3-4 vs. 4-3

[dcgc5]

Quote: Originally Posted by [email protected]

Yeah I was responding to the guy so I assumed we were both talking about the 4-2-5. Anyway this looks like a nice set that could potentially stop all offenses but then again I'm skeptical about being soft in the middle with only 2 LBs.

Very good concern which is why you need good tackling DBs and corners that can survive on an island. Strong athletic guys. If you have a team gashing you with the run you move your CBs a step or 2 off the line. Move on of your safeties into the box and now you're running a 4-3

[mailman2]

Quote: Originally Posted by freernnur5

There is no true defense to stop all offenses, you will want to adapt to the offense that you are facing within the constraints of the personnel you have. Edit: this also extends to shuffling around personnel. Jake Ryan, Michigan's starting SLB puts his hand in the ground and becomes our SDE on passing plays when we shift to nickel formations because he is such a fantastic pass rusher that we can't afford to take him off the field.

Yeah I agree but I think there are some defenses that are a better "base" so to speak then others. Like a good 3-4 can be manipulated into various formation easier than a 4-3 for example.

[freernnur5]

Quote: Originally Posted by [email protected]

Yeah I agree but I think there are some defenses that are a better "base" so to speak then others. Like a good 3-4 can be manipulated into various formation easier than a 4-3 for example.

Well one thing to consider about a 4-3 is that when you go into a passing defense with nickel/dime unless you have pass rushing LBs that you can substitute to play DEs in those packages you are probably left with a mediocre pass rush because you will have two big run stopping DEs and two NT types at DT in your 4 man front. Granted some defenses have their nickel be a 2-4-5 deal that keeps all the LBs in for the pass rush. So that may be something to consider.

Also a 4-2-5/nickel can be very similar to a 4-3 depending on the capabilities of your 5th defensive back (this is one area I wish that the depth chart allowed for a nickel back position).

I actually believe USC went with a 4-2-5 as their base defense last year to get another safety type of player on the field to have more speed in the defense to help defend against Oregon (and you may have seen how that turned out...).

Edit: on the subject of extra spaces on the depth chart I wish we got the following splits:
Outside, slot WR
Boundary, field and nickel CB
SDE instead of LDE (SLB and LOLB as well)
WDE instead of RDE (WLB and ROLB as well)
DT and NT separated

[freernnur5]

Quote: Originally Posted by IkeB2

The "bubble theory" comes from the alignment in a 3-4. There is a natural "bubble" created over the Guards because in a 3-4, the offensive Guards are uncovered. As for the secondary, they are not affected by what front is used. There is just so much more you can do out of an "Odd" front. LSU uses an Odd front against spread teams but they do not use 4 LBs. Teams normally get out of the "Normal/Base" 3-4 when teams use the spread. This is due to trying to cover slot WRs with 260lb LB/DEs. Notice the image below. Hope that helps. Now people do run it a little differently, but the ideas of most here are pretty much the base of each D.

Ok yea I understood that, just hadn't heard it called the bubble theory before. Thanks for clearing that up for me.

[Senio25]

Quote: Originally Posted by IkeB2

In a small capsule.... If you have 2 stud DTs, a 4-3 is better. They push the pocket and stoop the run. 2 stud DTs can also make your DEs better and cover up your MLB. In order to use a 3-4, you have to have a very good NT and above average DEs(5 Techs). But you MUST have 2 stud ILBs for a 3-4 to be really good. Bama is a great example. They always have a very good NT and stud ILBs. No one really knows who the DEs are yet the D is always special. Marcel Darius was the only DE that was a stud and many said that may have been the best college D ever.

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

[mailman2]

What would guys suggest for a smaller unit like Washington State?

[freernnur5]

Quote: Originally Posted by [email protected]

What would guys suggest for a smaller unit like Washington State?

I don't know much about Washington State. What are the capabilities of the DL and LBs? Any studs that stand out for a specific reason?

Edit: judging by their depth chart on Rivals, they run a 3-4 so you might want to stick with that as they probably currently have the personnel for it. You can recruit to whatever you are more comfortable with though and evolve over time.

[mailman2]

Quote: Originally Posted by freernnur5

I don't know much about Washington State. What are the capabilities of the DL and LBs? Any studs that stand out for a specific reason? Edit: judging by their depth chart on Rivals, they run a 3-4 so you might want to stick with that as they probably currently have the personnel for it. You can recruit to whatever you are more comfortable with though and evolve over time.

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