3-4 vs 4-3 defense
- Thread starter SLOHusker
- Start date
Jimmies and Joes. We haven't had the DEs or OLBs to be great in either system for the past 5 years. How did Pelini's 4 man front fair against Wisconsin? Yikes. I'm old and probably like 4 down linemen all the time but really is the difference if you have have an OLB who can hold up to the run and rush the passer? Pelini used to drop a DE in coverage and rush 3 or send a linebacker from elsewhere. What' the difference? Run your scheme. Recruit to it and teach it consistently and you'll be fine.
3-4 is a little more complicated D that requires a good OLB edge rusher and above average DC coaching , we are bad in both regards.
The dumbest thing you can do is take players who were recruited to be 4-3 d-linemen and lbs and force them to play a 3-4! You have to have ELITE linebackers also.
We had better quality d-linemen and depth and should have been 4-3 dominant last 2 years until you had the quality personnel to run 3-4. We easily win 5-6 more games last 2 seasons regardless of playcalling..
We had better quality d-linemen and depth and should have been 4-3 dominant last 2 years until you had the quality personnel to run 3-4. We easily win 5-6 more games last 2 seasons regardless of playcalling..
I favor the 3-4 and here's why:
Modern offenses tend to be more pass happy, heavy on presnap reads and sideline adjustments, and depend on QBs to make quick, decisive decisions.
Some advantages of the 3-4:
-More skill position players on the field to defend against pass happy offenses
-Tougher presnap reads. 4 LBs who can bluff on a presnap blitz, not show blitz but actually blitz, or be athletic enough to spy mobile QBs.
-Can be tougher for QBs to be decisive.
Example: Justin Fields vs Wisconsin. Ohio St has far superior talent but that 3-4 scheme both times was the only defense to cause Fields problems
-Another advantage is more defenses are still running the 4-3. With the 3-4 being more complexed, offenses aren't as use to executing against it.
Like with any offense or defense, it can't work without execution. Players have to fully understand what's going on. Coaching and player continuity should help fix this issue.
Modern offenses tend to be more pass happy, heavy on presnap reads and sideline adjustments, and depend on QBs to make quick, decisive decisions.
Some advantages of the 3-4:
-More skill position players on the field to defend against pass happy offenses
-Tougher presnap reads. 4 LBs who can bluff on a presnap blitz, not show blitz but actually blitz, or be athletic enough to spy mobile QBs.
-Can be tougher for QBs to be decisive.
Example: Justin Fields vs Wisconsin. Ohio St has far superior talent but that 3-4 scheme both times was the only defense to cause Fields problems
-Another advantage is more defenses are still running the 4-3. With the 3-4 being more complexed, offenses aren't as use to executing against it.
Like with any offense or defense, it can't work without execution. Players have to fully understand what's going on. Coaching and player continuity should help fix this issue.
I prefer the 3-4 but I agree that it is frustrating seeing players play out of place in the 3-4.
We did however run a 4-2-5/Nickel set often but it never seemed like a traditional 4 down linemen set. Half the time Alex Davis was our DEnd/4th lineman but would stand in a 2 point stance and appear to be trying to catch the man who's trying to block him!! Our 4-2-5 left a lot to be desired, especially since we had the players to run that scheme.
So would that same logic apply to running a spread offense when you dont have the offensive talent to do it?
of course not. Especially in Frost’s position where he has zero pressure to win divisions or hell, even games. You implement your stuff, teach the players to run it and deal with the growing pains.
if you continue to run the a 4-3 defense while recruiting players to run a 3-4, the new players will be practicing and learning the 4-3. Then when you decide you have the proper players to run a 3-4 you have to teach them a new defense.... setting yourself back in year 3 or 4 rather than year 1 and 2. Doesn’t sound like an effective plan to me.
We aren't running a pure 3-4 any more than we'd run a 4-3. We would be in 4-2-5 just as we are running a lot of 3-3-5. Quite often, we already run a 3-4 under that looks like various versions of a 4-3. Like someone said above, you recruit to a system and run your system.
so you keep them in a 4-3 for 2 or 3 years before you start teaching them the defense you really want to play? Makes perfect sense.
That's the great trade-off of transition years. At some point you have to show the kids you're trying to recruit what you plan to do with them...but doing that may cost you drives or even games in the current year.
that cost is eminent. It either happens early in the tenure or when you flip the switch. I’d rather pay early.
I'm thinking a switch to a 4-3 now is easier than going to a 3-4 that's all.
I think the answer is at least a few posters don't like the 3-4 defense and want NU to run a 4-3. But it seems Frost is committed to a 3-4. So a 3-4 it is.
My concern is whether or not the remaining players can replace the productivity of those departing. Mo and Alex totaled 119 tackles. Davis X2 plus Darrion totaled 113 tackles. Presumptive starters at DL are Deontre, Stille and Damion (70 tackles total). How much can young guy like Ty help out?
At ILB, Honas and Miller were second and fourth on the team in terms of total tackles and will at least be serviceable there. Jojo was fifth on the teams in terms of tackles and fills out the stat sheet in other areas. He's a nice player, but not a true game changer. Does a kid like Nelson (15 tackles) take a big step in year two? Why did Tannor only play in 6 games this year? Injuries, or is Frost still waiting for the light bulb to come on with him?
3-4 or 4-3, doesn't really matter. It's less about the Xs and Os, and more about the Jimmies and the Joes. NU has some nice players in the front 7, but no one that can blow the doors off of an opposing D.
Last edited:
Boom! Right there! Any alignment is successful if you can get the right type of dudes in the right positions. 3-4 needs to have animals at the OLB spots and sure tacklers at the ILB spots.
I think our top line ILBs are serviceable. Nelson could turn out to be a nice player. Would be nice to have a DE that can make opposing Olines sweat.
No you bleed it in over those 2-3 years. That's part of the Riley failed so bad. He took a zone read offense and tried to make it West Coast or whatever in year 1. Riley took an offense that averaged 38 points a game in 2014 (something Frost can only dream of right now) down to 32, 26, 25, points per game from 2015-17 respectively!
Pelini didn't overhaul offensive and defensive systems in his first year...he bled them in which took a team form 5 wins to 9 wins his first year (which I believe the quick success actually hurt him). He also didn't throw Callahan's culture, systems and players under their bus every week either....just a few butthurt media members.
Pelini didn't overhaul offensive and defensive systems in his first year...he bled them in which took a team form 5 wins to 9 wins his first year (which I believe the quick success actually hurt him). He also didn't throw Callahan's culture, systems and players under their bus every week either....just a few butthurt media members.
I was only speaking of implementation. You don’t wait until you get players to make the change. Everyone knew what schemes they were going to run. They weren’t hired because they were going to switch schemes.
True! I do think next season the ILBs are going to have to be more than just serviceable. They will have to step their game up and fill a lot better from the inside. Too many bad angles early in the season, it got better, but that is one area they really need to improve.
At the DE spot they really need to find some dudes with some length. Robinson, Rogers, Stille and Wildeman pass the eye test for that, but gotta show it on the field.
Time in the system helps or at least should help with player awareness. They both have the tools and now have an off season to look at and correct some of their mistakes.
The end of the season has me much more confident in our Def and Off Line. I am not as worried about either of them as they seem to be progressing. Just keep the momentum going!
Chin has stated a number of times that this D is a multiple defense that will run different fronts and is not just a 3-4 but 3-4, 4-3, 4-2-5, 3-3-5. They are trying to get the talent in here that can run all of them successfully. If we do get these players and they get it, this is gonna be one hell of a badass D as multiple schemes will be shown every game. This D is made to stop any and every offensive scheme run against it. UCF was a 3-4 only D. Currently we are the D in the nation that runs this type of defense. Hope this helps.
Last edited:
The 4-3 is and all-around effective defense that lets great players be great and doesn't scheme them into oblivion. The DTs are just DTs. The DEs are just DEs. You don't stick a 300 pound DT at DE on one play then make him a NG the next. The Big 10 is still a run first conference and the trenches benefit from players that can focus on their strengths and be disruptive. I believe if OSU ran a 3-4 Chase Young would have been a far less productive player.