Question about 3-4 vs 4-3

[panthers55]

Yeah, but I'm saying, could he do it CONSISTENTLY. Could he really drop in the flats and cover a Chris Johnson? He could defend the screen but any warm NFL body could disrupt a screen to some extent. Then you have to figure in his ability to contain the outside on runs while not getting kicked out on inside runs. I just think its too much of a risk. He could get by but given the choice, would you rather have Diggs playing the weakside OLB, or Peppers? Because if Peppers stays with his hand in the dirt, you have Diggs and Connor right behind him. That half is take away. Especially if Peppers were to crash down, cross the tackles face and get into B gap. This occupies the tackle, if done quickly, the guard, which would help Connor and Diggs simultaneously. 3-4 is all about flow and containing. The 4-3 is about attacking. There are weaknesses and strengths to both, as stated earlier. Pick your poison.

A 3-4 is all about containing with linemen and attacking with linebackers.

A 4-3 is all about attacking with your linemen and filling in and containing with your linebackers.

As to your argument. Peppers would never play DE in a 3-4, he as much said so. He would play OLB or go elsewhere. Beason could be one ILB and perhaps Davis could be the other but frankly I would probably make him a strong safety. Connors could back up Beason or fill the other ILB spot. But we would have to convert one or more of our DEs to an OLB spot. Brayton couldn't do it in Oakland, Johnson, Taylor and Brown have no experience in it. So we would bring someone in. Surely Kemo could be the NT although I like Thomas better. Perhaps Leonard could be a DE perhaps Lewis. But when all is said and done we would have a bunch of guys we would have to jettison for no good reason.

As you said could we do it? Perhaps. But the better question is why would we? I like the 4-3 for us as long as we are aggressive and can consistently get pressure on the quarterback.

[Snake]

The only thing it would hurt would be his Tackles. Still we dont have any good 3-4 OLBs so really thats why we would not need to use it.

[Urrymonster]

With the popularity of the 3-4 these days, the components for the 4-3 will be more plentiful and cheaper.

Why do you think the early 3-4 users has so much success? There was only a few teams competing for the players suitable for the positions.

[Wither]

So, if we acknowledge that the 3-4 is good for blitzing, is it good for turnovers?

[csx]

4 of top 5 defenses this year in terms of yardage are 3-4

5 of top 5 defenses this year in terms of points are 3-4

I think the best defense the past 4 or 5 years has been a 3-4

interesting

[Wither]

4 of top 5 defenses this year in terms of yardage are 3-4

5 of top 5 defenses this year in terms of points are 3-4

I think the best defense the past 4 or 5 years has been a 3-4

interesting

What about turnovers? The reason I ask is because that seems to be what Carolina is good at now (the defense).

[Jackofalltrades]

Kemo started at NT in Baltimore, so we wouldn't have to go find one. We 'could' swing it with the personnel we have now, but Fox won't go away from the one thing he really knows. I wouldn't be opposed to it, but it's just not going to happen with Fox here, that's common knowledge and that's why I'm tired of seeing it brought up five times a week.

[Snake]

So, if we acknowledge that the 3-4 is good for blitzing, is it good for turnovers?

I would not say it was any better for blitzing then the 4-3. Philly's has just as much success as say Pittsburgh.

[SCPantherFan90]

I would think TO's would be more affected by the individual players rather than the scheme.

[Delhommey]

There's still too much emphasis on the ground game in the NFC South to switch away from the 4-3. Even the high flying Saints try to keep a balance.

[Guild]

I would think TO's would be more affected by the individual players rather than the scheme.

The scheme and what the coaches require out of tackles does affect turnovers. Player tendencies do as well.

[csx]

Kemo started at NT in Baltimore, so we wouldn't have to go find one. We 'could' swing it with the personnel we have now, but Fox won't go away from the one thing he really knows. I wouldn't be opposed to it, but it's just not going to happen with Fox here, that's common knowledge and that's why I'm tired of seeing it brought up five times a week.

pretty sure they played a 4-3 that year with Kelly Gregg at the other DT position and Suggs & Weaver at DE...but there defense is so shifty you just never know