Which defensive system produces better special teamers?

[Mr. Scot]

Interesting debate between Dave Toub and Joe DeCamillis (link)

Given his choice, DeCamillis would prefer to coach special teams for a team using a 4-3 scheme because of the crop of players he has to pick from. He’s worked in the role as a coordinator for 20 seasons, and spent the last four seasons in Dallas where the Cowboys used a 3-4 defense. Prior to that, he was a coordinator for the Jacksonville Jaguars, Atlanta Falcons and New York Giants.

“I have worked in both systems now and I would much rather be in a 4-3 system because of the fact that you really have some speed at the linebacker position,” DeCamillis said. “Most of the time, (in a) 3-4 you are playing with bigger people. And, I think the 4-3 is gonna be something that is going to help us and it’s helped this team in the past.”

Interestingly, when former special teams coordinator Dave Toub left for the Kansas City Chiefs, he said he would prefer a 3-4 defense to draw players from, if given his choice. His reasoning is there are more linebackers on the game-day roster to utilize. As it turns out, Kansas City will remain in the 3-4 under new coach Andy Reid.

"I think a 3-4 is better,” Toub said. “You get more linebackers active on the 46-man game day roster. You will have eight and sometimes nine linebackers active. Every time we played a 3-4 team I always thought it was rough for us matchup-wise because they always had more linebackers than us. I always thought a 3-4 was the best special teams situation you can be in.

“That is why in a 4-3, when you run special teams, you always have to have a defensive end like Izzy (Idonije) or Corey Wootton. You have to have one of those guys be a good special teams player. In a 3-4 you don’t because you’ve got more linebackers. That is the difference.”

So whose argument makes more sense?

[frash.exe]

Idk since we run a 4-3 and our STs have been consistently horrible

[Mr. Scot]

In fairness, when's the last time we had a good Special teams Coach?

Not sure the Panthers are a good team to judge by.

[2jakefansinva]

I would say........the more LBer (size/speed) guys the better.

[Icege]

That explains Greg Hardy as a gunner

[KARASMATIC444]

i think safety's are more important, as they can get there fast and takel better than any WR or TE.

[L-TownCat]

Much to your point I believe ST's coaching and scheme are much more important than just the players themselves.

On offense and defense you are afforded highly talented players to mask otherwise limited talent in coaching and schematics(which are highly important too).

ST's are primarily back ups except for your 5 skill positions(K,P,KR,PR,LS) the rest are your depth players that need a huge boost from a proper scheme and coaching.

No team will ever have 54 starting caliber players on their game day rosters so the blue collar guys that are trying to make the team are the ones that make up your ST's units. This is why coaching and scheme are so important.

I like the argument for the 4-3 just because its what i am most familiar with and i think that rationale would hold true with ST's coaches. We all know coaches are creatures of habit so I'm sure they would just stick with what they know.

[Gabeking]

In fairness, when's the last time we had a good Special teams Coach?

Not sure the Panthers are a good team to judge by.

That's true but I'm more confident in our special teams after how good they were late in the season and the dehaven hire

[Brokenbad]

Does it really even matter what D you run?

A lot of the ST guys get very little to no snaps on offense or defense. Teams do pick up some guys specifically for special teams and not defensive alignment depth, right?

[panthers55]

I don't think one system is necessarily better than the other. They both make accurate points for their rationale. There are advantages to both. What makes a special team unit great is both the players you choose for it as well as the emphasis you put on it every day. Some teams use backips while others use more starters. Some like Chicago take pride in their unit and count on theirs to score points while other units hope not to screw up. It is a function of how much it is valued.

[iamhubby1]

Don't kid yourself. The more overall talent you have, the better your ST will perform. My 46 will beat your 46 type of attitude.

You have 22 starters, that leaves 24 potential ST stars. Subtract for the O an D lines and that leaves you 18. Minus the backup QB, kickers, and other verts and specialitst, and that leaves you short handed.

A good coach only gets you so far. You still need talent to get he job done on St. Which is why, IMO, good teams seem to have good STs. Their 46 can beat your 46

[Thorrez]

I actually think the 4-3 argument, only, stands better in theory.

4-3: 7 LBs with slightly higher

3-4: 6 LB with slightly lower speed. 2-3 LBs with lower speed (playing at the los in defense).

Of course this is all theory. In reality you did not have teh chance to pick 53 players perfect for your system. So the more people to choose from the larger chance some of them are good STers.

[thefuzz]

IMO I would think that the biggest difference would be the coach on ST.

That said, I think that I would lean more toward a 34 and having the extra LB or two on gameday.

I don't want my DE's playing ST, just me though. At least my starters.