@gips said:

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.

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!

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.

@riffer-x said:

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.

And guys who can catch the ball.

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.

@nickers said:

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-gipper said:

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.

@riffer-x said:

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.

@the-gipper said:

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.

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?

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.

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.