Check out the Hook Cam's channel here / @thehookcam Listen to the Couch Coaches podcast podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast... Follow the Hook Cam on Twitter / thehookcam Check out the JKS website www.jacksonkruegersports.com/
It's harder to run a 3-4 well, but easy to run decently. 4-3 is better if you need to stop the run and get pressure. But ultimately the personnel really tells the coach what to run.
The 4-3 doesn't offer as much versatility if you are close minded and without a lot of athletic players on the field. Also, the 3-4 can be less versatile with fewer athletic players as well. As a Redskins fan, I watched us run the 3-4 with very little versatility. The OLBs were converted DEs that were too slow to cover and the ILBs weren't athletic enough to stay on the field all 3 downs. We were very predictable and very unsuccessful in the 3-4.
It all depends on who your team is playing. Football is a chess match. Some 3-4 defenses match up better against certain offenses where as 4-3 match up better against others. Most teams don’t stay in base defense too long though. Now a days it seems like it depends on who has good players and coaches to use their strengths and hide their weaknesses.
Before Bill Belichick joined Bill Parcel's Patriots' coaching staff the Pats ran 3-4 Parcel took over for Pete Carroll who had installed his 4-3. When Belichick returned to the Patriots he's run both 3-4 and 4-3 sometimes switching during the same game.
Belichick has about a dozen different schemes and some hybrids as well. I have seen them run 5 different defenses on five consecutive plays. Rex Ryan used to do that too. He had one defense that had 7 DB's on the field at the same time. Gregg Williams runs a similar defense now. Lots of different looks, very hard to read.
I am not sure if I understood your sentence correctly, but Pete Carroll coached in between the Tuna and the Hoodie. You wrote "Parcel took over for Pete Carroll who had installed his 4-3" That is wrong. Carroll coached after Parcells, not the other way around. Also, a 3/4 and 4/3 is kind of meaningless, as defense really just comes down to gap assignments. Are you use a 1-gaptechnique or a 2-gap technique? Are your players coached up and versatile enough to switch and adapt? When Belichick had Richard Seymore and a stable of LBs, he could afford to line up in a 3-4. More so when they acquired Vince Wilfork. Without those guys, he had to use a 4/3 front.
I really enjoyed this video. I've actually searched RU-vid looking for videos with this kind of information but wasn't able to find much, certainly not of this quality. Great job!
james so true. We see who is coming and who isn’t. I’d for for Hybrid. Draft players that play multiple positions. Easy to disguise what a D coordinator is doing. See NE, of course
I’m with you, although teams that run 3-4 don’t necessarily need to rush more than 4 guys, the personnel is different and imo less effect. 4-3 tackles are one gap penetrators who can get upfield and pressure the QB, while a nose in 3-4 is a two gapper space eater who might be more limited as a pass rusher other than pushing the pocket. So if you rush one of the 2 outside backers and the 3 down linemen you aren’t getting as much pass rush as if you are rushing 2 stud 4-3 D ends and 2 penetrating 1 and 3 techs, at least in my opinion but obviously both fronts work
Personally I hate the idea of scheme it’s stupid I like what belichick does where he borrows ideas from all schemes and uses it in his playbook and his scheme changes each week based on the opponent and their strengths. I also like the amoeba defense they use where only two guys with hand in the dirt and is unpredictable as to the blocking assignments for the OLinemen and QB as to who is rushing and who is dropping back with the linebackers
Belichick was a DC before HC and uses his own schemes, who he taught to both Flores and Patricia. He runs a 3-4, 4-3 Hybrid ( barely runs a 4-3 though) and prefers a 3-3-5 Odd Nickel ( a 3-4 look, but replaces the Will LB with a Nickel CB) to the prototypical 4-2-5 or 2-4-5 Nickel.
But even to use those belichick schemes you need to have the correct players, not every player could run those, look at a team like the vikings last year, the edges were hunter and griffen, they can't drop in coverage so that type of scheme wouldn't be useful with certain team, you need to have really versatile and athletic players to be able to rum those
I cant say you're wrong or argue with Belichick's success but the saying "a jack of all trades is a master of none" does come to mind. I wonder if perfecting a scheme until it comes as natural to the players as breathing offers some benefit..
Definitely agree, it's a silly question and really doesn't matter in the end. To me, the best defense is the one that works better than everyone else's. Simple
Awesome video! I've been looking for real breakdown and strategy analysis to get a better understanding of the game. So that's nice to find what I've been looking for. Also, you did it in a way that was easily synthesized and that's something I appreciate very much. Keep it up your good at it!
This is why I think a versatile OLB is so important. With a versatile OLB such as Khalil Mack, KJ Wright, TJ Watt or Cardinals new OLB Isaiah Simmons, you can have your outside LB step up to play DE and have a DE play DT. 3-4 is more versatile but with a Versatile OLB, they are both just as versatile as each other
That's not necessarily true either. San Francisco runs a 4-3, and their defensive lineman play all over the place. It all comes down to the speed and athleticism of your personnel, and utilizing the proper stunt schemes. The bottom line is, there is no right or wrong answer to this question. Because it all depends on the type of athletes one has on their roster.. What may work for one team won't necessarily work for another.. And I think that's one of the things that makes football (and sports in general) so interesting..
What I've noticed over the many years that teams have now been operating out of the 3/4 is those teams, IF they are very good drafting teams (Patriots, Steelers, Ravens), have a decided advantage on day 2 and especially day 3 of the draft. That advantage is simple, the types of project defenders they are looking for tend to be different than the types 4/3 organizations are looking for and there is less competition for the 3/4 guys because fewer teams run it. So, the level of talent they are getting in the 6th and 7th rounds, 4/3 organizations might have had to spend 5th or 6th round picks to get equal talent. Over years that starts to show up. There a reason why the Ravens, Steelers and Pats are almost always in the top 10 in total defense.
This video deserves all the respect. I’ve been looking around Jackson Krueger Sports for this guy doing more break-downs, but I can’t seem to find him?
I think it’s easier to find versatile LB’s that a DC can scheme up pressure than it is to find a dominant 4-3 DE. Those guys are usually top 5 draft picks, you can find good LB’s late in the Draft! It seems like teams are catching on because I’ve seen a a lot of teams switching over to that 3-4 hybrid that runs nickel 80% of the time.
I disagree, the 3-4 requires an LT, or Von MIler to run it at a high level. Even worse is this rare breed position also means finding depth for it, which is next to impossible.
Great video! Been saying something similar for awhile. It's not a lot of difference between the two defenses but at the same time if you got personel that fits a position in a scheme perfectly it can make all the difference in the world.
It's a lot of difference when you draft and get rid of players based on scheme. The 3-4 typically requires bigger players which is why they call DEs in college OLBs in a 3-4 in the nfl. Also, your 3 interior guys need to be huge space eaters. Not a fan of most 3-4 defenses because they typically make the defense slower by having so many huge guys, but with the right personnel, they can be quite successful.
@@mpettaway97 very true. Those traditional 3-4 odd teams. Steelers and ray Lewis raves with big tony playing nose. Looking at teams like the cardinals now for the past few years they run alot of under and over fronts from the 3-4. Really interesting stuff
I have no doubt whatsoever which is better.. 4-3 or 3-4... and its the 4-3.. and here is partially why I will argue why.. because as you look back in history all the best defenses you can ever name and most of the best defenses were given names.. were all 4-3 defenses.. lets go over some of the names of the defenses.. Being from Minnesota most of my life, they were call the Purple people eaters.. were a 4-3 defense.. Pittsburg, the STEEL CURTAIN.. was a 4-3 defense.. the Orange Crush, was a 4-3 defense.. the NO NAME DEFENSE was a 4-3 defense.. the Seattle defense was a 4-3 defense.. Sacksonville, was a 4-3 defense.. the Bears Defense.. was a 4-3 bear defense.. the alignment is just different.. mostly called a 4D6 defense, but it had a 4 down lineman and 3 line backers just the same.. why is the 4-3 a better defense? Because it puts 4 down lineman against 5 offensive linemen.. meaning the most they can double block is one man, leaving three down linemen one on one..
Can you talk more about the strengths and weakness of playing different techs? You said its hard to pull guards against a 4i. So why play a 5? What's the rational behind playing any technique? Why choose a 1 over 0, or a 3 instead of a 2i? Great video!
I agree it's depends on personnel and who you are playing. I recall watching an interview with Willie McGinst of the Pats, he was saying the Bill Belechek in one particular game had six different game plans for this one game because that offense was so diverse in what they could do. That's some serious coaching and why he has won multiple championships and going to the Hall of Fame.
The greatest challenge of a 3-4 is finding a stout nose tackle. Now, Wade Phillips runs a one-gap 3-4 that attacks the offense as opposed to a read-and-react. His 2015 Denver defense is one of the more faster defenses I've seen. I do admit to having a 4-3 leaning (in part because I had greater success playing in it). But I can appreciate both styles and their effectiveness.
Simply because I feel like the line of scrimmage is crucial to winning a football game I love the 4-3. However, if you cannot win the line of scrimmage even in a 4-3 formation the the 3-4 is a really great defense. The additional linebacker in a 3-4 gives you more versatility in the secondary and more control over the middle of the field.
I disagree, like tdrivers said 4-3 is more vanilla. Hence, better players can just go win their matchups. With lesser players you need to be flexible and with 3-4 you camo and confuse more
4-3 would be way easier with low IQ players with alot of talent. If they have a clear defined skillset this works the best. 3-4 only works if your talented players also have a decent in multiple assignments. It's a skillset to know how to put your hand in the dirt and then a completely different skillset to also be effective standing up.
Excellent breakdown. Loved the selection of such pure, Super Bowl winning 4-3 and 3-4 defenses to study in Seattle and Pittsburgh. Really enjoyed this.
LOB, 99-2002 Bucs, 00 Ravens all ran versions of 4-3. When you have studs at every level it's better to stay basic. I feel the 3-4 is great for teams that have to scheme up pressure or don't have studs on the back end. Like the late 00's Steelers and Pats.
You got the right answer. Personnel drives the decision on what defense to use. Bu as an ex-O-Lineman.......I hated blocking vs the 3-4. I just found it easier to run block and pass block against a guy with his hand in the dirt vs one in space. Just me. Others may prefer blocking the guy in space.
I just think there are so many factors to the point where you can’t decide. It all depends on the coaches play calling, athletic abilities of the players, etc. I believe the best is what works the best for a particular team
I think this is a cool video...may I suggest you make a video about football terms and their meanings like what is a cover 2, what the gaps are, maybe give some examples of how certain offense formations work and how defenses read and defend those plays...something like that would help me and I'm sure others better understand the game..also, when a quarterback checks into a play what is he doing
Make video about position specifications like strong and free safety and the different roles a single position can play and specialize in such as run stopping, pass coverage, power and speed rush etc...
The base 3-4 defense the ends are in a 4tech head up on the tackle. Nose in a 0tech or head up on the center. Teams often will shift the line over a 3,1,5 tech to the strength depending on the defense called.
W/ my Madden “expertise” I love using 34. That OLB gives me a bunch of different options if ya have the right player for that spot. Dude that can rush off the edge but also work at covering the flat, RBs, and some TEs. In the game I’d use Klay Mathews, Clowney, Shazier, and now Micah would be absolute perfect in that spot. I also like it tho bc in some packages I’d bring a DB down into the box at a LB spot. The added speed helps a bunch in coverage, especially on passing 3rd down plays when the RB or TE are likely reads. Many SS in that spot can hold their own already against the run too so it’s just mad fun to get creative w/ it. Don’t think the 43 offers much in terms of providing the different looks
It depends on players and scheme and goal of the defense: For a long time in the late 90s/2000s, most teams ran a 4-3 to varying degrees of success. There’s a reason why DCs like Monte Kiffin, Lovie Smith, Jim Johnson (RIP), and Gregg Williams were so successful. On the other hand, the 3-4 was very good at confusing protection schemes and DCs like Rex Ryan, Dick LeBeau, Vic Fangio, and Dom Capers had various success as well.
It depends on who you're playing IMO. Quicker passes to backs and TEs I would think a 3-4 and keep everything in front of you. Deeper passing with deeper drops, 4-3. But it also depends on your personnel.
It is easier to find players for the 4-3. To run the 3-4 effectively, you must have a true Nose Tackle who can eat space and demand double teams. And there are only about 8 or 9 in the entire league who can actually do that play after play. And you actually need at least 2 so you can spell your starter. It is just too demanding physically to do all game long. Your DE's need to be big and agile which is also a hard combo to find, and your OLB's have to be big and fast since they have to set the edge and rush the passer. Overall, the players are just easier to find for the 4-3. But if you have the right athletes, the 3-4 can be more effective.
I used to hate the 3-4 as a linebacker because trying get around o-lineman or take them on would be tiring after a while and it was easier to get a blitz with the two big tackle's taking out those guards and centers
Depends on your personnel. 3-4 gives you more optionality, but it also requires different types of player than a 4-3. If you’re running a 2 gap 3-4 you need an elite nose tackle who can force a double team like Vince Wilfork. You also need very fast and instinctive inside linebackers who can take advantage of the defensive linemen keeping OL off of them and flow downhill. 4-3 is more often a 1 gap scheme which does not require such as big defensive linemen and simplifies the gap responsibility of the DL and LBs. You can run a 2 gap 4-3 or a 1 gap 3-4, but that is less common.
@Jackson Kruger Sports I believe the difference is as follows..... Its harder to establish a 3-4 roster than it is a 4-3 roster. Think about it, would an edge rusher out of college want to play in a 4-3 or a 3-4? 9/10 times they would prefer to play in a 4-3 (not like they really have a choice in the matter lol). But never the less, an edge rusher would most likely accumulate way more sacks playing in a 4-3 scheme than a 3-4 scheme. This is because in a 3/4, the defensive ends will get a fair share of those sacks based on the scheme. Also 3-4 OLB are asked to do a helluva lot more than a 4-3 Defensive End. 4-3 Defensive ends for the most part strictly rush the QB, while 3-4 OLB also have to cover against the run and sometimes cover TE's. 2nd point, its very difficult to find an elite nose tackle in today's game. Guys like Vita Vea or Vince Wilfork do not come that often at all. You cannot operate a 3-4 effectively with an "average" nose tackle.... You really need to fill that spot with a not even good but great player so you do not get burned in the run game. 3rd Point, 3-4 Defensive Ends are becoming costly in today's market... We have seen so many great ones in recent years Aaron Donald, Cameron Heyward, Jeffrey Simmons. Having elite players at this position only drives up the market cost of the average 3-4 defensive end. So in totality, assembling a 3-4 defense on avg would cost more than assembling a 4-3 defense. Now this is what i see too often. I see teams that run a 3-4 defense that do not have the personal. Semi-Recent example would be the Chicago Bears. Their 3-4 scheme was great in 2018/2019 I mean really good... The following year the bears would lose key 3-4 Defensive end players in Brent Urban, Nick Williams, and Roy Roberston-Harris in free agency/covid as well as Nose Tackle Eddie Goldman. And I get it, these aren't "ELITE" defenders, but all 4 played at a very high level during 2018/2019. During the 2020 season the Bears defense looked abysmal in a 3-4 scheme even when they had really great players such as Khalil Mack, Akeim Hicks, Robert Quinn, Roquan Smith, Danny Trevathan on their front 7. I know this is besides the point, but in the backfield the bears also had 2 very good defenders at the time in Eddie Jackson and Kyle Fuller who could still play at a high level. On paper this would be a very solid defense, but the issue was filling in the gaps on Defensive End and Nose Tackle. They just didn't have the cap space to do so. So thought experiment.....lets say if the 2020 bears Defense was ran in a 4-3 scheme having Khalil Mack and Robert Quinn play Defensive End, Akeim Hicks and Bilal Nichols as Defensive Tackles. Then having Roquan Smith playing Inside Linebacker, as well as Joel Iyiegbuniwe(still don't know why the bears didn't give him more snaps) and Danny Trevathan playing outside linebacker. I really do believe switching to this 4-3 would have continued the Bears defensive production into 2020 even with the loss of key players who became UFA or opted out for covid-reasons. Overall, a 3-4 scheme offers more versatility, way more fluid, and in my opinion works better in today's game where almost all offensive schemes operate using 3 WR and a TE. The big dilemma is that a 3-4 Defense is costly. Especially in today's game economy where the offensive side of the ball usually requires a bigger budget than the defensive side. So as i said previously, a 3-4 defense Costs more to assemble, difficult to find edge rushers to play in that type of system, as well as the rarity of finding a Nose Tackle who can play at a high level. Teams who consistently prioritize defense along with having a consistent defense year to year are the ones where a 3-4 scheme works well to their advantage. Some examples are: Baltimore Ravens, Pittsburgh Steelers, New England Patriots, Green Bay Packers. These teams generally have good success running a 3-4 defense year to year. Overall, the way i see it is that if your roster cap is tilted way more on the side of offense, if you do not prioritize defense in the draft and free agency, and obvious point..if you do not have ALL the necessary players to fill out a 3-4 defense; you are much better off sticking to a 4-3 system. A 4-3 scheme is a way safer bet.
It all depends on the personnel at the coordinator's disposal. If a team has more productive DL's than LB's, then 4-3 is the better choice. If they have more LB's than DL's then 3-4 is the wiser choice. But then it gets deeper than that. You also have to evaluate the size of your OLB's and how many there are, and if they can multi-roll into hybrid DE, and conversely your DE's and their athleticism and if they can hybrid into LB's or if they are big, if they can play inside on the line. Additionally, it even goes a step deeper, into the safety help, and the physical nature, especially with the SS. Many variables come into play when deciding which base to utilize, which is where training camp comes into play.
5-2,, 3 def tackles playing the a and b gap only so to stuff the middle, 2 linebackers on the line to press the edge and to drop back in zone or even man on the tight end and full back if in game, with 1 safety to blitz or man up against rb only on passing routes only and 1 linebacker playing strongside again to rush or cover tight end or full back,, my corners would press 80 percent.i have speed and can stuff the middle run while keeping the qb guessing who I'm sending to blitz or dropping into zone for crossing routes or pressing at the line
I definitely think the 3-4 allows a good DC to really get creative, disguise their coverages, and use different gap schemes. If a team has Miles Garret or someone like him and a guy that can get penetration from the 3 tech they should probably run a 4-3. Look at the 49ers they have as much talent on their D-line as any team I can remember but they have poured a huge amount of resources into it as well.
It's actually quite balanced in 3-4 teams and 4-3 teams. Chiefs, Broncos, Dolphins, Jets, Patriots ( Hybrid, but more 3-4), Ravens, Steelers, Texans, Titans, Rams, Panthers, Giants, Cowboys ( just switched), Packers, Bears all run 3-4. That's 15 teams who run a 3-4 to the 17 that run a 4-3.
@@thabruhfrom9444 Chiefs run 4-3 under Steve Spagnuolo, who switched from the 3-4 that Bob Sutton inherited from the prior 2+ decades before that. Prior to last year their star defensive players were typical 3-4 linebackers like Justin Houston, Derrick Johnson, Derrick Thomas. Now it's linemen like Chris Jones and safeties like Tyrann Mathieu.
@@kmarasin wrong. Spagnuolo runs more of a 3-3-5 nickel base than a 4-3... but the 3-3-5 is closer to a 3-4. It just looks like a 4-3, but the personnel is not.
Its just pick your best players. It ends up being a ton of 1v1 matchups anyway essentially at that position, either coverage or rush in some form. Same has having a flexible tight end. Extra DT or LB is basically just having a flexible TE or a reciever in different sets. You just send out the guy who wins that 1v1
3/4 or 4/3 is just your set defense. But will change in every play depending on the offense personal. It's a chess match between oc and dc. Like the Niners using the wide 9 defense. But we got a pass rush finally.
As an aspiring DC, I know it's all about personnel. Not one scheme is better than the other. If I were to coach a D that had big run stuffers on the DL and versatile LBs that can rush or drop into coverage, I'd run a 3-4. If I had smaller, more athletic EDGE rushers that aren't so good at coverage but I can get pressure with a 4 man rush, I'd run a 4-3. As a Redskins fan, it's been so aggravating watching a team run a scheme they didn't have the personnel to run. As a result, teams took advantage every game at one point or another... or, the whole game. Growing up watching Greg Williams coach the D and running a 4-3, it has become my preferred D, however. Greg Williams is one of the best DCs in the game, and is someone I look up to and inspired by.
The system being run now is a hybrid of everything, the 46th, the 34, the 432 downline, and 4 linebacker with 5 dB's. You just can't go in with 1 or 2 things in your bag. Anymore you gotta be able to pull out anything
Being a long time Steelers fan I suppose I'm biased, but 3-4 is definitely my favorite ad preferred scheme. Before signing Joe Haden, Steelers have never really had tier 1 cornerbacks. And there was no need for them either. The 3-4 zone blitz would cause so much confusion that CBs never really had to maintain their coverage that long. When you're leading the league in sacks it's almost like this in and of itself becomes your pass defense. Of course this is obviously relying on the fact you've got a great linebacker core that can bring continuous pressure. For those first few years during the post-LeBeau era, our blitz was stagnant and it began to expose the underdeveloped secondary. We gave up hella yards through the air, and was like the worse in the league when it came to giving up big plays down the field. So there's pros and cons to every system.
In this day and age with so many dynamic QB’s running around a 3-4 would be a better match because you don’t know which side the pressure is coming from and you’re able to get second and third level defenders on those QB’s as opposed to DL. They’re probably still gonna get beat, but if I’m a DC I’d feel more comfortable having a better athlete chasing that guy. If you got a DL that can get after it, then run the 4-3. Ultimately I think if you run a mix of both you’re really gonna fuck teams up because they’d have to game plan for multiple fronts as opposed to a base defense.
That's hard to pin point, it depends on a lot of elements, Player caliper, what offense you're facing, stopping the run, pass rush, there are so many different variables to consider. All in all I like the 4-3
typically the difference lies in the type of athletes you want to use. in a 3-4 basically you are running a big monster of a man at a nose with two "3 tech " type of def tackles at ends. typical ends in a 4-3 arent as big/strong/stout as DE in a 3-4 where the DEs in a 4-3 are typically more athletic and pass rush skilled. in a 3-4 your OLBs have to be more versatile with their skill sets and typically are the best athlete on the defense. they have to be able to set an edge and hold the outside, rush the passer, and cover. there is some difference in the strong side and weak side in this def where your weak side is your more ranged/athletic and best pass rusher. also in a 3-4 your inside LBs arent typically as athletic as in a 4-3. they might me more of a "thumper" type of LB designed to take on blocks cuz they dont have multiple d line to protect them to run free. your nose is going to try to eat the double teams and typically is a very low stat player. but there will always be a guard free to take on the ILB. in a 4-3 your middle backer typically has more range from the middle and more lateral quickness and typically can run from each end of the offensive line cleanly/free due to having two DTs to eat blocks and protect him. your MLB is typically a high stat production position. and 4-3 MLB is typically required to drop in deep middle alot with cover 2 coverage and cover seam routes. in a 4-3 your outside backers are near polar opposites of each other. the WLB is typically a athletic backer with pass rush skills kinda like in a 3-4 but typically smaller in build. and is asked more often to go sideline to sideline. where your SLB is typically more of a stout big body LB to jam TE and set hard edges on the strong side vs the run. also one thing to consider now in the nfl and football in general teams are removing the SLB on most downs due to lack of athletic ability vs more passing sets. they will replace him with 3rd corner or 3rd safety depending on match ups and formations/personal. in the current nfl your SLB only gets about 15-20% of defensive snaps per game and is a starter on special teams. another thing to consider is in sub packages for nickle/dime i think the 3-4 offers more complexity in zone/pass rush/blitz . you can go 2 down line men 4 lbs 5 dbacks allowing more athletic players on the field to match the offensive personal. and is easier to do due to the roster make up of a 3-4 defense by having more LBs who by nature are typically faster/more athletic then d line men. a 3-4 defense might carry as many as 8 lbs, typically 7. where in a 4-3 might only be 5 considering your SAM LB isnt a starter and on field in most situations. and in a 3-4 a team typically carries less D line men where in a 4-3 it can be as many as 8.
@@eliraplee4914 the music play list if for me. i listen to music all day at work. sadly in order to get a good paying coach gig you gotta know someone and be an intern and not make any money etc etc. look how all the coaches come from working with other coaches, its a good ole boys club
It's less a question of if the front seven is 34 or 43, and more a question of how do they play defense. Does the defense attack the gaps and try to penetrate, or does the defense try to clog the line? Do the off-ball linebacker play downhill and attack gaps, or do they read-react and play sideline to sideline? Denver under John Fox and Jack Del Rio used a 43 that played like at "traditional 34" with the goal of clogging the line. When Wade Phillips arrived in 2015, he brought the "Phillips 34" which plays like a "traditional 43" where the goal was to get penetration. (For as long as Wade has been around it's odd that few or none of his assistance have become DCs using the Phillips 34. Maybe Vance Joseph?) If I correctly understand, the base defense of a Phillips 34 looks very similar to a 43 under, with the difference on the backside. In a 43 under the undertackle attacks the weakside B Gap and the weak DE defends the edge. In the Phillips 34 the undertackle/DE two-gaps the B and the edge while the weakside OLB is a free defender. But in both defenses, the strongside OLB/Sam, the strong DE, and the nose do the same things.
I also want to say I think this misunderstanding caused PFF to incorrectly grade Derek Wolfe poorly under Fox/Del Rio. Because the front seven was 43, they assumed the line should be penetrating, and Wolfe wasn't. However that's incorrect. The defenders were supposed to clog the line, not penetrate it, and Wolfe did that assignment well.
Good video. I agree with you, it comes down to talent and execution. However, I think 3-4 is better for a few reasons. 1) I think the reads are easier for the LBs. 2) The offense never really knows where the fourth rusher is coming from. 3) It can be easier to find 3-4 LBs, than it is to find 4-3 DEs.
Depends on the type of 3-4 being ran. The 3-4 we ran here in D.C. was essentially a 5-2. That meant the 2 LBs were responsible for all the gaps being as though the D line's job was to occupy blockers. Often those 2 LBs chose the wrong hole and the back was off to the races. Needless to say, we were one of the worse teams in the league against the run despite so much talent. Also, we spent the entire 10 years looking for ILBs for our 3-4. London Fletcher was the most consistent but we either drafted or signed a new LB every year. Never did find the right combo.
Most defense schemes now are a hybrid 4-3/3-4. It's very situational do it depends on the kind of personnel they have and the schemes that opposing offenses have. I prefer the 4-3 because it's simpler to run and learn but also you don't necessarily need to have prototype players like the 3-4 necessitates.
Lots of times a 3-4 with good rushing OLBs becomes a 5-2 as the base defense seems to rush 5 on most downs without considering it a blitz. This seems to work unless the D line can’t get there, then short passes over the middle are often poorly defended.
A 3-4 will only be a "5-2" if you're running a pinch blitz scheme... which is a blitz. Otherwise, teams usually drop one of their OLBs into coverage while blitzing the other.
tha Bruh from 94 lots of times, but not always. Broncos ran and still run a 3-4 but in the Von Miller era it was an exception when an OLB did not rush from the edge. Whether the other side was Ware or Chubb, until Fangio, both OLBs default was edge rush. The linemen rushed as well. 5 man rush, not considered a blitz unless you want to say that they literally blitzed more than they didn’t blitz. Which I guess you could, but that was the default defense.
@@RyanAlexanderBloom when both EDGEs from the Broncos rushed, they were in a 3-3-5 Sam Nickel, or a 2-4-5 Nickel. Where you're wrong is any rush that contains over 4 players ( a basic rush) rushing the pass is considered a blitz. Like a Mike Buck Crossfire 3 blitz in the 3-4 ( both ILBs rush the passer with all 3 DL), or a basic CB blitz out of the 3-4 or 4-3 ( 4 DL rush the pass/ 3 DL and an OLB with an outside CB).
@@thabruhfrom9444 ok, i went back and watched 20 or 30 different defensive highlights from 2015-present and I did indeed miscount or misremember. its not "5-2" but it sure as hell isnt "4-3" most of the time either. In literally every highlight play where an ILB , CB, or S was not involved in the rush, i.e. a traditional non-blitzing play, they did in fact only rush 4, but since it was usually both edges, they only had 2 DL on the field. This leads me to believe that they almost never made any significant defensive plays from "base defense" and were playing either nickel or dime, which is I guess what you are saying. 2-4-5 being prominent. So to recap, I don't see 5-2, you are right about that, but now that I look closer I am seeing 2-4 a LOT. Which still ain't 4-3 in practice, even if that's what the base is on paper.
Being the NFL is becoming a passing league, the 3-4 seems like the better scheme. I've also noticed every year it seems like the 3-4 OLB and 3-4 DE positions are so much deeper and better than the 4-3 DE talent entering the NFL Draft. I could be wrong, being I'm just an observer and I have a very basic idea of defensive schemes
Most NFL offenses take most of their snaps in 11 personnel nowadays, and defenses respond by using nickel and dime personnel most of the time. So the 4-3 vs. 3-4 debate has evolved into a question of what kind of defense you want to run when the offense subs in their heavy personnel. The Steelers "base" is a 3-4, but most of the time they're in a 4-2-5/2-4-5 or a 4-1-6. When Belichick unveiled the "61" front that embarrassed Sean McVay in the Superbowl, he used nickel personnel with the nickel usually set opposite the TE.
I think 4-3 vs 3-4 is more a question of logistics than which is "better" in execution. I think it's easier to find athletes for a pro 3-4 than a 4-3, especially out of college. They also don't take up so much cap space, leaving budget room for talent elsewhere.
It’s all about personnel. But one thing about the 3-4 defense. If you look at how the defense function and teams that use it well, the ilb in a 3-4 defense should amass over 100 tackle.
I think 3-4 is better because it has better packages that come with that personal. I feel like the best way to make it work against power running is to switch to the nickel package, preferably nickel strong. To deal with the spread continue to use nickel, preferably 2/4/5 , 1/5/5 or you can switch it to some kind of quarter defense. Anyway 3/4 has more tools to deal with more situations it’s just that teams stay in the base too long.
2-5 defense is the best haha. I wish they would do what I call is a 2-5 defense 2 linemen and 5 linebackers. It would look similar to a 3-4 nickel package except for the extra db. Pros you can be a lot more flexible with players that are standing up.
A 46 D is basically a 4-3, but the Will and Sam LB line up on the line of scrimmage ( in a 6 man front) or slide over to the weak side, while the SS ( called the Rover) lines up in the box for extra run support. Looks like a 4-3 Cover 3, but the SS is closer to the line of scrimmage where the other LBs are.
3-4 defenses are better IF and ONLY IF you have more than two edge rushers. If your have a solid nose tackle, and three or four edge rushers, it will work. Two will play on the line and the other one or two will play outside linebacker, though they will still rush the quarterback.
The problem is that no NFL team really runs one over the other anymore because of sub packages. Running downs tend to be 4-3 packages more than 3-4 packages and visa versa for passing downs where some of of 4 linebackers are often subbed out for Safeties or Corners.
I like both 4-3 and 3-4 defenses because you get to pick your poison to create power, pressure, sacks, interceptions, turnovers, pick sixes, scoop and scores, etc. If I coached a real team I would do a mixture of both 4-3 and 3-4.
Sir ! --------------There are so many variations on both . -------------Vic Fangio does a base 3/4 totally differently than what The Pats have done . ------------And, just because a base 3/4 or 4/3 is preferred, all DC's today make changes as the game dictates. -------------WolfSky9, 73 y/o, & a Broncos Fan from the very start. ----------------------------------
Today a lot of the top defenses are hybrid the 3-4 is really a 5-2 verses running teams because the coverages behind it is multiple to take care of passing game which is what the defense really wants. Take the patriots vs gaints and Denver vs Carolina both ran 5-2 fronts the rams vs patriots superbowl all carbon copies, Seattle uses it every time they face Dallas,which is a power run team, you can only hide weak defenders in the 4-3 by hybridization it will appear as a 4-3 but will be a 4-2-5 one gap front that way no reading in the down front they can play fast and blitz from practically anywhere. Chiefs ran a 52 in superbowl to deal with run game,today's game is about stops not scoring,the defense needs stops and its been successful.
Lol bro I new playing madden 4-3 was the defense to be in cause my older brothers killed me when I first started playing but ever since then I'll put my skins in 4-3 nd jus smash people when I'm in the mood but now we added chase young lord god bless everyone QB and RB HTTR
Not if you're talented enough to read defenses easily...depends on personnel...Neither is superior to the other. I played in both and we got the same results...depends on personnel.
I would say 43. Yea the browns got rid of two of your best linebackers imo, kirksey and schobert but even still I would go 43 but the browns could play 34 if they wanted
3-4 is about disguise and scheme. Need correct personnel. Leads to linebackers being overmatched in coverage. Good luck matching up with a wide receiver.
The 3-4 is probably better when properly staffed. The problem is finding the unique body types it requires, along with adequate depth of said bodies, to run from year to year. Give me the 4-3. Just flood the roster with easier to find players that fit it.
