• New here? Register here now for access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Plus, stay connected and follow BP on Instagram @buckeyeplanet and Facebook.

3-4 Defense Discussion (Split from Grant Thread)

Jump to latest Follow Reply
plum diamonds buckeye planet
Sort by date Sort by votes
crazybuckfan40 said:
I understand, I played it in high school, and blocked against it. I just think that strong defense end that plays outside tackle and inside TE need to be of big stature, b/c these lineman know adays are quick enough and they can get that double team and on up to the linebackers, and a smaller guy is easier to push back and then you are going to have problems with the linebackers not being able to scrape and get to the outside or to fill the gap.
Click to expand...
Well I understand what you are thinking, but there are a number of college and pro coaches that would disagree. The DL in the 3-4/3-5/3-3 is constantly moving and the double teams are not the same as the combo block you are describing. If anything, the quicker guys cause more problems for the OL due to having to sit for that extra split second to see what is coming into their gap. West Virgina gave UGA fits with that philosophy against a much larger OL. WVU even plays their outside backers (Spur/Bandit) in a 9 technique at times just to add that extra thought process...the bigger one is 6'1 210. The odd man front is an entirely different thinking process than what is used in "traditional" football.
 
Upvote 0
Some teams that don't have the talent to compete run a heavy slant angle 3-4. With that the DL line up head up over their man and shoot hard either direction on the snap. That forces the OL to block for the worst case scenario. IE if you are the backside tackle and the ball is being run away from you you have to think the DE across from you is going to shoot hard inside so you have to take a big inside step. If you block him like is isn't going to move and he slants inside he is going to beat you across your face and blow up the play. If you take the big inside step like you have to and he slants outside you have to stop on a dime and turn back so that he can't go behind you and squeeze the cutback lane.
I remember once playing a team that ran the slant angle I had 3 or 4 pancakes one game because every time the guy tried to stunt across my face I was ready for him, caught him off balance, and put him on his back. If that happens to your DL you are in trouble.
If I was going to run a HS defense and didn't have very big DL I would run a 3-4 slant angle because I doubt that most HS OL's could handle it.
 
Upvote 0
osugrad21 said:
Really? Sorry but I disagree. The 3-4 is designed for confusion. Multiple line stunts and blitz combinations are what make the defense effective. Each member of the front 7 has a gap responsibility on every play, however, those gaps change with every play. There is no designation of a "pass rusher" amongst any position. I'm more familiar with the 3-5/3-3 stack but the basic premise remains the same. Slant the line, bring the heat from various spots on the second level.

You don't think Wilson, Richardson, or Gholston could line up in a 5-7 technique and crash a gap or force a double team?

I respectfully disagree.

EDIT: Split from Larry Grant's thread for further discussion
Click to expand...
no doubt. i know he's a freak, but Troy Polamalu (sp?) came from every possible angle last year. i think they were even saying that he had lined up at every position on the field...
 
Upvote 0
From what I remember, the staff was seriously considering the 3-4 before Freeman got hurt. Freeman-Laurinaitis-Kerr-Grant could hold up nicely, IMO, with Patterson-Pitcock-Wilson up front. I wouldn't mind at all and would like to see if they think it would be beneficial. Now, not saying run it the whole game, but it would be nice to change things up a bit and have the opposing offenses thinking too much about what we are going to throw at them.
 
Upvote 0
BGriffBuckeye said:
Now, not saying run it the whole game, but it would be nice to change things up a bit and have the opposing offenses thinking too much about what we are going to throw at them.
Click to expand...

...but then you also have to consider the possibility of putting too much on the players' plate. Is it better to do a few things very well or many things at just a satisfactory level. The key to defense is not thinking too much and simply reacting...if the guys have too much to think about, such as an entirely different scheme and set of responsibilities, that slows them down.
 
Upvote 0
osugrad21 said:
Well I understand what you are thinking, but there are a number of college and pro coaches that would disagree. The DL in the 3-4/3-5/3-3 is constantly moving and the double teams are not the same as the combo block you are describing. If anything, the quicker guys cause more problems for the OL due to having to sit for that extra split second to see what is coming into their gap. West Virgina gave UGA fits with that philosophy against a much larger OL. WVU even plays their outside backers (Spur/Bandit) in a 9 technique at times just to add that extra thought process...the bigger one is 6'1 210. The odd man front is an entirely different thinking process than what is used in "traditional" football.
Click to expand...

Yeah they will cause problems early in the game, but by the end they are worn out and have just taken a beating all game. That is why all teams with those small lineman worry about being able to continue to give full effort by the end of the game. As we saw UGA was able to move the ball with ease and came back from down 28, I believe it was, and if it wasnt for the punt fake, I think they would of came back and won that game.

But I do I agree with Taosman, give em a gap and let them hit and react, but you just need to but them in the gap where they will be able to that at the best of their ability.

exhawg said:
Some teams that don't have the talent to compete run a heavy slant angle 3-4. With that the DL line up head up over their man and shoot hard either direction on the snap. That forces the OL to block for the worst case scenario. IE if you are the backside tackle and the ball is being run away from you you have to think the DE across from you is going to shoot hard inside so you have to take a big inside step. If you block him like is isn't going to move and he slants inside he is going to beat you across your face and blow up the play. If you take the big inside step like you have to and he slants outside you have to stop on a dime and turn back so that he can't go behind you and squeeze the cutback lane.
I remember once playing a team that ran the slant angle I had 3 or 4 pancakes one game because every time the guy tried to stunt across my face I was ready for him, caught him off balance, and put him on his back. If that happens to your DL you are in trouble.
If I was going to run a HS defense and didn't have very big DL I would run a 3-4 slant angle because I doubt that most HS OL's could handle it.
Click to expand...

Since we are pimping ourselves, I played guard and a team that we played thought they were going to put thier little safety in the 1 gap and try and jump the snap, well needless to say I put that kid on his back 10 yards down the field. Same kid the year b4 I had carried off after I destroyed him on a screen play.
 
Upvote 0
osugrad21 said:
...but then you also have to consider the possibility of putting too much on the players' plate. Is it better to do a few things very well or many things at just a satisfactory level. The key to defense is not thinking too much and simply reacting...if the guys have too much to think about, such as an entirely different scheme and set of responsibilities, that slows them down.
Click to expand...

Grad, I'm not sure how long you've been coaching, but you are wise beyond your years (seriously). Confidence breeds success. When players are aligned properly, and understand their responsibility within the scheme, the chance of something good happening is increased. Not only is it crucial to know your responsibility, but you need to know where your help is, and what he is doing. You start fooling around with too many fronts, stunts, coverages, and the checks that go with them, guys start hesitating and lose some aggression. This is not to say we should remain stagnant. I'm sure Heacock and the gang have been looking at new wrinkles to suit the new personnel, but wholesale changes are not necessary. As Taos said, we have talented athletes. Let's coach them up and turn them loose.
 
Upvote 0
crazybuckfan40 said:
Yeah they will cause problems early in the game, but by the end they are worn out and have just taken a beating all game. That is why all teams with those small lineman worry about being able to continue to give full effort by the end of the game. As we saw UGA was able to move the ball with ease and came back from down 28, I believe it was, and if it wasnt for the punt fake, I think they would of came back and won that game.
Click to expand...
Really? I could swear they rotate DLineman at tOSU. Therefore, that argument holds no water. Especially with only 3 spots, there is the possibility of a huge rotation to guarantee fresh bodies.

UGA came back on WVU because they woke up and Shockley stopped killing them. I watched enough of that game last weekend to last me a lifetime. To compare WVU's depth to tOSU's would be severely misguided.
 
Upvote 0
osugrad21 said:
Really? I could swear they rotate DLineman at tOSU. Therefore, that argument holds no water. Especially with only 3 spots, there is the possibility of a huge rotation to guarantee fresh bodies.

UGA came back on WVU because they woke up and Shockley stopped killing them. I watched enough of that game last weekend to last me a lifetime. To compare WVU's depth to tOSU's would be severely misguided.
Click to expand...

I was referring to smaller teams depth. Not ours.:) I mean it is obvious we have depth, we will rotate about 8 guys on a 4 man line. I just think that if you try to go with that smaller guy on the line in a 3-4 in major college football you are going to get burned more often than he is going to make a play. Especially in a power conference like the big ten. I would rather see us have 2 dt clog up the middle, one strong guy and one speed rusher on the ends, and have the backers filling. I think that Pittcock and Patterson are too guys that are going to demand a lot of attention in the middle and even Penton when he comes in. He was a high school wrestler and really understands leverage, I look for him to have a big year. He is one guy I wasnt able to block.:tongue2:

Also you can still slant and stunt out of the 4-3 and cause havoc. I would rather have more at the LOS than have the lineman be able to get up to our backers.

Yeah but you have to factor in the fact that UGA started to pick up the scheme from their D-line.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
crazybuckfan40 said:
I was referring to smaller teams depth. Not ours.:) I mean it is obvious we have depth, we will rotate about 8 guys on a 4 man line. I just think that if you try to go with that smaller guy on the line in a 3-4 in major college football you are going to get burned more often than he is going to make a play. Especially in a power conference like the big ten. I would rather see us have 2 dt clog up the middle, one strong guy and one speed rusher on the ends, and have the backers filling. I think that Pittcock and Patterson are too guys that are going to demand a lot of attention in the middle and even Penton when he comes in. He was a high school wrestler and really understands leverage, I look for him to have a big year. He is one guy I wasnt able to block.:tongue2:
Click to expand...

So basically....after all of this talk about personnel, you have boiled it down to the fact that you prefer the 4-3 over an odd front. :wink:

crazybuckfan40 said:
Also you can still slant and stunt out of the 4-3 and cause havoc. I would rather have more at the LOS than have the lineman be able to get up to our backers.
Click to expand...
What defense can't you slant and stunt? However, that is not the basic principle of the 4-3 shade.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
crazybuckfan40 said:
Since we are pimping ourselves, I played guard and a team that we played thought they were going to put thier little safety in the 1 gap and try and jump the snap, well needless to say I put that kid on his back 10 yards down the field. Same kid the year b4 I had carried off after I destroyed him on a screen play.
Click to expand...
You got any eligibility left?
 
Upvote 0
Grad said:
So basically....after all of this talk about personnel, you have boiled it down to the fact that you prefer the 4-3 over an odd front. :wink:
Click to expand...

Yeah, and the fact that I think that our personnel is better suited for the 4-3.

LordJeffBuck said:
You got any eligibility left?
Click to expand...

He was 160lbs. Penton kicked my ass, even know it was only on punt coverage, same with Andrew Crummey(he played alongside Penton and he went to Maryland).

I was 190 playing guard, I don't think they will take me on the team. Unless they need a water boy.:tongue2: and no I am not Bobby Boucher.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top