3-4 or 4-3 defense
- Thread starter SLOHusker
- Start date
I don’t remember Cosgrove defenses being 3-4 defenses. Maybe I just wasn’t paying attention. But if my memory is correct, which it probably isn’t, the only time since then at least that we tried is with Diaco who was not good and now Chins and the jury is out on him as well.
I guess the question is, is it coaching or scheme? Lots of places run a 3-4 and do it well.
People act like it is a bigger deal than it is...in the end you almost always have 5 guys on or at the LOS. Unless you are Bobby D...then you have no guys at the line and all 11 defenders back the the goalline...defending the big play
And before 1992 Nebraska ran an odd front and had some success.
It wasn't.
Here is the depth chart for the 2007 season opener.
http://www.huskers.com/pdf7/82448.pdf
And here is the 2006 Texas game.
http://www.huskers.com/pdf6/48392.pdf
Yes. We were pretty much exclusively 5-2
That's the biggest problem I have with the 3-4......the"5" man front. There's a reason we went away from it. Granted, the style of personnel is completely different than the typical 5-2 but the numbers are the same. I just personally prefer the 4-3 for stopping the run. That's my first focus. Stop the run. It allows your lbs to play just a little deeper and see the field better. That's just me and i am old school and getting long in the tooth.
Know what I prefer for stopping the run? the 4-4. Worked in high school and works in NCAA 2014.
Not to mention that actual DEs are committing to rush the QB, vs OLBs that are 6’1 235.
Glad you brought that up. We ran a little bit of it too. We called it stack for short. You could bring some wicked blitzes out of it. A good qb could expose it. A good TE delay or a pass to a rb were a danger but that was more of a player not taking care of his responsibility than the scheme itself.
The 3-4 requires that the NT and DEs be beasts that will overmatch the OL. Alabama has the personnel to make it effective. NU hasn't and even when we have had dominate DL the 4-3 was still a good base defense against the running game. In the Big 10 the 3-4 gets overmatched.
You can make any defense work IF you have the right personnel. We struggled in the early 90s when we made the switch from the 5-2 to the 4-3. Once we got the speed, BOOM. Charlie McBride was a genius. There were a lot of people calling for his head.
Same thing will happen with the 3-4 after a couple years. YES I know we ran it last year under Diaco. That's a Mulligan and doesn't count. Personnel. Like Barry Switzer said, "its the Jimmy's and the Joe's"
Same thing will happen with the 3-4 after a couple years. YES I know we ran it last year under Diaco. That's a Mulligan and doesn't count. Personnel. Like Barry Switzer said, "its the Jimmy's and the Joe's"
Last edited:
doesn't matter...every team has alignment packages to match the offense. We really ran a 4-2-5 or a
4-1-6 during the early Pelini years...facing predominantly spread offenses. We will face predominately spread offenses this year actually so having 4 linebackers is more effective in theory at covering speed and TEs in space. I hope we see 4 dlineman against heavy sets against wisky...probably will. We are just really bad on defense personnel wise...can't compare the 90s and Suh teams to this one.
4-1-6 during the early Pelini years...facing predominantly spread offenses. We will face predominately spread offenses this year actually so having 4 linebackers is more effective in theory at covering speed and TEs in space. I hope we see 4 dlineman against heavy sets against wisky...probably will. We are just really bad on defense personnel wise...can't compare the 90s and Suh teams to this one.
But every Nebraska fan’s go to comparison team, Wisconsin runs a 3-4 and we all know they only recruit 2 stars and they do ok against the run.
My team copied, to perfection, the wide tackle 6 defense that Va Tech ran from the early 90’s to 2002 or so. That stopped the run. Let’s do that!!
I think the 3-4 gives you more options in blitzing and allows for more creativity. It is a bit more versatile because you can easily move a guy or two up to a 4 man or 5 man front.
It surprises me how little our base knows about schemes. The 3-4 is very effective. The best feature is the ability to be unpredictable. Like the 4-3, there’s almost always a 4th rusher. Sometimes there’s a 5th or 6th but offenses can be caught of guard more so than with the 4-3 scheme.
The funny thing is everyone complains about the 3-4 while half the time we run a 4 man front.
Either scheme can work.
The funny thing is everyone complains about the 3-4 while half the time we run a 4 man front.
Either scheme can work.
True. Most of the time there are 4-5 guys on the line. However, the difference is the 4th and 5th man aren't weighing 295 lbs. It's a linebacker going against 300 lb ol
Does anyone here actually watch the games and see where dudes line up or do you seriously just hear what a coach runs and take it as gospel!!!!?? JFC!!!!
You highlighted a 3rd and 15 in the 2nd quarter of the 1st game as your reasoning that we were running a base 3-4 in 2007?
At that moment in the game, we're in a specialty defense due to down/distance/personnel. If anything it's a 3-3-5 nickel defense...but I have a hard time telling with how zoomed out it is on the telecast and looking at it on my laptop.
We were a base 4-3 under Cosgrove...but like any defense, we don't stay in it exclusively. Just like Chinander's 3-4.
Depth Chart for that Nevada Game
Edit: Didn't catch it at first, but I see in the OP that you have us running a 3-4 under Banker as well (2015-2016). At first, I didn't understand why you were so off on the Base D's we were running at different points in recent history. But I get it now. I see the common thread.
Last edited: