Effectiveness Of 3-4 Vs. 4-3 Is Found In The Numbers
-
Effectiveness of 3-4 vs. 4-3 is found in the numbers
Published: Dec. 18, 2008
Getting to the quarterback is critical to any football team's success -- perhaps second only to the quarterback's ability to throw the ball. There's debate about the most effective way of sacking the signal-caller, but some clues about what works best have been revealed this season.
The top three pass rushers this season are outside linebackers from 3-4 defenses. Dallas' DeMarcus Ware (19), Miami's Joey Porter (17.5) and Pittsburgh's James Harrison (15) have 51.5 sacks between them. The top three pass rushers from 4-3 defenses -- Atlanta's John Abraham (15.5), Minnesota's Jared Allen (14.5) and Carolina's Julius Peppers (12.5) -- all are defensive ends and have 42.5 sacks between them.
So, is the 3-4 defense a better package for rushing the passer? Is the 4-3 defense easier for an offensive line to counter? Those are some of the questions I'll try to answer here.
Base 4-3 defense
In the most popular base 4-3 defense that NFL teams run, the defensive tackle lines up over the strongside guard, meaning all four defensive linemen are situated on offensive linemen who can get a good blocking angle on the pass rushers.
"Big on big is always the preference for an offensive line, and blocking the 4-3 gives you the best chance," said an offensive line coach. Offensive linemen want to block defensive linemen, hence the term "big on big."
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.
The best pass blocker is usually the left tackle, but if he struggles to clear the defensive end in order to get to the outside linebacker, he'll give up sacks. Porter, Ware, and Harrison all rush from outside and have a defensive end occupying the left tackle in the base look.
Someone please tell me why we are reverting back to the 4-3?
Is it simply just because we continue to stike out with linebackers in the draft? To many Hyped up Tweeners and Projects have been thrashed down our throats, so we are simply throwing in the Towel and going to stack the box with 8? (4-3 + SS)
-
I don't have the numbers, but maybe you should look at the rush defense numbers of 4-3 defenses. I'm assuming that stopping the run and forcing opposing qbs to throw is the idea of switching... making opposing offenses one dimensional has always been a highly effective strategy in the NFL
-
Mr. T, many teams are running the 3/4 now. Back when it was mostly just Pitt and NE running it, they basically had a monopoly on the few positions integral to the success of the 3/4 ie . tweener defensive ends in college reverting to the stand up OLB position in the NFL.
It is much easier to find talent to fit a 4/3 than it is a 3/4, and if the 3/4 is not stocked well it brings inherent weaknesses. The 3/4 tends to be weaker against the run as so much is contingent on having very good 2 gap dlinemen and ILB's that can be a physical presence in the running game. The OLB's have the onus of putting pressure on the QB and curling into the flats in coverage.
This is a copycat league and things run in cycles. The bottom line is whatever scheme you run, it is paramount that your front office and coaching staff be on the same page regarding talent acquisition. We have that now, and under Savage and RAC 'n ROLLS we didn't.
-
I can remember just before we hired Savage and RAC 'n ROLLS, Trivisausage on WTAM said that if we did not get these hires right that we would struggle for the next 8 years.
Give that man a crystal ball.
I understand the copy cat aspect, but I do prefer the 3-4, we have either had bad D lineman or slow wornout LOB'rs or LB's who cant fill the gaps in the middle and making tackles right before the RB sprung free past the safeties.
Maybe I'm just pissed off after reading the article (False Start) on the other thread and I am left scrathing my head. But what else would you expect from a league that was formed from a bunch of Ad men and Car dealers.
-
How about the old 5-2-4 that was run when I was in HS. You had 5 up front linemen, 2 LBs and 4 DBs. Of course, that was at time when a high school team probably threw only 6-8 passes in an entire game.
Or what about using the 46 defense of Buddy Ryan. I believe the Jets under Rex Ryan still use this defense. As I understand it, it is a base 4-3 defense only it is hyper aggressive when it comes to rushing the passer.
Why would this defense still not be in favor in the NFL?
-
How about the old 5-2-4 that was run when I was in HS. You had 5 up front linemen, 2 LBs and 4 DBs. Of course, that was at time when a high school team probably threw only 6-8 passes in an entire game.
Or what about using the 46 defense of Buddy Ryan. I believe the Jets under Rex Ryan still use this defense. As I understand it, it is a base 4-3 defense only it is hyper aggressive when it comes to rushing the passer.
Why would this defense still not be in favor in the NFL?
How about the old 5-2-4 that was run when I was in HS. You had 5 up front linemen, 2 LBs and 4 DBs. Of course, that was at time when a high school team probably threw only 6-8 passes in an entire game.
Or what about using the 46 defense of Buddy Ryan. I believe the Jets under Rex Ryan still use this defense. As I understand it, it is a base 4-3 defense only it is hyper aggressive when it comes to rushing the passer.
Why would this defense still not be in favor in the NFL?
It is still used by teams in limited situations, but can be exposed if shown too often given the limitations in pass coverage. Basically, the advent of the WCO offenses made this defense obsolete as a staple given the efficiency of the short passing games used by many teams now.
-
How about the old 5-2-4 that was run when I was in HS. You had 5 up front linemen, 2 LBs and 4 DBs. Of course, that was at time when a high school team probably threw only 6-8 passes in an entire game.
Or what about using the 46 defense of Buddy Ryan. I believe the Jets under Rex Ryan still use this defense. As I understand it, it is a base 4-3 defense only it is hyper aggressive when it comes to rushing the passer.
Why would this defense still not be in favor in the NFL?
It is still used by teams in limited situations, but can be exposed if shown too often given the limitations in pass coverage. Basically, the advent of the WCO offenses made this defense obsolete as a staple given the efficiency of the short passing games used by many teams now.
It is still used by teams in limited situations, but can be exposed if shown too often given the limitations in pass coverage. Basically, the advent of the WCO offenses made this defense obsolete as a staple given the efficiency of the short passing games used by many teams now.
Except, the WCO was in use long before the 46. I mean, the 49ers were running the WCO in the early 80s, and the Bears came along in 1985 with the 46 and blew the WCO up.
....or perhaps, is it the talent playing the scheme that caused the Bears to have success rather than the scheme itself? And is it the talent that gave the 49ers and Packers running the WCO that caused them to have success, and not the scheme?
Schemes and coaching are important. The coaching ability of guys like Paul Brown, Lombardi, Landry, Noll, Belichick, Walsh, Gibbs, LeBeau and others absolutely makes a difference when it comes to winning and losing. But you have to have talent as well.
-
Every team runs some sort of WCO version now, so if a team was to line up in a 46 exclusively the offense would just attack the intermediate areas that are exposed from the scheme's weak spots. I agree that you need to have a studly front seven for the 46 to work, and the Bears had that back in a generation where the WCO was basically run by a few teams---or variations of.
-
How about the old 5-2-4 that was run when I was in HS. You had 5 up front linemen, 2 LBs and 4 DBs. Of course, that was at time when a high school team probably threw only 6-8 passes in an entire game.
Or what about using the 46 defense of Buddy Ryan. I believe the Jets under Rex Ryan still use this defense. As I understand it, it is a base 4-3 defense only it is hyper aggressive when it comes to rushing the passer.
Why would this defense still not be in favor in the NFL?
How about the old 5-2-4 that was run when I was in HS. You had 5 up front linemen, 2 LBs and 4 DBs. Of course, that was at time when a high school team probably threw only 6-8 passes in an entire game.
Or what about using the 46 defense of Buddy Ryan. I believe the Jets under Rex Ryan still use this defense. As I understand it, it is a base 4-3 defense only it is hyper aggressive when it comes to rushing the passer.
Why would this defense still not be in favor in the NFL?
Fritz Shurmur,the late Uncle of Pat Shurmur (Our coach) Was Def Coord who ran the 5-2-4 with the Rams back in the mid/late 80's with limited success. I was never a huge fan of the 34 def. I always knew the 4-3 was easier to employ and it took the burden off the players with all of the technical Jargon and calls you had to make. Im just huge fan of stalwart bone crushing kill the QB type of Defensive linemen.
-
How about the old 5-2-4 that was run when I was in HS. You had 5 up front linemen, 2 LBs and 4 DBs. Of course, that was at time when a high school team probably threw only 6-8 passes in an entire game.
Or what about using the 46 defense of Buddy Ryan. I believe the Jets under Rex Ryan still use this defense. As I understand it, it is a base 4-3 defense only it is hyper aggressive when it comes to rushing the passer.
Why would this defense still not be in favor in the NFL?
Fritz Shurmur,the late Uncle of Pat Shurmur (Our coach) Was Def Coord who ran the 5-2-4 with the Rams back in the mid/late 80's with limited success. I was never a huge fan of the 34 def. I always knew the 4-3 was easier to employ and it took the burden off the players with all of the technical Jargon and calls you had to make. Im just huge fan of stalwart bone crushing kill the QB type of Defensive linemen.
Fritz Shurmur,the late Uncle of Pat Shurmur (Our coach) Was Def Coord who ran the 5-2-4 with the Rams back in the mid/late 80's with limited success. I was never a huge fan of the 34 def. I always knew the 4-3 was easier to employ and it took the burden off the players with all of the technical Jargon and calls you had to make. Im just huge fan of stalwart bone crushing kill the QB type of Defensive linemen.
I am not sure I knew that about Fritz Shurmur. Thanks for the info.
-
The success of the defense you run has much less to do with what system it is and more to do with who you have teaching it and who you have finding players to fill it. The past how many years we tried running a system that no one could find the right players for and we only had an average D-Coordinator to teach it the last 2 years. I mean in how many season we ran it and we found maybe a handful of guys who had talent and fit the systems well to some degree (Basically Rubin and Benard in passing situations) and wasted how many draft picks trying to find guys to fit but they just never worked out. Now we have a front office who has a fairly good rep for finding players for a 4-3 and a D-coordinator who ran some top defenses in the league as a coordinator and head coach (even though he was never good at the head coach part) plus a defensive assistant who fits the same bill.
I would also like to point out that every defense has it's own weaknesses. The 4-3 would be that it is probably worse against passing because it is not as sack focused like a 3-4 is, but a 3-4 is much more affected by a large passing formations that use 4-5 receivers due to OLB not being very skilled in coverage. The 4-3 isn't ass affect in these situations because all 3 LB in a 4-3 are expected to have decent cover ability.
-
Yeah, Green Bay used large passing formations in the Superbowl and rendered many of Shittsburg's top D players helpless.
-
The 3 to 5 step drops are being used more predominantly to beat teams like Pitt. Renders the rush useless and spreads the defense, but you gotta the QB like Rodgers to really execute it.
-
The 3 to 5 step drops are being used more predominantly to beat teams like Pitt. Renders the rush useless and spreads the defense, but you gotta the QB like Rodgers to really execute it.
-
The Saints won the super bowl with a 4-3 system, and they not only had an explosive offense that year, but an explosive defense.
Any system works as long as you have good players for it, it doesn't matter what system you have if your players are lackluster.
-
I tend to like bone jarring aggressive defenses rather they are a 3-4 or 4-3 does not matter to me as much as the quality and aggression of the players that are acquired to fill the roster and the aggression and decision making capability of the DC is equally important..
I am quite glad we are switching back to the 4-3 simply because that is the system our GM openly admits to being most comfortable recruiting for and working with..
The 3-4 system is already hard enough to get quality players that can effectively convert and with the growing trend in the number of teams switching to the 34 defense its going to get even harder to get these rare brutes, not to mention the browns last 2 GMs before heckert and their 3rd party scouts were so bad at bringing in quality 3-4 talent from drafts that they chose to build the defense with FA and old men instead and this was never going to get the team where it needs to go..
While savage and mangini both experimented around with utter 3-4 failure and an inability to bring in suitable players greenbay under McCarthy and capers and 2 other clubs successfully built talented 3-4 defenses from the ground up..
Now hopefully heckert and shurmur/jauron will reverse our fortunes by building a young 43 defense in which they have great knowledge and expertise with instead of keeping our failed 34 in place that only got marginally better but much older player wise in 6 years, i cant wait to see our young 43 develop and dominate!
-
I tend to like bone jarring aggressive defenses rather they are a 3-4 or 4-3 does not matter to me as much as the quality and aggression of the players that are acquired to fill the roster and the aggression and decision making capability of the DC is equally important..
I am quite glad we are switching back to the 4-3 simply because that is the system our GM openly admits to being most comfortable recruiting for and working with..
The 3-4 system is already hard enough to get quality players that can effectively convert and with the growing trend in the number of teams switching to the 34 defense its going to get even harder to get these rare brutes, not to mention the browns last 2 GMs before heckert and their 3rd party scouts were so bad at bringing in quality 3-4 talent from drafts that they chose to build the defense with FA and old men instead and this was never going to get the team where it needs to go..
While savage and mangini both experimented around with utter 3-4 failure and an inability to bring in suitable players greenbay under McCarthy and capers and 2 other clubs successfully built talented 3-4 defenses from the ground up..
Now hopefully heckert and shurmur/jauron will reverse our fortunes by building a young 43 defense in which they have great knowledge and expertise with instead of keeping our failed 34 in place that only got marginally better but much older player wise in 6 years, i cant wait to see our young 43 develop and dominate!
I tend to like bone jarring aggressive defenses rather they are a 3-4 or 4-3 does not matter to me as much as the quality and aggression of the players that are acquired to fill the roster and the aggression and decision making capability of the DC is equally important..
I am quite glad we are switching back to the 4-3 simply because that is the system our GM openly admits to being most comfortable recruiting for and working with..
You took the words right out of my hands... Scheme is only part of the equation. You can have the best defensive play calling in the world but if you don't have the athletes who can read react and make the right decisions quickly then execute it wont mean a thing.
Defense in any sport is about reacting, adjusting and execution.
.jpg.a1a2b9a0c33008fdaf4097d8fe2cfd64.jpg "Riffer X"){kind=avatar}
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