Welcome to PatsFans.com

Does The 3-4 Still Make Sense?

Discussion in 'Patriots Draft Talk' started by mgteich, Apr 25, 2009.

  1. mgteich

    mgteich PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    21,692
    Likes Received:
    222
    Ratings:
    +671 / 53 / -21

    The 3-4 made a lot of sense when we were one of 3 or 4 teams playing it and the players were easily available. Now, with 14 teams going to play the 3-4, the players are at a premium. Consider the situation at 3-4 DE. Jackson, a mid-first talent may be drafted 3 or 9. Look at Gilbert, a 3rd round talent who may go in the first. Raji may be a top 5 players and Brace a 2nd rounder because of the needs of so many.

    Given the premium being paid instead of getting players in the later rounds, perhaps it is time to move back to the 4-3 much more often. There are several 3-4 DT's at the top which would give us a very reasonable front seven. Consider if we chose Jerry, Everette Brown and a LB on Day Two.

    DL Seymour, Wilfork, Jerry, Warren, Brown, Green, Wright
    LB Thomas, Mayo, Woods, Crable, Bruschi, Guyton, Redd/draftee, Banta-Cain
     
  2. reamer

    reamer Third String But Playing on Special Teams

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2009
    Messages:
    920
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    It does make a certain sense, but I think it's trying to be too cute. The 34 allows for more flexibility, more confusion (for the offense), better pressure, and better run defense. Ideally. The 43 just doesn't inspire me. It always seems boring and lacking in creativity, though that's a broad categorical statement and probably untrue.

    Although BB can manage a 43 just fine, he is at his best with a 34. That's reason enough to keep it.
     
  3. Box_O_Rocks

    Box_O_Rocks PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2005
    Messages:
    20,544
    Likes Received:
    25
    Ratings:
    +25 / 0 / -0

    Nope, time to go to the 3-3-5 stack.
     
  4. reamer

    reamer Third String But Playing on Special Teams

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2009
    Messages:
    920
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Hehe. 46, anyone?
     
  5. Box_O_Rocks

    Box_O_Rocks PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2005
    Messages:
    20,544
    Likes Received:
    25
    Ratings:
    +25 / 0 / -0

    Gimmick defense.:snob:
     
  6. Ungeheuer

    Ungeheuer Practice Squad Player

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2005
    Messages:
    211
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    You don't pick your defense based upon the availability of personnel. You pick it because you prefer it intrinsically.

    You can tell that Belichick likes the 3-4 because it allows him to change around his coverages and disguise his formations. That's the primary advantage of the 3-4. I don't see how they could change; it would take years. They don't have anyone on the roster who could realistically be a 4-3 end. BB won five Super Bowls with this defense, in three different decades. I don't see them changing.
     
  7. farn

    farn 2nd Team Getting Their First Start

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2009
    Messages:
    1,945
    Likes Received:
    46
    Ratings:
    +135 / 3 / -4

    3-4 makes sense to me. Patriots and Steelers using it heavily since decade started and have been kickin' A ever since. I like it.

    Figure it out : BB likes it so much that when he has injuries to his LBs, instead of plopping in J.Green and going 4-3 (like everyone always suggests) he prefers putting in Alexander, TBC, Woods, Colvin from the street... he loves it.
     
  8. mayoclinic

    mayoclinic PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    May 1, 2008
    Messages:
    15,108
    Likes Received:
    1,384
    Ratings:
    +3,989 / 11 / -8

    I think we're going to run 2 schemes: the 11-0, where all 11 guys stack the line of scrimmage, and the 0-11, where all 11 guys drop back into coverage.
     

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>