3-4 vs. 4-3

[freernnur5]

Quote: Originally Posted by [email protected]

lol yeah but in my dynasty its 2018 so imagine things have changed. but changing over time still apllies

I would say to go then with first and foremost what you are comfortable with playing as (3-4 can offer a lot of zone blitzes in the playbooks) and secondly what you have recruited to/what is your personnel.

[dcgc5]

Quote: Originally Posted by [email protected]

lol yeah but in my dynasty its 2018 so imagine things have changed. but changing over time still apllies

Unless a coach came in and changed the scheme...does the CPU do that?...you should still be set up for the 3-4. You could try the 4-3 as a base set if you're not getting enough push. Then maybe the 4-2-5 if teams are throwing on your too well.

[Senio25]

That 4-2-5 is great for getting speed on the field against spread teams. I think it could be dangerous tough to stop and good running team that will run right at you with a FB and RB. With a 3wr set it will spread the d a little and should have success getting a guard and the FB on the 2 LB's. The RB could go untouched every time.

[IkeB2]

Quote: Originally Posted by Senio25

Actually Dareus is a DT who can play different positions on the line. I remember he covered a TE down the field in the Tenn. game we almost lost in 2009. It was the play before Cody blocked the kick I think. It wasn't bad coverage either. I met him in person he is HUGE. And yes LSU did try a little 3-4 mostly in 2011 with tyrann and the other db #13 (forgot his name) playing as the OLB's. Only in Nickel packages. It was fun to see

Yeah, Dareus(sorry for mispelling before) was a DT but played DE(5 Tech) in the Base D and slid inside to the more natural DT on passing downs(or when Bama went to an even front). He was/is special!

As for LSU, as I said, it was never a legit "3-4" that LSU used....due to the fact that not all the "4" were LBs. They used a 3-2-6 or 3-3-5. In that alignment, The 3 linemen were all DEs, 2 of your best LBs, and and Tyrann would play over the slot and #13(Ron Brooks...who is the nickle back for the Bills now) was the other slot guy. Obviously in the 3-3-5, there was an extra safety to go with the LBs and Tyrann was the 5th DB.

[dcgc5]

Quote: Originally Posted by Senio25

That 4-2-5 is great for getting speed on the field against spread teams. I think it could be dangerous tough to stop and good running team that will run right at you with a FB and RB. With a 3wr set it will spread the d a little and should have success getting a guard and the FB on the 2 LB's. The RB could go untouched every time.

It gets tougher for sure but really if you face a run heavy team you can bring your Safety/LB hybrid in the box and run a 4-3 variation. Thats the beauty of the 4-2-5. You can easily change from one formation to another.

[BigBlueInd]

The 4-2-5 originally was TCU's answer to all the spread teams they were seeing. I think people view the defense as something completely different but to me it isn't. It's another 1 or 2 db's instead of linebackers. I learned defense first through the 4-4 and then Miami's version of the 4-3. If I'm in the 4-3 and I face a spread team then I'm going to look like a 4-2-5 alignment wise anyways. It's just changing personnel.

I'm always interested in Virginia Tech's 4-2-5 because their philosophy is from 4-4(and trying to get that S in the box too lol) and not the 4-3 like most teams.

And as far as facing heavy run teams the 4-2-5 is going to look like a traditional 4-4. Like TCU in the Rose Bowl against Wisconsin.

[Senio25]

Quote: Originally Posted by BigBlueInd

The 4-2-5 originally was TCU's answer to all the spread teams they were seeing. I think people view the defense as something completely different but to me it isn't. It's another 1 or 2 db's instead of linebackers. I learned defense first through the 4-4 and then Miami's version of the 4-3. If I'm in the 4-3 and I face a spread team then I'm going to look like a 4-2-5 alignment wise anyways. It's just changing personnel. I'm always interested in Virginia Tech's 4-2-5 because their philosophy is from 4-4(and trying to get that S in the box too lol) and not the 4-3 like most teams. And as far as facing heavy run teams the 4-2-5 is going to look like a traditional 4-4. Like TCU in the Rose Bowl against Wisconsin.

Yeah TCU eventually started to just beat the blockers with their speed. For example one play Wisconsin ran a counter to the left and Tank Carder ran behind the pulling o-line to tackle Ball for a loss. It was smart. Why take on those huge blockers when you can just use your speed and run around. Also they didn't fear Wisconsin's wr beating them 1 on 1 so they stacked the box. Wisconsin reminds me of LSU they're very stubborn with the run and TCU took advantage.

[BigBlueInd]

Yeah, Wisconsin's play calling in that first half was interesting. They ran Outside Zone like 3 times the whole first half and got at least 7 yards each time. Then they ran OZ for a whole drive in the 3Q and ran it down their throat for a TD. And then never ran it again the rest of the game! They had to gameplan that they were gonna run power/counter/ a lot and it burned them.