We are playing a 3-4 Defense

[Scraps]

The difference between a 3-4 and a 4-3 isn't that dramatic IMO. There are some subtle differences that require different talents (for example, a dominant NT required for a 3-4) but the schemes are similar enough that IMO a great defense should be able to run both in a single game.

I remember back in the mid-90s we had a slew of LB injuries so Wade Phillips turned us from a 3-4 to a 4-3 in one week's time. We played Miami that week and Marino was LOST against a defense they hadn't prepared for.

 

Why can't this be the case every week? IMO it can and should be part of any good defensive system. Throw in some forty six for even more diversity and watch opposing offenses panic.

 

But we are not talking about a great defense. We are not talking about the Bills defense under Wade Phillips. We are talking about Dick Jauron's weak front 7 defense.

[nostyle126]

Going to a 3-4 doesn't magically make a defense better. You still have to run it right. We're talking an awful lot about how the 3-4 is going to cure all our ills...while we still have no clue who will be running the defensive show. We could still run a conservative tampa 2 shell from a base 3-4. I'm hoping our next DC comes in and decides to install an aggressive D, whether it's a 4-3, 3-4, or 50 alignment (bring back the double eagle).

[jtl3302]

Stroud and Johnson are not ends and you can't just move a tackle to end. The ends in a 3-4 better be able to rush the passer.

Could be wrong but believe main job of the ends in 34 defense is to neutralize the tackles and allow OLB's to rush QB!

[nostyle126]

But we are not talking about a great defense. We are not talking about the Bills defense under Wade Phillips. We are talking about Dick Jauron's weak front 7 defense.

We are talking about what we HOPE our defense can BECOME.

[Scraps]

We are talking about what we HOPE our defense can BECOME.

 

You have to start by realistically assessing what you have.

[nostyle126]

You have to start by realistically assessing what you have.

What we have is personnel for a 4-3. Howevah, we can play more aggressive schemes from a 4-3. We don't have to sit back in read-and-react zone all the time. I can't stress enough how much I think we have to blitz more. What is the strength of our D? Our secondary. What part of the defense is pressure put on by blitzing? The secondary. Doesn't it just make sense to shift the pressure to our defense's strength?

[pioniere]

The difference between a 3-4 and a 4-3 isn't that dramatic IMO. There are some subtle differences that require different talents (for example, a dominant NT required for a 3-4) but the schemes are similar enough that IMO a great defense should be able to run both in a single game.

 

I remember back in the mid-90s we had a slew of LB injuries so Wade Phillips turned us from a 3-4 to a 4-3 in one week's time. We played Miami that week and Marino was LOST against a defense they hadn't prepared for.

 

Why can't this be the case every week? IMO it can and should be part of any good defensive system. Throw in some forty six for even more diversity and watch opposing offenses panic.

 

I agree. We just need the parts (players) and a DC that is creative enough to do it.

[Mr. ChumChums]

Could be wrong but believe main job of the ends in 34 defense is to neutralize the tackles and allow OLB's to rush QB!

 

Didn't Warren Sapp try being a 3-4 end in Oakland? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought that experiment was a failure for him, and he ended up switching back to his 3-technique position of a 4-3 Tackle.

[dgrid]

Didn't Warren Sapp try being a 3-4 end in Oakland? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought that experiment was a failure for him, and he ended up switching back to his 3-technique position of a 4-3 Tackle.

yeah, cause he couldn't rush the passer in 3-4 system.

[SouthGeorgiaBillsFan]

Could be wrong but believe main job of the ends in 34 defense is to neutralize the tackles and allow OLB's to rush QB!

 

No, if either tackle is being neutralized, then the offensive tackle is winning the battle. It isn't like the guy is going to block two people anyway, so that really doesn't make much sense. From a run defense standpoint, holding his ground at the line I guess could be considered neutralizing the tackle in an effective way, as long as he can still move laterally to fill gaps, but when rushing the pass, which is what was being discussed, you have to expect a push from the defensive lineman, period. If the line can't create a push, it is not going to be hard for 2 guards and one or two backs to pick up blitzing linebackers. You need defensive lineman who can draw a double team, thereby leaving one or both linebackers with only one blocker to pick them up, thus allowing them to utilize what should be an advantage in speed. As it stands, only Stroud appears to have the ability to consistently draw the double team, and playing him in the middle would be disadvantageous against the run, which btw, was our weakness.

 

All that being said, I'm not sure why anyone would want to change our defensive scheme at this point. We have a decent line and a great secondary and the d was rock solid against the pass. Also, our rush defense never really got abused until well into the second halves of most games (barring the occasional long run that any team gives up), and that is as much a function of our inept offense not giving them enough plays to rest as any lack of talent. If we stay in a 4-3 scheme, we are about one great LB away from having a very strong overall defense. Then the onus is on the offense to move the ball and keep guys fresh. Bottom line is there is no adjustment that can make the defense successful if we don't start to move the ball consistently, and the thought that our defense is sub par is greatly exaggerated by the continued ineptitude of the offense.

[nostyle126]

As it stands, only Stroud appears to have the ability to consistently draw the double team, and playing him in the middle would be disadvantageous against the run, which btw, was our weakness.

Very true. Also, the 3-4 has a natural weakness in what they call the "bubbles" between the NT and DEs. The 3-4 has its flaws, for sure.

 

All that being said, I'm not sure why anyone would want to change our defensive scheme at this point. We have a decent line and a great secondary and the d was rock solid against the pass. Also, our rush defense never really got abused until well into the second halves of most games (barring the occasional long run that any team gives up), and that is as much a function of our inept offense not giving them enough plays to rest as any lack of talent. If we stay in a 4-3 scheme, we are about one great LB away from having a very strong overall defense. Then the onus is on the offense to move the ball and keep guys fresh. Bottom line is there is no adjustment that can make the defense successful if we don't start to move the ball consistently, and the thought that our defense is sub par is greatly exaggerated by the continued ineptitude of the offense.

Couldn't agree more.

[SuperKillerRobots]

In the 3-4 what current Bills players would you plug in at DL and LB?

 

I think you could make the switch and only really need two or three players - not all of them full-time starters.

 

Something like this:

 

DE: Stroud

DE: Williams

NT: need

Rush OLB: Maybin

ILB: Poz

ILB: Mittchell

OLB: need/Schobel

 

Obviously this is only the starters, so we would certainly need some depth as well, but I think this could work. First of all, Schobel, if he comes back next year, would be a situational pass rusher from the OLB position. You'd need to bring in the prototypical NT and an OLB who can cover and play the run primarily, so Schobel can come in on passing downs and rush from that spot. I'd have to think that the DL, with an NT we don't have now, and Stroud and Williams would be pretty stout. Johnson and McCargo could work as DE backups (maybe not McCargo). Poz and Mitchell should be good inside. The keys to this defense, as I see it, are: 1. Maybin needs to work out in the OLB capacity, meaning he has to be effective rushing the passer from that spot and has to show some ability to drop into coverage (I think he plays the run well enough now to play the rush backer position in a 3-4 - since that won't be his primary responsibility); and two we need an NT.

 

My thought on this year is that even is they eventually want to go 3-4, they will only do it part time this year and going forward until they have the right players to play it all the time. Basically it will depend on whether they can get a good NT in the draft (or FA). The only other worry, and it's kind of big, is whether or not the LBs as a group can hold up and how the depth looks (of course the starter who isn't on the roster now would be a big step).

[nostyle126]

I don't understand when you guys think we should move our DTs to DEs. They're very different positions.

[SuperKillerRobots]

It's never too early for this conversation. The last couple of seasons it didn't even require a new HC for people to ask for a 3-4 defense.

 

I mean everybody else is doing it right? If we don't we won't be cool. But no, mean old Mr Wilson won't let us

 

Mr Wilson won't let us have any fun. Who wants to get a bag of dog**** and light it on fire on his front porch?

[SteamRoller67]

Stroud and Johnson are not ends and you can't just move a tackle to end. The ends in a 3-4 better be able to rush the passer.

 

Not really. 3-4 ends are generally run specialists, not pass rushers. Perfect example was the Chiefs pick at #3 of Tyson Jackson from LSU in the '09 draft. Had he gone to a 4-3 team, he would have played DT, not DE.

http://www.nfl.com/draft/2009/profiles/tys...ackson?id=71341

 

Stroud could make the move to end or bulk up and hold down the nose tackle position until a 360 pound mass of humanity becomes available via free agency or the draft. The Bills LBers are already well suited to play the 3-4...

Schobel would move to OLB the same as Aaron Kampman did for Green Bay in 2009.

The last 3-4 defense the Bills implemented in 2000 had a front 3 of Hansen, Washington and Wiley. Pat Williams came in on some obvious run downs to form "the package" tandem at DT. LBers were Newman and Rogers outside, Holecek & Cowart inside.

That was one hell of a defense...

[jtl3302]

No, if either tackle is being neutralized, then the offensive tackle is winning the battle. It isn't like the guy is going to block two people anyway, so that really doesn't make much sense. From a run defense standpoint, holding his ground at the line I guess could be considered neutralizing the tackle in an effective way, as long as he can still move laterally to fill gaps, but when rushing the pass, which is what was being discussed, you have to expect a push from the defensive lineman, period. If the line can't create a push, it is not going to be hard for 2 guards and one or two backs to pick up blitzing linebackers. You need defensive lineman who can draw a double team, thereby leaving one or both linebackers with only one blocker to pick them up, thus allowing them to utilize what should be an advantage in speed. As it stands, only Stroud appears to have the ability to consistently draw the double team, and playing him in the middle would be disadvantageous against the run, which btw, was our weakness.

 

All that being said, I'm not sure why anyone would want to change our defensive scheme at this point. We have a decent line and a great secondary and the d was rock solid against the pass. Also, our rush defense never really got abused until well into the second halves of most games (barring the occasional long run that any team gives up), and that is as much a function of our inept offense not giving them enough plays to rest as any lack of talent. If we stay in a 4-3 scheme, we are about one great LB away from having a very strong overall defense. Then the onus is on the offense to move the ball and keep guys fresh. Bottom line is there is no adjustment that can make the defense successful if we don't start to move the ball consistently, and the thought that our defense is sub par is greatly exaggerated by the continued ineptitude of the offense.

 

Base 3-4 defense

"But in the base alignment of a 3-4 defense, a defensive end is in position to prevent the offensive tackle from consistently stepping out and blocking an outside linebacker."

This came from Pat Kirwan, NFL.com. Not trying to argue with anyone here but just think both Stroud(6'6" 310) and Johnson(6'3" 290) have ideal size and ability slide outside in a 34 alignment. I realize they need to be strong at the point of attack and get some push, just don't believe their main job is to rush the passer like 43 ends! Here are some 34 ends and there stats on some pretty good defenses: Jets #1 D- Ellis(6'5" 285) 7sacks, Douglas(6'2" 290) 1.5 sacks; Balt #3 D- Price(6'5" 290) 6.5 sacks, Ngata(6'4" 345) 1.5 sacks; Dallas #9 D- Spears(6'4" 309) 2.5 sacks, Olshansky(6'6" 315) 1.5 sacks. I'm not sure if Williams could put on 10lb and handle NT; might need to find thru draft or FA. Just think there is more talented 34 olb/hybrids(Maybin) then true 43 ends out there. Like to see us switch. I GUESS WE NEED BACKERS TOO!

[ishouldbegm]

Base 3-4 defense

"But in the base alignment of a 3-4 defense, a defensive end is in position to prevent the offensive tackle from consistently stepping out and blocking an outside linebacker."

This came from Pat Kirwan, NFL.com. Not trying to argue with anyone here but just think both Stroud(6'6" 310) and Johnson(6'3" 290) have ideal size and ability slide outside in a 34 alignment. I realize they need to be strong at the point of attack and get some push, just don't believe their main job is to rush the passer like 43 ends! Here are some 34 ends and there stats on some pretty good defenses: Jets #1 D- Ellis(6'5" 285) 7sacks, Douglas(6'2" 290) 1.5 sacks; Balt #3 D- Price(6'5" 290) 6.5 sacks, Ngata(6'4" 345) 1.5 sacks; Dallas #9 D- Spears(6'4" 309) 2.5 sacks, Olshansky(6'6" 315) 1.5 sacks. I'm not sure if Williams could put on 10lb and handle NT; might need to find thru draft or FA. Just think there is more talented 34 olb/hybrids(Maybin) then true 43 ends out there. Like to see us switch. I GUESS WE NEED BACKERS TOO!

 

those weights arent real, they never get updated. I wouldnt put much stock in them

[jtl3302]

those weights arent real, they never get updated. I wouldnt put much stock in them

Yeah, just saying 34 ends aren't rush ends like 43. Who knows, i don't think Schobel will be back and we have no other rush ends on roster. No matter what we do, there are holes to be filled!

[nostyle126]

Not really. 3-4 ends are generally run specialists, not pass rushers. Perfect example was the Chiefs pick at #3 of Tyson Jackson from LSU in the '09 draft. Had he gone to a 4-3 team, he would have played DT, not DE.

http://www.nfl.com/draft/2009/profiles/tys...ackson?id=71341

 

Stroud could make the move to end or bulk up and hold down the nose tackle position until a 360 pound mass of humanity becomes available via free agency or the draft. The Bills LBers are already well suited to play the 3-4...

Schobel would move to OLB the same as Aaron Kampman did for Green Bay in 2009.

The last 3-4 defense the Bills implemented in 2000 had a front 3 of Hansen, Washington and Wiley. Pat Williams came in on some obvious run downs to form "the package" tandem at DT. LBers were Newman and Rogers outside, Holecek & Cowart inside.

That was one hell of a defense...

Tyson Jackson is a freak and not a typical DE. He is built like Reggie White, a rarety at the DE position. Most DEs are less power, more quickness, like a schobel, or (prototypically) Bruce Smith.

 

Schobel at OLB would be HORRIBLE. Teams would run spread offenses, forcing Schobel into coverage against, for example, Dallas Clark. how do you think that would work out?

 

Even Maybin, the greek statue he is, is not quite athletic enough to be a bona fide outside linebacker.

 

If we switch to 3-4 we would put Kelsay and Maybin on the ends (assuming Schobel is retiring) and we'd need a massive body in the middle, which we don't have right now. Wilfork would be a f/a option. Then we'd need an ILB to go with Poz. Mitchell and Nic Harris could play outside, but that is a pretty weak linebacking corp if we don't reinforce it via free agency or draft. This would be a pretty mighty overhaul.

[dgrid]

Schobel at OLB would be HORRIBLE. Teams would run spread offenses, forcing Schobel into coverage against, for example, Dallas Clark. how do you think that would work out?

very true about TE's, but not out of spreads

 

If we switch to 3-4 we would put Kelsay and Maybin on the ends (assuming Schobel is retiring)

Williams & Stroud would be better 3-4 ends than Kelsay & Maybin