Strategic idee-ur

[Matt Foley]

What if I was to design a defense that had no defensive ends, but rather four very powerful defensive tackles that did nothing other than surge forward on every play...the outer tackles thrusting slightly outward and the inner tackles attacking the guards. Imagine Kris Jenkins, the Williams boys from Minnesota and Ndamakong Suh all coming at you at once. The linebackers clean up on any running back who attempts to get through that and even blitz through the openings on passing downs.

Fire away at why my idea wouldn't work. I don't see how any opposing offensive line could handle that much power coming at them. Obviously you'd need speed at every position on the back seven.

[Jbro]

You would spend all your money on the Dline and have no offense.

[[email protected]]

Decent idea but they arent quick enough to get a decent pass rush. Offense will bring in a TE and leave a RB to block or run a delayed route. When the backers blitz the middle will be wide open and the QB will eat that up. Quick toss plays will get to the corner easy because a big DT wont be able to get out there before someone like CJ or D-Will.

[Matt Foley]

I guess a Michael Vick type would kill you, too, huh? I knew it had to be flawed.

[Peppers90 NC]

I guess a Michael Vick type would kill you, too, huh? I knew it had to be flawed.

Screens, stretch plays, draws just to name a few.

[Raleighcat83]

Yeah, it would require blitzes on all passing downs, which would make you awfully predictable. Also, outside runs would cause problems. Plus, nobody has four all pro caliber defensive tackles. In Carolina, for example, this would be Dameone Lewis, Hollis Thomas, Louis Leonard and Nick Hayden, which doesn't sound nearly as intimidating. Actually, the Giants went in the opposite direction a couple years ago during their Super Bowl run; on passing downs, they sometimes used 4 ends: Osi Umenoyria, Micheal Strahan, Justin Tuck and Mathias Kiwanuka. The Panthers can do this too, Charles Johnson and Tyler Brayton are both capable of playing inside on third downs, allowing Everette Brown and Hilee Taylor to bring speed off the edge.

[rayzor]

use 5 on the Dline. three giant DTs in the middle eating up the whole Oline and two edge rushers. Go 5-2-4.

[mountainpantherfan]

use 5 on the Dline. three giant DTs in the middle eating up the whole Oline and two edge rushers. Go 5-2-4.

A friend of mine and I recently had a discussion on this. Most media people will say that teams like the Steelers and Cowboys run a 3-4 defense but in reality they run a 5-2.

A true 3-4 defense is designed to stop the run and clog up the middle of the field to protect agaisnt slants and screens. But that leaves little pressure on the QB and a lot of pressure on the corners to cover the wide outs for extended amounts of time. If this type of team could get pressure with just their front 3 it could be successful. This is what Buffalo did back in the 90's.

The 3-4 most teams run now is a 5-2 where the DE is called a OLB and the two outside DT are called DE. Whats even more interesting to me is how more and more "3-4" teams are running a 4-3. The Patriots, for example, have a lineup of a 3-4 but most of the time once the ball is snapped only 1 OLB rushes along with one DE while the other DE plays more of a DT role and the other OLB plays more of a OLB role. Confussing? Thats the point.

The truth is that in today's NFL the offense has been given so much of an advantage that it really doesn't matter what scheme you run, rather it be a 4-3, 3-4, 5-2, 4-4 or what ever. It's all about discusing what you are going to do and who is going to do.

[panthers55]

A friend of mine and I recently had a discussion on this. Most media people will say that teams like the Steelers and Cowboys run a 3-4 defense but in reality they run a 5-2.

A true 3-4 defense is designed to stop the run and clog up the middle of the field to protect agaisnt slants and screens. But that leaves little pressure on the QB and a lot of pressure on the corners to cover the wide outs for extended amounts of time. If this type of team could get pressure with just their front 3 it could be successful. This is what Buffalo did back in the 90's.

The 3-4 most teams run now is a 5-2 where the DE is called a OLB and the two outside DT are called DE. Whats even more interesting to me is how more and more "3-4" teams are running a 4-3. The Patriots, for example, have a lineup of a 3-4 but most of the time once the ball is snapped only 1 OLB rushes along with one DE while the other DE plays more of a DT role and the other OLB plays more of a OLB role. Confussing? Thats the point.

The truth is that in today's NFL the offense has been given so much of an advantage that it really doesn't matter what scheme you run, rather it be a 4-3, 3-4, 5-2, 4-4 or what ever. It's all about discusing what you are going to do and who is going to do.

The 3-4 is not designed to stop the run and is actually susceptible to being gashed by the run. The 3-4 is designed to blitz whether it is pass blitzing on run blitzing. It is also designed to flow to the ball, limit outside runs and confuse the offense as to their blocking assignments. It is not designed to get pressure by the front 3 as they are typically in a 2 gap technique which is to occupy blockers so the linebackers can make plays and fill gaps. It is not designed to stop slants and screens and can actually be susceptible to both if the linebackers on that side blitz. It often uses zone schemes behind the blitz which can be effective limiting yards after the catch but doesn't pressure the receiver like a man under scheme does.

A 5-2 is not a 3-4 it is what it is- a 5-2. And the DE in a 3-4 is still similar to a DT in a 4-3. What I assume you mean is that when the OLB lines up on the defensive line typically in the 5 or 7 technique, it is similar to what a DE does which is line up outside the tackle and rush the passer. Dallas who runs a 5-2 at times also substitutes a linemen on one side and the OLB on the other side on running downs instead of just lining up both OLBs outside while against passes will often line up the OLBs on the edge not necessarily to rush but also to hit the receiver off the line is they go to man under on the slot while going zone under by the linebackers for example. Dallas runs 3 or 4 different defensive schemes similar to most teams with the dominant look being the 3-4.

What is true is that no team typically runs the same defensive package on every series or even every down in a series depending on down and distance. It is not true that a 3-4 that lines up in a 5-2 is the same thing. Just like a three man rush using a prevent defense is not the same as a 3-4 although it uses many of the same personnel. A defensive scheme is about both personnel and responsibility. Players have to learn what to do depending on the defensive scheme used. Different schemes means players have to learn different responsibilities. I get what you are saying but disagree that they are the same given the different responsilbilities.

[panthers55]

As to the original question, why not go with 4 DTs instead of 2 DTs and 2 DEs. Because a line with all DTs would get abused to the outside and against the pass. Most DTs are used to playing in a 2 gap scheme which is read and react. Most DTs are great at the point of attack but have trouble recovering due a lack of speed on reverses, outside runs, screens, etc. And it is true that a line of all DTs would collectively have less than 20 sacks. The DT with the highest number of sacks was Babineaux with 6 sacks good for 40th on the list. You would be stout against the run up the middle but little else. You would get abused on the outside and against the pass.

Overall a bad idea.

[Delhommey]

It would take a line of Suh/Sapp/Haynesworth level DT's to even be remotely feasible. And with a line worth of Suh/Sapp level players, you'd have to have a bunch of Jason David/Ben Leber level players in the backfield to be even able to field a defense.

[mountainpantherfan]

The 3-4 is not designed to stop the run and is actually susceptible to being gashed by the run. The 3-4 is designed to blitz whether it is pass blitzing on run blitzing. It is also designed to flow to the ball, limit outside runs and confuse the offense as to their blocking assignments. It is not designed to get pressure by the front 3 as they are typically in a 2 gap technique which is to occupy blockers so the linebackers can make plays and fill gaps. It is not designed to stop slants and screens and can actually be susceptible to both if the linebackers on that side blitz. It often uses zone schemes behind the blitz which can be effective limiting yards after the catch but doesn't pressure the receiver like a man under scheme does.

That is how a 3-4 is run now in the NFL. But look back at teams like the Bills in the 90's and it is a totally different mindset. I'm not a coach by any means and you diffinantly have some serious knowledge that I won't even attemp to question. But I know the way that the Bills and other teams in the past ran a 3-4 is completely different than how they are used today.

A 5-2 is not a 3-4 it is what it is- a 5-2. And the DE in a 3-4 is still similar to a DT in a 4-3. What I assume you mean is that when the OLB lines up on the defensive line typically in the 5 or 7 technique, it is similar to what a DE does which is line up outside the tackle and rush the passer. Dallas who runs a 5-2 at times also substitutes a linemen on one side and the OLB on the other side on running downs instead of just lining up both OLBs outside while against passes will often line up the OLBs on the edge not necessarily to rush but also to hit the receiver off the line is they go to man under on the slot while going zone under by the linebackers for example. Dallas runs 3 or 4 different defensive schemes similar to most teams with the dominant look being the 3-4.

I think we are on the same wave length here. To me, though, it doesn't matter how many of your lineman are down lineman and I think that is where the two of us disagree. If a team, like the Steelers for example, always have at least 3 down lineman and two up lineman on the line of scrimage, they are running a 5-2. In a tradional 5-2 all five lineman would be down and that effects the technique assignments, and I understand this. But in a 4-3 scheme, many different teams use different technique assignments for both their DE and DT, yet they are still considered a 4-3.

In other words if your base defense always has at least 5 men on the LOS then your base is a 5-2.

What is true is that no team typically runs the same defensive package on every series or even every down in a series depending on down and distance. It is not true that a 3-4 that lines up in a 5-2 is the same thing. Just like a three man rush using a prevent defense is not the same as a 3-4 although it uses many of the same personnel. A defensive scheme is about both personnel and responsibility. Players have to learn what to do depending on the defensive scheme used. Different schemes means players have to learn different responsibilities. I get what you are saying but disagree that they are the same given the different responsilbilities.

And please do not take my responses here as being disrepectful or that I felt disrepected by your response. I think its just a difference of perspective. By the way you explained it, I can clearly see and understand why you would say that a 3-4 and a 5-2 is completely different.

Great discussion and thanks for the response! When I first joined this board there were a lot more back-and-forths like this which IMO are so much more insightful than what has become the normal rumors/ideas/trade this player for that player threads.

[panthers55]

That is how a 3-4 is run now in the NFL. But look back at teams like the Bills in the 90's and it is a totally different mindset. I'm not a coach by any means and you diffinantly have some serious knowledge that I won't even attemp to question. But I know the way that the Bills and other teams in the past ran a 3-4 is completely different than how they are used today.

I think we are on the same wave length here. To me, though, it doesn't matter how many of your lineman are down lineman and I think that is where the two of us disagree. If a team, like the Steelers for example, always have at least 3 down lineman and two up lineman on the line of scrimage, they are running a 5-2. In a tradional 5-2 all five lineman would be down and that effects the technique assignments, and I understand this. But in a 4-3 scheme, many different teams use different technique assignments for both their DE and DT, yet they are still considered a 4-3.

In other words if your base defense always has at least 5 men on the LOS then your base is a 5-2.

And please do not take my responses here as being disrepectful or that I felt disrepected by your response. I think its just a difference of perspective. By the way you explained it, I can clearly see and understand why you would say that a 3-4 and a 5-2 is completely different.

Great discussion and thanks for the response! When I first joined this board there were a lot more back-and-forths like this which IMO are so much more insightful than what has become the normal rumors/ideas/trade this player for that player threads.

I would agree that the 3-4 designed by Chuck Knox in Buffalo back in 1978 is different than the present as much by today's sophistication of scheme, more athletic players and a bend toward passing rather than running in the 80s. Back then they had what what was known as the Bermuda Triangle- Fred Smerlas, Jim Haslett, and Shane Nelson.

But what makes a 3-4 so unique is that if you look at Baltimore for example they line up as many as 7 or 8 guys within a yard of the line of scrimmage. The point is that properly run, the offense doesn't know which of the 7 or 8 guys are going to blitz so they have trouble with blocking assignments and picking up overloads for example. A 5-2 lined up as a 5-2 with guys just rushing straight ahead with little misdirection is very different from a 3-4 where 5 or 6 guys line up on the line and on different plays different guys actually attack. In both cases 5 guys rush but in one case it is easy to pick them up and in their other not so easy. As for your example if the steelers have 3 down linemen and 2 standing up who sometimes blitz, sometimes drop back and sometimes read and react, you have a 3-4 not a 5-2. Like you said a typical 5-2 is when 5 guys start down. BTW we ran a 5-2 on third down many times this year. It didn't change our base look from a 4-3 it just meant we changed into a 5-2 for that play.

And lastly I agree that we need to have more discussion about football and scheme instead of the typical name calling, blaming the coaches, FO and various other bitching which has overtaken this board in the past several months.

[Matt Foley]

What if you had 11 cornerbacks out there, and they swarmed to the ball on every play and tried to strip the ballcarrier and piled on? Call it the hornets nest defense. I think it would work.