(Not so) Stupid football questions - Page 11 - New England Patriots Forums

Patspsycho · 09-10-2011, 10:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jmt57

I think when the 3-4 first started to become popular the advantages were in large part that it confused opposing offenses; they weren't familiar with it. In addition there was more flexibility, where those outside linebackers could either drop in coverage or rush the passer on any given down; it's easier to confuse the offense by showing different blitz packages.

At this point though it really comes down to personnel, not formation in determining which is better. An effective 3-4 needs a big NT who commands and occupies two defenders, allowing the ILBs behind him to make plays; the OLBs should be fast enough to cover a RB or TE in the flat; and the ILBs need to be strong enough to take on opposing interior linemen; if any of them can't do that then the defense is in trouble.

The old basic theory is that the 3-4 is better against runs and short passes at or behind the line of scrimmage that go wide and the 4-3 is better against runs up the middle, but again it really comes down to the players executing and not the formation.

I think more teams will go back to more 4-3 not because the league passes the ball and runs it less often, but because there are a limited number of players that fit the profile of 3-4 players. There are only so many players like Vince Wilfork that are effective 3-4 nose tackles, which may be the most important position in a productive 3-4. Similarly there are only so many players that have the size and speed needed to be an effective 3-4 OLB.

If for example only five teams are utilizing a 3-4, there should be enough players available for those teams to find that they can use. But if twenty teams are looking for players to use in a 3-4, now there are not enough guys that can play those positions well to go around.

The 3-4 (especially the 2 gap version) is attractive to defensive-minded coaches like BB who are highly intelligent and creative, because it has far more playmaking abilities than the 4-3 does, because your backers are free to do anything, as long as they are jack of all trades.

However, with more and more teams adopting the 3-4, not only is the personnel for the defense more and more in demand, but the rest of the league has become a lot more familiar with it by now and have learned how to play against it, pretty effectively.

jays52 · 09-10-2011, 11:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by neuronet

Great overview of the situation, thanks for posting it. It reminds me a lot of the book 'Don't watch the ball' which I got last year, except your writing is more clear

The 4-3 seems a rational scheme, why has the 3-4 been so popular? Do you think 4-3 will come back into popularity now that the league is so pass-heavy (this is implicitly asking if 4-3 poses more, or less, trouble for QB on passing downs)?

The 43 and 34 are pretty different defenses. Let's look at the run game first. Essentially the 34 defense seeks to contain and squeeze the run, whereas the 43 is more pursuit and flow based. The 34 evolved from the 52 defense by (shocking, I know) standing up the defensive ends. This was in response to the evolution of the passing game, and the strong safety was no longer just a fast linebacker. The primary role of the 52 ends is to never break contain so that the interior linebackers and two tackles could make a play. The same holds for 34 outside linebackers. Much like the 52, the two inside linebackers in the 34 are responsible for the area between the tackles. The design of the 34 is to turn everything back into these players. Yes, things differ with different run nuances but at a very basic, fundamental level this is the concept. The 43 defense as I mentioned earlier relies much more on the pursuit of the defense. The linebackers tend to be smaller, faster players as they are more protected by defensive linemen. The techniques (d-line alignment) of the 43 are also geared towards getting upfield. The two tackles most often play the 1 and 3 techniques, respectively. The one technique is an alignment on the outside shoulder of the center, the three technique is an alignment on the outside shoulder of the guard. It facilitates getting past the blocker but the tradeoff is that the tackle cedes the other gap. With penetration, creases will form and often the runner will be able to get in space. This is where the pursuit of the linebackers matters. They must be fast enough to chase plays from sideline to sideline, as well as aggressively attack any seams that are created by the offense before the play develops.

In the passing game the main difference is versatility. The 34 defense gives you a myriad of options from which you can attack or defend against a passing offense. You disguise your blitz intentions (all 34 linebackers must be able to blitz) pre-snap, and your pressures can come from more angles. You can also more effectively only rush three to create a very clogged intermediate zone. The 34 also gave birth to the zone blitz (invented in and is now the bread and butter of Pittsburgh). The zone blitz was invented as a way to run zone coverages while still sending a standing defender. Before, blitzing took away the extra man advantage the defense had (quarterback essentially turns the offense into a ten man team) and forced teams to play man coverage. The zone blitz drops a defensive lineman into coverage when a standing defender blitzes. It is extremely effective against a lot of "blitz beaters" as it places a player into the vacated zones quarterbacks target when a standing defender rushes. It leads to a lot of indecision and interceptions. The 34 is all about versatility in the passing game. The 43 against the pass is, at it's most basic level, far more vanilla. They seek to get after the passer through their down linemen who are better pass rushers than their 34 counterparts. The 3-technique is typically the best pass rushing tackle on the team. The ends are smaller, more explosive players who seek to defeat the larger o-linemen with speed and agility. Dwight Freeny and his spin move is a great example of such a player. His speed mandates that the tackle extends to the outside, and his spin is how he counters the outside momentum of the tackle. Speed to agility. The main goal of 43 pass rush is to win individual matchups without having to scheme a rush. This can be extremely effective when you have the personnel. In coverage, it's still about pursuit from the linebackers. Because there are less linebackers in the zone, they have to be able to move to the ball. The athleticism of the linebackers affords some different coverages as well.

So basically the main differences are contain vs chase and versatility vs individual matchups.

neuronet · 09-10-2011, 07:39 PM

Jays52: that is awesome, I have read it once, and will need to look it over again before I fully get it. Great stuff you really explained some of the jargon well, and especially it gives me a much better "big picture" view of the main philosophical differences in 3-4 versus 4-3 (and it is amazing that BB actually seems to be switching overall approach--wow).

livinginthe past · 09-10-2011, 07:50 PM

Excellent thread

Learning alot.

***AndyJohnson*** · 09-10-2011, 08:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jmt57

Part of the confusion may be because though most think that the kick MUST go ten yards for the kicking team to recover, that is not the case. Some also believe the receiving team MUST touch touch the ball first, but that is also not the case.

The rule is that it must EITHER travel ten yards OR be touched by the receiving team. Once either one of those two things happens, it's a free ball and either team can recover. Also, don't forget that the kicking team cannot be the first to touch the ball within those first ten yards of the kickoff.

So to answer your questions: if the kicking team recovers they cannot advance the ball - unless the opponent (receiving team) had possession (not just touched; possession) and fumbled. Kind of strange, that distinction between touching the ball vs having possession, but that's the rule. Also, no, the receiving team does not have to touch it first, as long as it has traveled at least ten yards; once it has gone ten yards anybody can recover the ball.

As for that squib kick, since it had gone more than ten yards anybody can recover. Similarly I have seen kicks go deep but between the returner and the blockers ten yards in front of him; that's a free ball. Likewise, hoping or waiting for a ball near the sideline to go out of bounds can be dicey not just because you may not get to return it - the kicking team could recover since it is a live ball.

One other little known factoid: the receiving team can, if they so desire, call for a fair catch just like they do on punts. The caveat to this is that they cannot do that if the ball has touched the ground first (once again, similar to a punt - with the important difference being that with a kickoff that's a free ball). So if the kickoff team tries to pop it up in the air and have a speedy receiver on the outside catch it, the receiving team (if they are alert and well coached) can simply call for a fair catch. That is part of why you see kickers drive the ball into the ground on an onside kick rather than lofting it into the air like a fade route in the end zone.

Hope that helps; great questions.

Another rule that is not well known is that after making a fair catch of a punt, you can elect a free kick FG attempt from the spot. Its almost never done except on the last play of a half, but the kicker gets to kick from the spot of the fc with the defense not on the field.

Reckedtrek · 09-10-2011, 11:31 PM

This is a great thread. I know some, but can always learn more! This thread should be one of the permanent ones at the top of the page.

A sincere thank you to those who have contributed so much info (and there have been many) to this thread.

Let's hope it's great season!

eom · 09-11-2011, 12:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by neuronet

Jays52: that is awesome, I have read it once, and will need to look it over again before I fully get it. Great stuff you really explained some of the jargon well, and especially it gives me a much better "big picture" view of the main philosophical differences in 3-4 versus 4-3 (and it is amazing that BB actually seems to be switching overall approach--wow).

well, I'm not so sure how much switching he's actually doing.
I think all the stuff he's been working on this year is basically stock schemes that he's used before, and they'll still be a multiple front team.

he even said they were working the 4 man fronts in practice and preseason to get them on tape so they could correct them, and that the other stuff would get worked in later as they had more experience with it.

in pre they were showing 4 man 'under' fronts, pictured below, which aren't so tremendously divergent from the 3 man front.
just imagine the SLB is Cunningham and LDE is Ellis --- the only thing that makes this a '4-3' is that your RDE (Carter) is in a 3 point stance --- if you stood him up you've just turned it into a 3-4 with Carter and Cunningham as OLB, without moving anyone around.

so, that's really the nature of a multiple front team --- they can change the look while keeping the same personnel on field.
you can see there's not always a tremendous distinction between the odd and even fronts.

as an aside, you can also see how BB has most likely schemed the 4-3 under fronts to iso haynesworth up on a guard, which is putting his player in the best position to succeed.
this is one of the things that I think makes BB such a good coach.

this is essentially the same stifling defense tampa adapted at the turn of the century when they won their superbowl, with haynesworth in the warren sapp role, which got him 16 sacks one year.

I am extremely excited.

neuronet · 09-11-2011, 09:59 AM

I've often heard people say it is much more flexible than a hard division between 3/4 versus 4/3. Thanks for explaining it eom. Pic isn't showing for me....

Not sure why the image isn't showing in my browser, for thsoe that can't see it:
http://s2.postimage.org/gn18wzb5r/UNDER.jpg

livinginthe past · 09-15-2011, 05:33 PM

I thought i'd give this thread a little bump with some pretty interesting information regarding cut blocks.

It appears, the Steelers, like 95% of us fans, thought a chop block was blocking a defender low when he was already engaged 'high' with another offensive player.

This isn't the case.

I'm pretty sure our impression of what a cut block actually is has been greatly influenced by commentators and the media.

I don't think i've ever seen this part of the rule ever mentioned before.

Per PFT.

Steelers apparently don’t understand the chop block rule | ProFootballTalk

Quote:

An illegal chop block doesn’t occur when, for example, the center engages the nose tackle and one or both of the guards block him low. Instead, an illegal chop block happens only when the offensive lineman delivering the low block was originally lined up more than one position away from the offensive lineman who initially has engaged the defender.

Here’s the official rule, which a league source has forwarded to PFT: “On a running play, A1, an offensive lineman, chops a defensive player after the defensive player has been engaged by A2 (high or low), and the initial alignment of A2 is more than one position away from A1. The rule applies only when the block occurs at a time when the flow of the play is clearly away from A1.”

And so, if the center hits a guy high and a tackle hits him low, it’s a penalty. When it’s a center and one of the two guards, the chop block is not illegal.

neuronet · 09-15-2011, 09:14 PM

I guess it isn't only the Steelers that didn't understand that rule, I know I didn't

I have a question about offense versus defense getting tired. Why is it that when the offense stays out a long time, they always talk about the defense getting tired? Why doesn't the offense get equally tired? I see that it is more work to rush the passer than to block someone from rushing the passer: is that the main difference?