Switch to 4-3?
-
I'm not saying we do it, but has anyone ever thought about this? This defense has a lot of potential. Especially the run D.
I mean, Shaun Rogers is better with 4-3 seeing as how he's a 3-tech tackle.
Thoughts?
-
nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
-
I agree NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. We don't have any defensive ends although roth might be ok. Our linebackers cannot play the 4-3. Why change, we have a pretty good defense that can get better with only a couple of more players.
The run D is good because we have big physical linebackers who like to punish. That is the strength of the 3/4
-
My ass. Did you watch the game last week? We shouldn't switch as long as Rob Ryan is our DC
-
Dude wtf. Ryan is finally mixing things up. I see good thing coming. Don't change a thing.
-
you guys have a lot of big beefy defensive linemen. you really dont have the tall quick guys to play defensive end in the 4-3 but your tackles are a perfect fit for the 3-4
barton, fujita, and roth could all play in a 4-3 and they would all do fine. fujita played the strong side in the saints 4-3 for a few seasons and he was pretty good at it
the 4-3 is much easier to find people to fill it but the personel that you guys have just doesnt fit it well enough
besides, now that so many teams pass in the NFL its better to have a base defense that defends the pass better anyway
-
One reason we've been so good against the run this year is because we are a 3-4. This 3-4 is a two-gap scheme meaning the DL stand their man up and take on a double team. As long as they don't commit to either side they can play both gaps. This is especially good against zone run blocking teams because it limits creases and cutbacks BUT it requires discipline.
If you recall, the only 100 yard rusher we've had this year was Michael Turner and most of that came on a 55 yard run that saw everyone playing 2 gap except for good ol' Shaun who decided he needed to play 1-gap penetrator and (in the process) open up a chasm for him to run through a mile wide.
The 3-4 also is good in pass defense because the offensive line blocking schemes are predicated on knowing who's coming. It's far more versatile that way.
This isn't to say that I didn't have to get used to it myself but when done properly...it's excellent.
-
One reason we've been so good against the run this year is because we are a 3-4. This 3-4 is a two-gap scheme meaning the DL stand their man up and take on a double team. As long as they don't commit to either side they can play both gaps. This is especially good against zone run blocking teams because it limits creases and cutbacks BUT it requires discipline.
If you recall, the only 100 yard rusher we've had this year was Michael Turner and most of that came on a 55 yard run that saw everyone playing 2 gap except for good ol' Shaun who decided he needed to play 1-gap penetrator and (in the process) open up a chasm for him to run through a mile wide.
The 3-4 also is good in pass defense because the offensive line blocking schemes are predicated on knowing who's coming. It's far more versatile that way.
This isn't to say that I didn't have to get used to it myself but when done properly...it's excellent.
One reason we've been so good against the run this year is because we are a 3-4. This 3-4 is a two-gap scheme meaning the DL stand their man up and take on a double team. As long as they don't commit to either side they can play both gaps. This is especially good against zone run blocking teams because it limits creases and cutbacks BUT it requires discipline.
If you recall, the only 100 yard rusher we've had this year was Michael Turner and most of that came on a 55 yard run that saw everyone playing 2 gap except for good ol' Shaun who decided he needed to play 1-gap penetrator and (in the process) open up a chasm for him to run through a mile wide.
The 3-4 also is good in pass defense because the offensive line blocking schemes are predicated on knowing who's coming. It's far more versatile that way.
This isn't to say that I didn't have to get used to it myself but when done properly...it's excellent.
the 3-4 is usually successful at stopping the run because of the personel....not the scheme. the 3 down linemen make it somewhat of a liability against the run game unless you have a guy like shaun rogers who can plug up any hole
more often than not the 3-4 is designed to stop the pass but it can be manipulated to be a run stuffing defense, although the pass defense will suffer as a result
-
I have always preferred the 3-4.....don't change.
-
The 3-4 is a better run defense if you have athletic linebackers and corners. It is strong against sweeps and other plays to the outside, as well as the short passing game. It is also better than the 4-3 for confusing the quarterback. The 4-3 is superior for teams that run the middle well, but the 3-4 can be easily adjusted for big line, running teams. With Cleveland's current defensive players the 3-4 is their best bet. It also gives Ryan a lot more flexibility for blitzes and special situtational plays on defense in my opinion.
-
The linebackers we have are much more athletic than the D-linemen. This has always been the case, even when we ran a 4-3.
There is no "magic" solution to any defensive issue. If there was, Rob Ryan would have figured it out long ago.
-
Great idea,
After your defense dismantled the Saints, the Browns need to be retooled so you can climb up in the draft. I mean we can't have your franchise winning now can we, I don't think the ERs in Cleveland would be prepared for all the heart attacks that could cause.
-
it's the one and only thing your team does well and has done well the last couple of years. why would you want to change it?
oh yeah, forgot who i was speaking to.
-
Great idea,
After your defense dismantled the Saints, the Browns need to be retooled so you can climb up in the draft. I mean we can't have your franchise winning now can we, I don't think the ERs in Cleveland would be prepared for all the heart attacks that could cause.
Endymion said:
Great idea,After your defense dismantled the Saints, the Browns need to be retooled so you can climb up in the draft. I mean we can't have your franchise winning now can we, I don't think the ERs in Cleveland would be prepared for all the heart attacks that could cause.
they really didnt run the 3-4 very much at all against the saints
there were a lot of packages with only 1 or 2 defensive linemen, 4 or 5 LBs and lots and lots of DBs
-
Lmao some of you guys need to relax. I said "I'm not saying we do this".
Simply a thought of what the D would look like if we WERE to switch to the 4-3.
-
Your guys D is why u have a good team. You have the personel to run it, esp the LB's. Its a little different from ours, but that doesn't meqn its worse. Rob R. is making a name for himself, hopefully he doesn't get offers to become a HC too soon for the Browns sake. With McCoy in place at the QB pos. I see good things for the Browns. Seriously, u can see the change and discipline. I'm getting a little off track here, but its exciting to see u guys turning around.
-
I dont want to switch but I will say this...
When only a few teams ran 3-4, it was much easier to find the parts to run it which in some ways are far more specific than that of the 4-3 personnel. Now, with more teams running 3-4, I was wondering if the 4-3 parts are easier to find.
For example, now, when a prototypical 3-4 nose tackle comes out, every 3-4 team is tripping over themselves to get him.
-
I'm not saying we do it, but has anyone ever thought about this? This defense has a lot of potential. Especially the run D.
I mean, Shaun Rogers is better with 4-3 seeing as how he's a 3-tech tackle.
Thoughts?
I'm not saying we do it, but has anyone ever thought about this? This defense has a lot of potential. Especially the run D.
I mean, Shaun Rogers is better with 4-3 seeing as how he's a 3-tech tackle.
Thoughts?
Oh my a revelation................and someday we will moslty recoginze here that
Shaun Rogers is what he is USELESS
meanwhile................
we never had the people to go 3-4 and I am glad you finally recognized this after three years
-
I'm not saying we do it, but has anyone ever thought about this? This defense has a lot of potential. Especially the run D.
I mean, Shaun Rogers is better with 4-3 seeing as how he's a 3-tech tackle.
Thoughts?
Oh my a revelation................and someday we will moslty recoginze here that
Shaun Rogers is what he is USELESS
meanwhile................
we never had the people to go 3-4 and I am glad you finally recognized this after three years
Oh my a revelation................and someday we will moslty recoginze here that
Shaun Rogers is what he is USELESS
meanwhile................
we never had the people to go 3-4 and I am glad you finally recognized this after three years
That's not true. Kenyon Coleman is a straight 5-technique, Rubin is a great 0-technique and Shaun Rogers can be whatever the hell he wants to be. The problem is the "wants" part. Shaun Rogers is a great 0-technique until he decides to play 1-gap and give up 55 yards to Michael Turner on one play. Sheldon Brown makes a great 3-4 corner if only he were just a little faster but that would burn him in the 4-3 too. Matt Roth is coming on as a rush backer and David Bowens still plays ILB well. Scott Fujita just made ten friggin' tackles in this defense.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login