Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
3-4 vs 4-3 Defense
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="mradtke66" data-source="post: 468556" data-attributes="member: 4199"><p>I think there is a common misconception that the 4-3 is the better run defense. The 3-4 typically is. Gross generalizations to follow: While you have fewer linemen in a 3-4, all of them are 300 pounders. In a 4-3, only your tackles are over 300. Add in your outside linebackers and a 3-4 becomes a 5-2 on running plays.</p><p> </p><p>As far as 'real ends' on our roster, we don't have any. Worthy, Daniels, and Neal are 3-technique tackles in a 4-3 scheme. The closest thing to a 4-3 end we have on our roster is Perry. Actually, Perry would likely be a more impactfuly player today as a 4-3 end. To a lesser extend Matthews might work as a 4-3 end, but he's about 10-20 pounds light to do it every down.</p><p> </p><p>To put this in different perspective, look at our nickel defense. We trot out, from left to right, Perry, Neal, Raji, and Matthews. Have Perry and Matthews put their hand in the dirt. Ta-da, that's our starting line if we switched to the 4-3 without a huge influx of different body types.</p><p> </p><p>To really make a go of a 4-3, we'd need another stud pass rushing end to pair with Perry. Matthews would probably become our strong side OLB and Hawk and Bishop as the Middle and Weakside backers. Who is who would depend on the specific scheme. In the Bob Sanders/Jimmy Johnson scheme, I'd probably put Bishop in the middle as that is the play-making position. In most others, the weak side get the glory and more coverage responsibilities, so I'd put Bishop there. Not that he's a great cover man, but better than Hawk. Really, we'd need another play-making guy to replace Hawk, but if we're doing that, let's just get him anyway and stick with the 3-4.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="mradtke66, post: 468556, member: 4199"] I think there is a common misconception that the 4-3 is the better run defense. The 3-4 typically is. Gross generalizations to follow: While you have fewer linemen in a 3-4, all of them are 300 pounders. In a 4-3, only your tackles are over 300. Add in your outside linebackers and a 3-4 becomes a 5-2 on running plays. As far as 'real ends' on our roster, we don't have any. Worthy, Daniels, and Neal are 3-technique tackles in a 4-3 scheme. The closest thing to a 4-3 end we have on our roster is Perry. Actually, Perry would likely be a more impactfuly player today as a 4-3 end. To a lesser extend Matthews might work as a 4-3 end, but he's about 10-20 pounds light to do it every down. To put this in different perspective, look at our nickel defense. We trot out, from left to right, Perry, Neal, Raji, and Matthews. Have Perry and Matthews put their hand in the dirt. Ta-da, that's our starting line if we switched to the 4-3 without a huge influx of different body types. To really make a go of a 4-3, we'd need another stud pass rushing end to pair with Perry. Matthews would probably become our strong side OLB and Hawk and Bishop as the Middle and Weakside backers. Who is who would depend on the specific scheme. In the Bob Sanders/Jimmy Johnson scheme, I'd probably put Bishop in the middle as that is the play-making position. In most others, the weak side get the glory and more coverage responsibilities, so I'd put Bishop there. Not that he's a great cover man, but better than Hawk. Really, we'd need another play-making guy to replace Hawk, but if we're doing that, let's just get him anyway and stick with the 3-4. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Members online
tynimiller
Jonty
gopkrs
Green_Bay_Packers
Emur
Latest posts
2024 Round 5, pick 169 (compensatory): Kitan Oladapo, S
Latest: Curly Calhoun
17 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
2024 2nd Rd pick #58 Javon Bullard S
Latest: Curly Calhoun
21 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
2024 draft discussion thread
Latest: Poppa San
22 minutes ago
Draft Talk
2024 Packer UDFA Tracker....
Latest: weeds
27 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Green Bay to Host '25 Draft!
Latest: weeds
29 minutes ago
NFL Discussions
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
3-4 vs 4-3 Defense
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top