1. Welcome to Green Bay Packers NFL Football Forum & Community!
    Packer Forum is one of the largest online communities for the Green Bay Packers.

    You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Create an Account or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member! Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!

The 4-3 vs. the 3-4

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by IPBprez, Jun 21, 2005.

  1. IPBprez
    Offline

    IPBprez Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2004
    Messages:
    2,883
    Location:
    Lambeau Midwest
    Ratings Received:
    +4 / 0 / -0
    The 4-3 vs. the 3-4

    By Mike Tanier

    Once upon a time, defenses lined up almost the same way that offenses did. The offensive line has a center, two guards, and two tackles. Long ago, the defensive line did to.

    This was the 1930
  2. Robin Yount
    Offline

    Robin Yount Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2005
    Messages:
    265
    Ratings Received:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    Honestly I think we should just stick with the 4-3. The 3-4 could cause even a bigger disaster than probably what will occur to our D anyway next season.

    We do not have the personnel for it.
  3. stump5454
    Offline

    stump5454 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    56
    Location:
    Gulfport
    Ratings Received:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    The 4-3 will be the defense personnel wise we could not run a 3-4. I do not believe Bates was brought in to run the 3-4. I agree with you yount. We barely have 3 quality starting LB now.
  4. PackerTraxx
    Offline

    PackerTraxx Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2005
    Messages:
    1,028
    Ratings Received:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    If we had the depth at LB it can be a good change up D but, as was said we are way short of talent at LB to run a 4-3. I prefer the 4-3 probably because that is what I have seen the Packers win with. Actually, either can be effective with the right personnel and coaching.
  5. I hate the vikings
    Offline

    I hate the vikings Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2005
    Messages:
    8
    Ratings Received:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    If you want to win you have to do the 3-4 :idea:
  6. PWT36
    Offline

    PWT36 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2005
    Messages:
    895
    Location:
    De pere, Wi.
    Ratings Received:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    The Green Bay Packers have been winning since 1992 with the 4-3, and will not change. They don't have the personel, even if they wanted to change. The Packers record since 1993 in a NFL best 127-65.
  7. Odysseus
    Offline

    Odysseus Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2005
    Messages:
    9
    Ratings Received:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    I think the key is KGB. If you believe he is a DE, you have to go with a 4-3. If you think he might be more versatile as an OLB in a 3-4 that's the way to go. In either defense, his primary job would remain as a pass rushing specialist.
  8. musccy
    Offline

    musccy Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    1,854
    Location:
    Lynchburg, VA
    Ratings Received:
    +1 / 0 / -0
    I'm not a defensive guru, but I'd imagine converting to a 3-4 in one season is a pretty drastic change, esp. for a coach that's not accustomed to it. On top of that, I don't think you want to do something like that just to match the personnel you have on your roster for 1 year.

    Some will say "play to your strengths," but that seems a bit too hasty.
  9. IPBprez
    Offline

    IPBprez Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2004
    Messages:
    2,883
    Location:
    Lambeau Midwest
    Ratings Received:
    +4 / 0 / -0
    I always like the Reggie White Pass-rush option... amazing to watch him pull an "arm-sweep" coming around the corner and decking the QB in SB31 - AWESOME stuff! We need to return to that type of smothering defense!
  10. Greg C.
    Offline

    Greg C. Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 31, 2005
    Messages:
    2,856
    Location:
    Marquette, Michigan
    Ratings Received:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    Interesting article. The question of 4-3 vs. 3-4 may be irrelevant for the Packer defense at this time, because I hear that Bates' defense is a compromise between the two, with its emphasis on speedy defensive ends who play wide. I'm still looking for a pass-rushing bookend for KGB, though. If Bates can come up with one of those as well as a serviceable left cornerback, this defense will have a chance to be good.
  11. TOPackerFan
    Offline

    TOPackerFan Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2004
    Messages:
    2,084
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    Ratings Received:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    Not only do we not have the personnel at LB for a 3-4 we also do not have it at DE. The 3-4 requires big DLs not only at the tackle but at the end, which we simply don't have.
  12. Greg C.
    Offline

    Greg C. Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 31, 2005
    Messages:
    2,856
    Location:
    Marquette, Michigan
    Ratings Received:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    What do you mean, TO? We have the perfect end-tackle hybrid in Cletidus.........oh, nevermind.
  13. IPBprez
    Offline

    IPBprez Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2004
    Messages:
    2,883
    Location:
    Lambeau Midwest
    Ratings Received:
    +4 / 0 / -0
    At this point - word is Joey Thomas is in the lead for Left CB.
    I think him paired up with Al Harris will work better than anything we've had for some time. Add to that... and this is IMHO... so you don't have to drink kool-aid here... add to that, the fact that last year on almost every play, we saw Aaron Kampman wherever the ball was...every play! If he can adjust his technique - he just might be the gold mine that could play opposite KGB... but, like I said... it's IMHO!
  14. wpr
    Offline

    wpr Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2005
    Messages:
    1,517
    Ratings Received:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    Great post IBP.
    Personally I think 4-3 is the way for GB to go. It may not be as aggressive of a system but if the defense doesn't make mistakes the 4-3 can give up a few 1st downs and still shut down the offense.
    As so many have said GB doesn't have the personel for the 3-4.
    I know some teams have had success using the 3-4 but not only do you have to have the quality on the D line and linebackers to do so there is a lot of wear and tear on the DL so you need 4-5 quality D line players not just three. As soon as your big behemoth NG goes down and you don't have someone nearly equal to his ablity to replace him the system becomes worthless.
    Another thing to keep in mind, the article kind of glossed over it but after 1st down, many times teams are in a nickle or dime package anyway. In those downs you are wanting the DL pressure the QB not just to tie up the OL and the "4-3" DL is better suited to those situations. Another situation is when the defensive is facing 3rd/4th and short they will many times bring in more beef on the DL too. While the 3-4 DL will have more bulk in it's regual 3 starters than the 4-3 will, it is easier to see a 4-3 type of defense having more more quality defender than a 3-4 having two such quality defenders available.
  15. wpr
    Offline

    wpr Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2005
    Messages:
    1,517
    Ratings Received:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    :shock: are you sure?
    :lol: the perfect end-tackle hybrid. LOVE IT!
    Good job Greg :thumbsup:
  16. net
    Offline

    net Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2005
    Messages:
    931
    Location:
    Rhinelander
    Ratings Received:
    +45 / 19 / -0
    Bates plays a 4-3 so there's no debate there. In the 70's and 80's..the 3-4 was the rage until the West Coast offense came in. The coordinators realized they needed more of a presence inside to fend off the inside running game and the short passing game.

Share This Page