3-4 vs. 4-3

[TheMeat]

I had almost exclusively used a 4-3 defense, my thinking being that if I'm going to be rushing 4 players each down, I'd rather be rushing 4 DL's than 3 DL and a LB. I recently switched to a 3-4, due to talent shortage on DL. I had a great defensive season overall, and my WLB had an insane stats season, 34 sacks and DPOY, etc....

So I decided to stick with it and have had another great year defensively. I'm wondering what people's thoughts are on 3-4 vs 4-3. Is it purely a matter of talent and putting up the most talented front 7? Or is a certain set up better vs run/pass? Or is a certain set up better in general?

My current strategy for my team, which is a very pass-heavy offense that usually scores first and stays ahead, is to play players in these roles :

DT - High RunDef, Low PassRush

DE - High PassRush, Med-High RunDef

ILB1/SLB - Med-High RunDef, High Coverage, Low PassRush

ILB2 - High RunDef, Low Coverages, Low PassRush (comes out in Nickel)

WLB - High PassRush, High RunDef Low Coverage

Any thoughts, suggestions? My defense faces about 60-70 percent passing plays.

Another thing I've wondered about is which coverages are more important for a LB? I assume this comes purely from which defensive style you play? Can I just stick with better zone LB's and just use more zone coverage and be ok?

[Epi_862]

I'm referring to real football here, so take it with a grain of salt. FOF usually does a great job of simulating football, but at times it's pretty far fetched.

So, 3-4 is better against the pass, 4-3 is better against the run. If you play them conservatively. Of course, there are a lot of 3-4 d's that can really stuff up the run. On the other hand, a lot of times, 3-4 and 4-3 are in actuality really similar. 3-4's strength is that the OL never knows the direction the pressure is coming from. In 4-3, you are rushing the front 4 on almost every down. I think (not sure, only played 3-4 in FOF a couple of games) FOF really doesn't work the 3-4 like real football, so, i guess the more experienced people will answer this one better.

But after all, personnel dictates the system. Use your players strengths, thats much more important than a specific system.

[Ben E Lou]

I don't have hardcore tests to back it up, but my opinion based on observation is that the 3-4 in FOF is the 4-3 with a coat of paint on it. The RDE seems to get the stats of a DT, and the WLB gets more than his fair share. I suspect that the way to go is to have a guy at RDE with run stopping skills. Other than that, I'd agree with the skills mentioned in the original post as the more important ones (although I tend to think that it doesn't matter very much if your LDE has run-stopping skills if your LBs do).

On the whole, the 3-4 doesn't appear to be any better or worse in performance than the 4-3, other than a pretty reliable way to get sacks from a WLB who may not otherwise be terribly useful.

[gadorg]

Originally Posted by TheMeat

I had almost exclusively used a 4-3 defense, my thinking being that if I'm going to be rushing 4 players each down, I'd rather be rushing 4 DL's than 3 DL and a LB. I recently switched to a 3-4, due to talent shortage on DL. I had a great defensive season overall, and my WLB had an insane stats season, 34 sacks and DPOY, etc....

So I decided to stick with it and have had another great year defensively. I'm wondering what people's thoughts are on 3-4 vs 4-3. Is it purely a matter of talent and putting up the most talented front 7? Or is a certain set up better vs run/pass? Or is a certain set up better in general?

My current strategy for my team, which is a very pass-heavy offense that usually scores first and stays ahead, is to play players in these roles :

DT - High RunDef, Low PassRush

DE - High PassRush, Med-High RunDef

ILB1/SLB - Med-High RunDef, High Coverage, Low PassRush

ILB2 - High RunDef, Low Coverages, Low PassRush (comes out in Nickel)

WLB - High PassRush, High RunDef Low Coverage

Any thoughts, suggestions? My defense faces about 60-70 percent passing plays.

Another thing I've wondered about is which coverages are more important for a LB? I assume this comes purely from which defensive style you play? Can I just stick with better zone LB's and just use more zone coverage and be ok?

Off topic question - at what point in the offseason can you switch from say, a 4-3 to a 3-4? I am running the TB Buccaneers and because of depth at the LB spot, I'd like to go to a 3-4.

[Lintyfresh85]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

On the whole, the 3-4 doesn't appear to be any better or worse in performance than the 4-3, other than a pretty reliable way to get sacks from a WLB who may not otherwise be terribly useful.

Quoted for the truth.

In the OSFL, I switched to a 3-4 and while my team didn't really take to it that well... Vernon Abrams an OLB I signed in the offseason went on to have a career year. Coming into the year I think for his career he had 2 or 3 sacks tops. I flipped him over to WLB and he goes out and has around 16-17 sacks and wins DPOY.

That's about the only thing I know how to do correctly in FOF and that's finding a quality rush WLB.