A possible return to the 3-4?

[MTM558]

A recent article posted on PatsPulpit recently got me thinking about the direction of this defense going forward, and the possibilities for next season. While the old moniker of being a strict 3-4 or 4-3 team is dead with the increase of sub packages and hybrid fronts, teams are still largely known defensively for what they base out of. For the Patriots, they began the 2000s with a 4-3, winning their first Super Bowl, before switching to the 3-4 in 2003 and becoming one of the most dominant defenses in NFL history. The 3-4 was a staple of Patriots success until 2011, when the team brought in veterans such as Andre Carter, Mark Anderson, and Albert Haynesworth, and began to transition to a 4-3 base. This past year was a further evolution of the transition, though there was still a recognizable 3-4 aspect of it to begin the season.

Bill Belichick has long been a defensive guru, especially with the 3-4. Looking back at his success with the Giants and Lawrence Taylor, it was the 3-4 that won them the Super Bowl. In the book "War Room," it clearly states that Bill has always preferred a defense with 2-gap principles (which to his credit he has still accomplished with the 4-3 they run today).

Ok, no more overhyping the fabled "3-4." But it is still an interesting discussion from a personnel viewpoint. Taking a look at some of the Patriots' most versatile players (positions based on previous experience and my own observations):

* Chandler Jones - Can play 3-4 OLB, 3-4 DE, 4-3 DE
* Rob Ninkovich - Can play 3-4 ILB, 3-4 OLB, 3-4 DE, 4-3 DE, 4-3 MLB, 4-3 OLB
* Jerod Mayo - Any LB position in 4-3 or 3-4
* Brandon Spikes - 3-4 ILB, 4-3 MLB
* Dont'a Hightower - 3-4 ILB, 3-4 OLB, 4-3 MLB, 4-3 OLB, 4-3 DE
* Jamie Collins - 3-4 ILB, 3-4 OLB, 4-3 DE

Using the above players as the foundation, there is clear versatility among the "Linebacker" group. Many can play down at end in 4-man fronts, but they can all play some sort of position in the 3-4. In a NFL where defenses need to get their best athletes out on the field, would the 3-4 allow them to do as as opposed to the 4-3?

Looking at possible lineups:

3-4:
DE - Chandler Jones - Jake Bequette
NT - Vince Wilfork - Kyle Love
DE - Armond Armstead - Tommy Kelly
OLB - Dont'a Hightower - Michael Buchanan
ILB - Jerod Mayo
ILB - Brandon Spikes - Dane Fletcher
OLB - Rob Ninkovich - Jamie Collins

vs:

4-3:
DE - Chandler Jones - Michael Buchanan
DT - Vince Wilfork - Tommy Kelly
DT - Kyle Love - Armond Armstead
DE - Rob Ninkovich - Justin Francis
OLB - Dont'a Hightower - Jamie Collins
MLB - Brandon Spikes - Dane Fletcher
OLB - Jerod Mayo

While both fronts utilize largely the same personnel (making for easy transitions between fronts in a hybrid scheme), you can see that in the 3-4 front, there would be more flexibility and more ways to get the strongest part of your roster (the Linebackers) onto the field.

Maybe there is some evidence to support this with how Jamie Collins and Michael Buchanan were drafted (both very good 3-4 players in college), or maybe I just wasted your time with this thread. I still think it's an interesting discussion to have.

Thoughts?

Should Patriots Look to the 3-4? - Pats Pulpit

 

[Fencer]

I stopped reading when you suggest Ninko at 3-4 DE. That position requires a lot more sandypants, specialized packages or gameplans OCCASIONALLY excepted.

Analogy: I recall one game in which Mike Vrabel played NT. I do not recall a second one.

 

[nabwong]

I believe that 4-3 or 3-4 doesn't matter to BB. It's all about flexibility and the ability to learn the overarching concepts and to disguise what is coming. The fact of the matter is that BB will put whatever defense will win that particular game. For example, in the 1st teblow broncos game, we started out with a 4-3 and tebag was just scorching us. Then we made in game on the fly adjustments to a 3-4 alignment. That doesn't mean that the 3-4 will always work against the run. It really depends on how the team can adjust and execute. The more schemes they learn, the adjustments they can make.

 

[Hammer of Thor]

I believe that 4-3 or 3-4 doesn't matter to BB. It's all about flexibility and the ability to learn the overarching concepts and to disguise what is coming. The fact of the matter is that BB will put whatever defense will win that particular game. For example, in the 1st teblow broncos game, we started out with a 4-3 and tebag was just scorching us. Then we made in game on the fly adjustments to a 3-4 alignment. That doesn't mean that the 3-4 will always work against the run. It really depends on how the team can adjust and execute. The more schemes they learn, the adjustments they can make.

Agreed. One of the most famous examples was Super Bowl 39 when they played that game in a 4-3 and completely caught the Eagles off-guard and it took them a full quarter to adjust.

I think given the choice, Belichick would like to be able to play multiple fronts like he did in 2011, playing a traditional 4-3, playing the 4-3 under, and playing 3-4. He really couldn't last year with Jones and Hightower being both rookies and injured at various points, and with Scott not being an adequate replacement for Anderson. The players this year might enable them to do it.

 

[BradyManny]

Tricky thing to discuss...on the one hand, as you mention, the repercussions of switching between the two fronts is very minor. On the other hand, that very minor difference could be important.

It feels like the 34 would suit this team again. It might be the best way to take advantage of the versatility of guys like Hightower and Ninko. Hightower needs to be blitzing more this year, the guy has a beast of a bull rush.

Deus mentioned it last year, and I argued with him over where the LBs are best suited. Feels like I was on the wrong side of the argument now. Our LBs are slow in coverage. In a 34, you can drop a 4th LB, you can blitz one of your LBs, your ILBs are probably dropping into shallow zones and maybe not following TEs down the seam in man. But now we're talking coverages and I don't feel comfortable speculating on all the Xs & Os repercussions here.

All I know is this: this defense will have by far the most versatile players with the most diverse skillsets Belichick has had to play with in a long time.

 

[SONS_OF_BELICHICK]

Everyone knows...BB likes to mix up his defenses. With athletic/versatile linebackers..it makes the opponent more formations to worry about.
Dont over -analyze ...leave it to the pros

 

[Kontradiction]

The team needs one more 34 DE before it can start show a 3-4 base more often, IMO. Jones is a "elephant" type, but a two-gapping 34 DE needs to be able to take on double teams at the point of attack. Jones was a force when healthy last season, but he had trouble doing just that. I like Armstead at the other DE spot, though. I just wouldn't entrust Deaderick or Love at one of those spots. If we were to put Bequette or Ninkovich out there at DE, teams would run all over that.

 

[Don Kipines]

The real question here is who plays end in the 3-4. Deaderick we know can do it, and Wilfork we know can do it (with Love on the nose), and Kelly has done it before, only not with us. But since the ideal setup has Wilfork on the nose, we really need two reliable and dynamic guys in those end spots.

Armstead would seem like a candidate for it. Bequette is allegedly bulking up, which might mean they're thinking of him in that role. He's certainly long enough, has a little Brett Keisel in him. But we don't even know if either of those guys can play at all.

The only thing we know for sure is that they have a lot of bodies and they don't all profile as pure 4-3 or 3-4 players. It's a weird mix of players who don't have defined roles. My guess is that with so many young players, they'll try to keep it as simple as possible. We know how BB likes to switch it up and tinker -- let's hope he doesn't overthink.

 

[AzorianPats]

A recent article posted on PatsPulpit recently got me thinking about the direction of this defense going forward, and the possibilities for next season. While the old moniker of being a strict 3-4 or 4-3 team is dead with the increase of sub packages and hybrid fronts, teams are still largely known defensively for what they base out of. For the Patriots, they began the 2000s with a 4-3, winning their first Super Bowl, before switching to the 3-4 in 2003 and becoming one of the most dominant defenses in NFL history. The 3-4 was a staple of Patriots success until 2011, when the team brought in veterans such as Andre Carter, Mark Anderson, and Albert Haynesworth, and began to transition to a 4-3 base. This past year was a further evolution of the transition, though there was still a recognizable 3-4 aspect of it to begin the season.

Bill Belichick has long been a defensive guru, especially with the 3-4. Looking back at his success with the Giants and Lawrence Taylor, it was the 3-4 that won them the Super Bowl. In the book "War Room," it clearly states that Bill has always preferred a defense with 2-gap principles (which to his credit he has still accomplished with the 4-3 they run today).

Ok, no more overhyping the fabled "3-4." But it is still an interesting discussion from a personnel viewpoint. Taking a look at some of the Patriots' most versatile players (positions based on previous experience and my own observations):

* Chandler Jones - Can play 3-4 OLB, 3-4 DE, 4-3 DE
* Rob Ninkovich - Can play 3-4 ILB, 3-4 OLB, 3-4 DE, 4-3 DE, 4-3 MLB, 4-3 OLB
* Jerod Mayo - Any LB position in 4-3 or 3-4
* Brandon Spikes - 3-4 ILB, 4-3 MLB
* Dont'a Hightower - 3-4 ILB, 3-4 OLB, 4-3 MLB, 4-3 OLB, 4-3 DE
* Jamie Collins - 3-4 ILB, 3-4 OLB, 4-3 DE

Using the above players as the foundation, there is clear versatility among the "Linebacker" group. Many can play down at end in 4-man fronts, but they can all play some sort of position in the 3-4. In a NFL where defenses need to get their best athletes out on the field, would the 3-4 allow them to do as as opposed to the 4-3?

Looking at possible lineups:

3-4:
DE - Chandler Jones - Jake Bequette
NT - Vince Wilfork - Kyle Love
DE - Armond Armstead - Tommy Kelly
OLB - Dont'a Hightower - Michael Buchanan
ILB - Jerod Mayo
ILB - Brandon Spikes - Dane Fletcher
OLB - Rob Ninkovich - Jamie Collins

vs:

4-3:
DE - Chandler Jones - Michael Buchanan
DT - Vince Wilfork - Tommy Kelly
DT - Kyle Love - Armond Armstead
DE - Rob Ninkovich - Justin Francis
OLB - Dont'a Hightower - Jamie Collins
MLB - Brandon Spikes - Dane Fletcher
OLB - Jerod Mayo

While both fronts utilize largely the same personnel (making for easy transitions between fronts in a hybrid scheme), you can see that in the 3-4 front, there would be more flexibility and more ways to get the strongest part of your roster (the Linebackers) onto the field.

Maybe there is some evidence to support this with how Jamie Collins and Michael Buchanan were drafted (both very good 3-4 players in college), or maybe I just wasted your time with this thread. I still think it's an interesting discussion to have.

Thoughts?

Should Patriots Look to the 3-4? - Pats Pulpit

Ninko or Jones for that matter aren't 3-4 DE. Jones as potential to be one of the best pass rushers in this teams history. He'd be a waste as a DE in a 3-4. But besides that yea this team is versatile to play both formations. Wilfork and Love NT Armstead, Kelly, Deadrick as DE. Jones, Ninko, Collins, Buchannon, and Hightower could play OLB, and Mayo, Spikes, Fletcher and even Hightower could play ILB.

 

[Kontradiction]

The real question here is who plays end in the 3-4. Deaderick we know can do it, and Wilfork we know can do it (with Love on the nose), and Kelly has done it before, only not with us. But since the ideal setup has Wilfork on the nose, we really need two reliable and dynamic guys in those end spots.

Armstead would seem like a candidate for it. Bequette is allegedly bulking up, which might mean they're thinking of him in that role. He's certainly long enough, has a little Brett Keisel in him. But we don't even know if either of those guys can play at all.

The only thing we know for sure is that they have a lot of bodies and they don't all profile as pure 4-3 or 3-4 players. It's a weird mix of players who don't have defined roles. My guess is that with so many young players, they'll try to keep it as simple as possible. We know how BB likes to switch it up and tinker -- let's hope he doesn't overthink.

I think Armstead could do it better than anyone on the squad. Kelly, IMO, you want as an interior sub-rusher in sub-packages.

 

[patsfan13]

BB wants the flexibility to do either if the personnel will allow it. We look to be pretty close if not there.

We need to include the LB's in the conversation also.

 

[tonyto3690]

Every 34 de listed would be hilariously bad. We just don't have the personnel to run the 34 and listing guys like bequette and nine as 34 des when they are at least 60 pounds underweight and five inches too short is just flat out wrong. I mean for cripes sake nink is a liability and undersized as a 43 de. As a 34 de he'd be eaten alive.

 

[captain stone]

The thought of a return to more of a 3-4 did enter my mind when the Jamie Collins pick was announced,
because he seems much more suited as a 3-4 OLB than as either a 4-3 OLB or a 4-3 DE.

Our base defense will remain 4-3, however, because in the first place, there are no Richard Seymours
or Ty Warrens on the roster, and in the second place because Chandler Jones is strictly a 4-3 DE,
not a 3-4 DE or a 3-4 OLB. His game is one-gapping straight ahead; no more, no less.

 

[kennyb]

The OP didn't list Ninko as a DE, he listed him as an OLB in a 3-4. Not DE. At least as I'm reading it. Maybe I can't read.

I've thought Collins would make a good 3-4 OLB and maybe Jones would as well.

Last year's defense didn't work....too predictable in rushing. Maybe this would work better. Never know if it's the OLB's rushing or a safety or a corner.

DE's could be Armstead and Tommy Kelly and Deaderick. Maybe Baquette if he gains a few pounds.

So I think the OP is on to something.

 

[patchick]

I'd rather ask "what roles maximize what each player does best" rather than what CAN they play. And while this roster could certainly line up a classic 2-gap 3-4 if required, I don't think it gets the best out of them as a group.

Looking from an optimal rather than possible perspective, I have:

* Chandler Jones - 4-3 DE
* Rob Ninkovich - 3-4 OLB, 4-3 DE
* Jerod Mayo - any 4-3 LB, 3-4 ILB
* Brandon Spikes - 3-4 ILB, 4-3 MLB
* Dont'a Hightower - 4-3 MLB
* Jamie Collins - 3-4 OLB, 4-3 OLB
* Vince Wilfork - 4-3 DT, 3-4 NT
* Kyle Love - 4-3 DT, 3-4 NT
* Armond Armstead, 4-3 DT, 3-4 DE
* Tommy Kelly - 4-3 DT, 3-4 DE
* Brandon Deaderick - 3-4 DE
* Jake Bequette - 4-3 DE
* Michael Buchanan - 4-3 DE, 3-4 OLB
* Jermaine Cunningham - 4-3 DE
* Steve Beauharnais - 4-3 MLB
* Dane Fletcher - 3-4 ILB, 4-3 MLB (maybe 4-3 OLB?)

If I have to pick 7 players from that group for my theoretical midseason base (though we all know that nickel is the real base, right?), assuming all progress reasonably well, I like:

Mayo - Hightower - Collins
Jones - Wilfork - Armstead/Love - Ninkovich

Edit: forgot Deaderick

 

[s3antana5757]

The team needs one more 34 DE before it can start show a 3-4 base more often, IMO. Jones is a "elephant" type, but a two-gapping 34 DE needs to be able to take on double teams at the point of attack. Jones was a force when healthy last season, but he had trouble doing just that. I like Armstead at the other DE spot, though. I just wouldn't entrust Deaderick or Love at one of those spots. If we were to put Bequette or Ninkovich out there at DE, teams would run all over that.

This. I think Armstead can play one of the 3-4 DE positions, but the others options are comical. Dont' forget though, our boy and one the best to ever play the position Richard Seymour is still a FA. I know that ship has sailed, but if they are serious about going to a 3-4, he could be a nice fit on a one year deal.

Edit: Maybe it is possible. I totally forgot about Kyle Love.

3-4:
DE: Love
NT: Wilfork
DE: Armstead

OLB: Jones/Collins
ILB: Spikes/Mayo
Hightower as a super sub.

They'd still need more bodies up front, but in it's simplistic form, it's doable.

 

[ALP]

It does appear as though we have plenty of talent at the LB position, and that these lb's are quite flexible, but that even though they can play 43 de, they're not ideal for it...and we currently don't have any proven 34 DEs on the team (except wilfork) and he's best at nose, so if he fills in at DE some serious role switching would have to take place

 

[AzorianPats]

Im just as excited for Collins as much as anyone...but there is no way he starts the season over Hightower or Ninko. Hightower got potential to be a special player in this system, we traded up and drafted him in the first round. And Ninko done to much to be benched by a rookie. I think Collins eventually earns his was into the lineup, but not in week 1.

 

[BradyFTW!]

My issue with a 3-4 base is that it would create a glut of LBs and a shortage of defensive linemen, since we don't have a lot of guys who would be at peak effectiveness at 3-4 DE. Jones would be better as an OLB in a 3-4, IMO. Two-gapping emphasizes his weaknesses and minimizes his strengths.

I've always liked Spikes better in a 3-4, and I think Hightower could be a force of nature in one. Not sure where Collins fits, since he doesn't set the edge particularly will, which would make him a liability against the run as a 3-4 OLB.

 

[deters]

As long as someone else replaces Ninko at DE, I'm happy. Tired of seeing him on the line where he is ineffective 75% of the time.