams that switched this offseason.Personally, I want all 3-4s gone because those players suck for IDPs.

 

[inbreeder]

Nice posts fellas.

Couple of small points to add to Bloom's post, which is dead on.  The most successful 3-4 teams have at least one solid pass rushing OLB and very good NTs.

PIT and SD fit that bill for sure.  DAL will soon.  NE would as well if it weren't for the decimation of that secondary.

so what you are saying is that a decent secondary is needed as well?That brings it down to a good DL, good Lbs and a decent secondary.

How is this different than the 4-3 then?

I assume you're just being silly here.The original post brought up the relatively poor performance of the 3-4 defense this season. Bloom made the point that it was a personnel issue rather than a scheme issue. And that the 3-4 defense may be the better scheme against the run. My post built on that just a little.

I don't know many 4-3 defenses that thrive on good NT play and pass rushing LBs. So it's plenty different in the details. Obviously a good defense (either 3-4 or 4-3) needs all components to work.

If you want to start a thread debating which scheme is better, go ahead.

 

[Weiner Dog]

But you have to ask yourself - is the problem the 3-4 D itself, or not having the right personnel to make it work?

CLE clearly needs an overhaul upfront and at least 1 more solid LB, if not 2.

HOU needs everything.

SF needs help up front and in the secondary.

OAK needs LBs and DBs

NE lost just about every DB over the course of this season.

The 3-4 is still the better D vs. the run - its no coincidence that SD and PIT are 1-2 in the NFL vs. the run. Minnesota's run defense also completely turned around when they switched to the 3-4 because of injuries up front. I think thats why the league is migrating to it, along with more players coming up that fit the 3-4 roles better than the 4-3 roles.

OK...even if the 3-4 provides a better run defense than the 4-3, the passing defense of the 3-4 obviously suffers. Alarmingly, teams running the 3-4 have 4 of the 6 worst passing defenses this season. Personnel or not, this is not a promising stat for the 3-4. Also, with more and more teams turning to the West Coast Offense and throwing the ball more, you would think more teams would be more conscience of their passing D, as opposed to their rushing D.If I had to take a step back from what the '05 numbers are telling me, I would say that the 3-4 defense is a great defense...when mastered (ala the Steelers). However, the "learning curve" could be steep. Let's take the best "non-Steelers" 3-4 team for example.

Wade Phillips (aka one of the "masters" of the 3-4) was hired by the Chargers two seasons ago. The result?? The #2 rushing defense, but also the #29 passing defense. Worst yet, the Chargers are out of the playoff hunt despite having LT, Gate, Brees, and McCardell on offense. The #29-ranked passing D cannot be blamed on personnel, either. Jammer, Florence, Davis, Fletcher, and Kiel are top-shelf talents.