The Front Seven
by amiller92 on Jan 6, 2012 10:27 AM CST
Email
PrintIt seems that some around here, like some of the smarter sports writers in town, are clamoring for a change from a 4-3 to a 3-4 defense. I thought it would be worthwhile to take a look at the concepts behind the two schemes, the personnel requirements of each, and how the guys we have might (or might not) fit in.
But first off, let's be clear on what the 3-4 isn't: it's not a coverage scheme. It says almost nothing about what's happening in the defensive backfield. For those of you who lament the Vikings soft zones, rest assured that similar zones can be played behind the 3-4 too. We're only talking here about how you line up the front seven guys on defense, not about what's happening in coverage.
The rest after the jump.
First off, I'm no defensive genius. Heck, I'm not even a defensive reasonably-bright. Maybe I'm a defensive village idiot (is that an idiot talking about defense, an idiot who defends the village, or an idiot who lives in the village and is insecure?). Anyway fair warning, I tend to look at these things from a defensive lineman's perspective.
Let's start out with a general notion of what each option means when you're playing base defense (any manor of blitzes, stunts and coverages can be attached to either scheme):
4-3
First the obvious: ya got four down linemen and three linebackers. In general, all seven guys are responsible for one gap against the run. That means that the linemen are closer to being freed up to get after the passer because their primarily responsibility is only on one side of the offensive player lined up across from them. 4-3 is a defensive line oriented defense, and it's traditionally associated with teams that like to get after the passer. Like the Vikings (you may have heard of some old guys who used to like to eat purple people, or were purple and like to eat people of other colors, or whatever).
3-4
The obvious again: you swap one down lineman for an extra linebacker. Which really kind of sums it up. The point of the 3-4 is to substitute toward more athletic linebackers and diminish the role of the d-line. In the 3-4, generally the lineman are supposed to play two gaps. That means rather than pinning your ears back and going, you hold your ground, fight the man blocking you, and make a read as to where the play is going. This makes the lineman less dynamic, but that's okay, they are taking up blockers so that the linebackers behind them can run around and make plays.
The way I learned it, which might be wrong, is that the 3-4 is a newer scheme that was developed primarily as a way to more effectively stop the running game (I associate it with the old AFC). Linebackers are by definition harder for offensive linemen to block (because they aren't right across the line from them) and you use the three down linemen to get in their way.
Personnel
For three of the linebackers, the personnel needs really aren't that different. You need three guys who can play the run and get back in coverage as necessary. The fourth backer tends to be primarily a pass rusher, who gets moved around the formation to bring pressure from where ever you want to aim it. The rush backer is similar to a 4-3 rush end, except, of course, that he often has to play standing up, and sometimes he will need to cover. Maybe that doesn't sound that different to some of you, but it sure does to me. Again, there's a lot more reading and a lot less letting it rip.
Things are different for the linemen too. Two of them are called ends, but they aren't really ends in the same sense as a 4-3 scheme, in that they aren't principally called upon to provide edge pressure. Again, they are generally playing two gaps and taking up blockers. Finally, the nose tackle position isn't that different from the 4-3 interior tackle, except that there is even more need to have him be a plugger who requires more than one blocker to move on run plays.
The Fit
Ultimately, one big problem I see in switching to a 3-4 is I don't think we have the personnel. Let's take a look:
Nose: Remi Ayodele is the obvious choice, but he had trouble plugging this year in the 4-3. I don't think he's adequate. Assuming Guion or Evans are still around next year, they are possibilities, but neither really has the girth you're looking for. Both are more athletic guys who can provide a rush in addition to holding the middle. So, you know, they kind of tackles you want in the 4-3. I guess you could play Kevin Williams here, but again, that seems like a waste of his athleticism.
DE: Williams and Ballard would actually be pretty well suited to being 3-4 ends. The are good athletes for their size and could handle being bit further outside than they are in the current system. Brian Robison, Jared Allen and Everson Griffen, however, would be woefully wasted. They're pass rushers whose speed and athleticism would be underutilized as 3-4 ends.
Rush backer: The cup overfloweth, sort of. Allen, Robison and Griffen are all guys who could maybe play here. Each is a bit of a question mark in coverage, but let's assume one or more could figure it out. But the biggest problem I see is that there is only one spot in the 3-4 that makes sense for these three guys. That means two of them are on the bench most of the time. That is not good.
Other backers: So, you might say, well, how about using two of them as backers? Well, I don't know. I really don't like the thought of any of those three regularly trying to run with a TE or a guy out of the backfield in coverage. They are just too big, and I kind of doubt that any of them would enjoy that role.
Bottom Line
I don't think we have the personnel for the switch right now. We'd need to trim at least one of our most talented defensive players, and we'd need to find a real run plugging nose.
But beyond that, I don't see the point. The Vikings have always played the 4-3, and always tried to have lineman who can rush. In a pass first league, why would we want to change away from that?
So, what do you think? And if you want to switch, what are you trying to achieve?
This FanPost was created by a registered user of The Daily Norseman, and does not necessarily reflect the views of the staff of the site. However, since this is a community, that view is no less important.
56 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Probably a Moot point
Especially if Morris does become the DC. However a couple of things I would like about the 3-4 would be Allen as the primary rush LB and Griffen playing the other outside LB playing primarily in coverage (which he did a lot this year as LB). Both Allen and Griffen have shown some coverage skills and we all know they both know how to get after the QB. This could create matchup nightmares as teams wouldn’t know what one was rushing and what one was dropping into coverage.
The NT is really the only position that I think we don’t have the proper personnel in place if they want to go in that direction. Personally I would try and develop a hybrid type defense to keep the opposition guessing but that isn’t the Vikings way.
by VikesFanInTulsa on Jan 6, 2012 10:53 AM CST reply actions
a lot?
I remember a lot of talk about Griffen playing LB, but I don’t recall seeing much of it.
I do recall him playing DT in pass rush situations a decent amount, though.
Maybe it would work, but it seems to me like you really want a linebacker playing linebacker in coverage instead of a DE.
If I was the offensive coordinator, I’d be trying to work in way to get him matched up on a slot receiver or a speedy back.
Did he play that much?
I’d love to see stats.
Good luck on that one...
Finding a site that chronicles where a player played at every snap is nigh impossible.
But I did see him playing LB a lot more than normal.
My wholly unreliable sense
Was that in the second half of the season he played maybe 3-4 snaps at LB and maybe another 10 on the line.
But as I said, that’s highly unreliable.
Keep in mind...
my 30% was intended to mean 30% of HIS snaps, not 30% of total snaps.
So…. 3-4 snaps at LB and another 10 on the line would be close to 30%.
I'm not sure where he lined up
But the last few games I saw him in the range of where the LBs drop in coverage. Now whether or not he dropped into coverage from a zone blitz or not I didn’t pay that close of attention, however he was around the tackles in the LBs zone.
by VikesFanInTulsa on Jan 6, 2012 12:54 PM CST up reply actions
From the heart
The Vikings are an old school, 4-3, kill the QB and disrupt the backfield kinda’ team. Dont screw with it. Its one of the few lasting, signature traits (other than completely melting down in fun, new ways in big game situations) that our Vikings have.
Now, if we could just get back to playing out doors we may see a true Purple Revival.
by Viking64 on Jan 6, 2012 10:55 AM CST reply actions 2 recs
I voted no, but the more I think about it the more I think we could do it...
Not that I think we should, but the size of our front line could be entirely adequate at 300+ pounds to anchor against opposing O-lines.
The main reason, though, is that Allen could be moved to outside linebacker and evolve into an even better Lawrence Taylor, since he is considerably bigger than LT’s 6-3 240 and would be a matchup nightmare. Plus LT got his share of sacks, Kevin Greene, also a linebacker, is number three on the sack list, and Allen could continue his rampage.
It depends on who we get for other linebackers more than who our front line is, in my opinion, as to whether we would want to do 3-4.
Greenway is a good tackler but not necessarily much of a rusher/quarterback headhunter. He would be moved to inside linebacker. One of the Hendersons would have to step up to bull rush from the other side of Allen, assuming he would play outside linebacker, to prevent the ball from always going away from Allen. I don’t think either one is capable of that. Robison is too small for a 3-4 lineman so maybe could be moved to linebacker to complement Allen Allen on the other side.
Kevin Williams is slowing down a bit so his speed isn’t what it used to be and would be great in the 3-4 at this point of his career. That means that the other two line positions are up for grabs as is the other inside linebacker position.
by liveforadrenaline on Jan 6, 2012 12:07 PM CST reply actions
I think they can easily make the switch
They can go after a Paul Soliai 6-4 355 NT from Miami who is going to be a free agent. I would want them to go after him anwyay. They also could go after Aubrayo Franklin as well. Jasper Brinkley is a better fit as a 3-4 ILB. Greenway is big enough to move inside. They can resign Erin H to also play ILB.
They have Robison and Griffen to play the OLD spots both of whom are very athletic. If they keep Allen in this scenario (which I doubt since he said he was not interested) then he can play one of the OLB spots too similar to DeMarcus Ware. Ware rarely drops into coverage and he still had 19.5 sacks this year. I do not see why Allen could not do that.
The Vikings would probably resign Letroy Guion who also has good size to play one of the 3-4 DE spots. Plus there are plenty of college DTs that fir better as a 3-4 DE than a 4-3 DT. Like Billy Winn, Derek Wolfe, Kheeston Randall, Kendall Reyes, etc. There a lot of LBs coming out that fit a 3-4 scheme better.
The Vikings went 6-10 and 3-13 the last two years. Everything should be on the table for consideration. Everything.
The Vikings could also switch into a 4-3 on occasion as well.
I have no problem if they wanted to switch. If Spielman decides to draft players and sign free agents that fit the 3-4 scheme better then the Vikings will probably be playing a 3-4.
Now is as good of a time as any to make a switch. They can only go up from here.
I'm looking for clarity
Because I see people saying they can do this (of course they can, the question is should they), and then breezing by the details.
You would have Allen at one OLB and Robison/Griffen at the other? Or if Allen is traded (which is DEFINITELY not happening), Robison and Griffen at the two OLB spots? You’d be comfortable with that in coverage and against the run? Putting to DEs in space seems really risky to me.
But beyond that, aside from DJ saying that the personnel is a better fit (which as I’ve explained I think is wrong), I haven’t seen anyone make an argument for why they should switch. What’s the advantage? Why are we better off playing 3-4?
I think mark would make a front 7 like the following if we were to switch from what I can gather from his reading
NT: Soliai, Franklin or draft someone like Poe from Memphis
DE: Guion/Ballard or drafting: Billy Winn, Derek Wolfe, Kheeston Randall, Kendall Reyes, etc
OLB: Allen/Robison/Griffin
ILB: Greenway/Brinkley/Henderson (erin)
Thanks
Although you left out Williams, which I guess means the switch wouldn’t necessarily require the two draft picks you posit might be required (which would be reason enough to take it off the table).
But that still leaves the question of whether you’re comfortable with two converted DEs on the field at LB at the same time. That possibility is deeply troubling to me. Any of those guys are fine as the rush backer. I have no faith that any of them can play a straight-up backer position.
And I still don’t see the advantage in switching.
The advantage
would be that the team would look different and fresh. The first year the Packers switched they were suppose to be worse. Maybe they played over their heads but they were actually better. Part of this may have been the newness of the defense and teams not prepared for what their version of the 3-4 would be like. I don’t know about that, however I do know that what we are trotting out on the field every week is old, stale and not working.
by VikesFanInTulsa on Jan 6, 2012 2:54 PM CST up reply actions
Thanks
But I’m not sure I like the concept of change for it’s own sake. But at least you gave a reason.
Missing Williams
Figure he’d be put in the DE list though
by VikesFanInTulsa on Jan 6, 2012 2:49 PM CST up reply actions
Thinking about it some more
I’m really not sure it makes sense to have a second DE at OLB in coverage while moving Greenway and Henderson inside. Surely those two are better in coverage than any of the DEs.
But OLBs are the primary pass rushers in a 3-4 defense.
And his exercise puts those guys where they would make the most sense if we did switch up, I think they are too small to play the line in a 3-4 scheme. Plus, Jared allen and Everson Griffen are pretty good athletes, I think they might be able to handle the type of pass coverage required by an OLB. They are fast and agile.
You don't tug on Superman's cape
You don't spit into the wind
You don't pull the mask of the Spiderman
And you don't trash talk about him
They could if
at least one of them was always rushing the passer and not dropping into coverage. I would not be to thrilled to see both Allen and Griffin dropping back, whilst rushing greenway/Brinkley.
Well, I guess that would depend on the pass rush called for a particular play.
Rarely do teams only have 3 guys rushing, and often one of the OLBs in a 3-4 scheme will line up in a stance at the line, just like Jared and Everson do now when they play 4-3 end.
You don't tug on Superman's cape
You don't spit into the wind
You don't pull the mask of the Spiderman
And you don't trash talk about him
Also
We keep leaving out run defense (as I did up top). I really don’t like the thought of the two DEs playing in space against the run.
It’s not unusual for the successful defense of a run play to turn on the point LB’s first step. If they step left when they need to go right, or up when they need to move laterally, they get blocked an are out of position. After the first step, you have to make the right read and take the right angle, which isn’t a necessarily a natural skill either.
Being a successful linebacker depends on having the instincts to do the right thing at the right time, and I’d be very worried about how quickly those guys can develop the instincts to play the run.
Same thing applies to any position on the field (other than kicker or punter I guess).
I am not advocating any change, but I’m open to looking at what the implications are. What I am interested in hearing is why the vikings seem to be discussing this a a possibility. I want to know their reasoning.
You don't tug on Superman's cape
You don't spit into the wind
You don't pull the mask of the Spiderman
And you don't trash talk about him
Me too
Although I don’t think the Vikings are discussing it. I think some guys in the press and others on the interwebs are discussing it.
Pellisero was hinting that there might be truth to the rumor in his on twitter.
You don't tug on Superman's cape
You don't spit into the wind
You don't pull the mask of the Spiderman
And you don't trash talk about him
The run defense is not that good and is on the decline
Check the stats the last two years and you will see the decline.
So talking about the run defense in relation to a possible switch to a 3-4 defense is irrelevant. The team needs to get better and they have been going the wrong way statistically the last two years with Allen, KWill, & Robison playing on the line.
We need a true run stuffer next to KWill
Or put KWill at NT and draft/move Ballard to UT. (of course Ballard needs to bulk up about ten lbs.)
The run defense
Has declined slightly with the decline and loss of Pat Williams. They still need an adequate replacement.
But that doesn’t mean we will be able to defend the run with lineman paying out of position as linebackers. Maybe we will, maybe not.
But the two things are unrelated.
No, one of them is
The other one has to cover.
It depends on the rush package they call for a given play.
Teams don’t do the same thing on every play, they mix it up and disguide blitzes a lot. But a 3-4 olb need to be a solid pass rushers.
You don't tug on Superman's cape
You don't spit into the wind
You don't pull the mask of the Spiderman
And you don't trash talk about him
Yeah
That’s why this discussion is about base. You can do lots of things some of the time.
But most of the time, one OLB is covering and one is rushing. Sometimes you will rush both. And sometimes it’s a run play.
But it’s not true that both OLB positions are primarily rushers.
I think you are splitting hairs. 3-4 olb's need to be solid pass rushers
is what I said.
You don't tug on Superman's cape
You don't spit into the wind
You don't pull the mask of the Spiderman
And you don't trash talk about him
Mark
What kind of info do you have on a DT Dontari Poe from Memphis? I was checking out some mocks http://walterfootball.com/draft2012charlie.php and this guy has us taking him in the 2nd round. He has him listed at 6-5 350 lbs. At that size I would think he could fill DT/or NT.
by VikesFanInTulsa on Jan 6, 2012 2:11 PM CST up reply actions
I looked into him as well. I think he will be gone by the end of Rd 1 though.
My only concern is yea he is big, but what type of talent does he play against playing for memphis?
I have not seen much of Poe at all but he is huge
He will go in the first two rounds because 3-4 teams need to keep adding the belugas.
My preference as most of you know is Alameda Ta’amu. Many have said he is not that good and will be falling in the draft. I hope that is true.
No matter how you slice it the Vikings need some DTs. KWill will be 32 next year and the rest are average at best. Evans is not going to get better and Guion has had 4 years already. And we all know that Ayodele was not impressive whatsoever.
I agree with this "if they are going to make any switch now is the time"
But then they need to fire frazier ASAP, bring in a coach and DC who are BOTH familiar with the 3-4. and they need to start planning on what to do with Allen, Greenway, Kwill, all of whom have stated they have no interest playing a 3-4. but would play what they were told.
It really does not matter what those players say they are interested in doing
They are interested in collecting those checks 16 times a year. Thus they will play anywhere the Vikings want them to play.
Greenway should be happy to make the switch as he is awful in coverage and the stats prove that out. He does not make the Pro Bowl precisely because of his coverage deficiencies. Anything that they can do to limit his coverage responsibilities will help the defense that if for sure.
he also doesn't read from the inside well...
he’s going to get caught up in the wash alot
by midnightwonder on Jan 6, 2012 8:08 PM CST up reply actions
I'd say there is a little more to it than what you are describing.
The personnel have different roles and responsilibities between the 2 schemes and thus the ideal player for each position in the 2 schemes is a little different. For instance, the ends in a 4-3 are more likely pass rushing specialists who are a little lighter and faster off the edge, while the ends in a 3-4 scheme are more like tackles and hold the line. They tend to be bigger and stronger. Likewise, the olb in a 3-4 scheme tend to be the pass rushing specialists. Also, the 3-4 relies heavily on a stout nose tackle, and a 4-3 scheme relies on the middle linebacker to drop back into pass coverage more.
From what I’ve read about it, certain players are more naturally suited for one scheme over another. Kick ass 4-3 defensive ends are a more rare breed and thus get big contracts. I think the question is to see where all of our current players would fit best in the 3-4 scheme.
We went through this in some good detailed convo a few weeks back when the rumor first popped up. Personally, I don’t really have an opinion one way or the other at this time, but I think that would be based on what the team does with a defensive coordinator and roster turnover / new player acquisition. But I do think some of our current guys could make the switch.
I’m more concerned with the defensive backfield scheme and personnel, and how any changes their will dovetail with a front seven scheme.
You don't tug on Superman's cape
You don't spit into the wind
You don't pull the mask of the Spiderman
And you don't trash talk about him
Not really, the roles of the linebackers is a bit different in a 3-4 scheme
and the ideal physical make-up of the players at each spot differs as well.
You don't tug on Superman's cape
You don't spit into the wind
You don't pull the mask of the Spiderman
And you don't trash talk about him
Good reads here also...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3-4_defense
this is prolly why Allen is not so enthusiastic, " In most cases, 3–4 OLBs lead their teams in quarterback sacks."
I’m thinking guys like Allen are pretty smart at his career point and there must be something to his reservation or I think with his team and bring it on attitude we would prolly be hearing him say something more on the lines of, “yep lets do it.”
@}-----You've been Touched-----{@
Don't think so
In a 3-4, Allen would be that OLB.
Oh no doubt
Definately would have to or it would be a waiste of him for sure.
@}-----You've been Touched-----{@
true but....
he would start off with his hand in the dirt. Which is a big deal, it’s like forcing a golfer to change a swing he has been successful with all his life. It will take A LOT of time to adjust.
We need to remember that OLBs are also responsible for screens and flats if they aren’t blitzing. That’s probably why JA doesn’t want to do it. We can’t just blitz him all the time offenses will adjust.
If you can remember or happened to have caught any of our rivals games. C Matthews blitzes a lot, but when if a team could force him into coverage they usually had a positive offensive play.
by midnightwonder on Jan 6, 2012 8:20 PM CST up reply actions
The difference
Is that the league is now more or less a passing league.
Brian Burke, who runs statistical analysis, says that the 3-4 is better by using a concept called EPA… Expected Points Added.
He concludes that a defense running the 3-4 allow a net advantage of 1.2 points per game over the 4-3, due to a variety of factors. Mostly that it is more unpredictable and the modern NFL offense has a harder time reading it.
He also concluded that exceptionally good players on certain teams running the 3-4 haven’t skewed the results, and in fact, exceptionally good players make the team have even more of an advantage.
by liveforadrenaline on Jan 6, 2012 3:52 PM CST reply actions
Part 1
http://fifthdown.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/09/21/measuring-the-effectiveness-of-the-3-4-defense-part-1/
Part 2
http://www.advancednflstats.com/2010/09/comparing-3-4-and-4-3-defenses-part-2.html
by liveforadrenaline on Jan 6, 2012 4:25 PM CST up reply actions
Not sure I really understand that
But the sample size is actually quite small, and I’m not sure I see him adequately accounting for the fact that some of the best teams of the last decade have been playing 3-4.
The problem I have with switching to a 3-4 is that our linebackers aren't very good and our D-line is very solid as is.
Right now, the only area of our defense that is solid and that has good depth behind the starters is our defensive line. Our linebacking unit consists of Greenway, one Henderson in decline, another Henderson that’s okay, and a bunch of backups. Switching to a 3-4 right now marginalizes the one area of the defense that is relatively strong while opening more holes to fill in an already weak unit.
I have no problem switching schemes but at the moment the surplus of talent on defense is on the D-line so it seems like a switch would just create even more holes to fill. If we were stacked with linebacker talent the 3-4 would be the way to go but that’s not the case so I don’t see the benefit. Switching right now doesn’t make sense personnel wise and seems like it would just be change for change’s sake.
I’d worry more about fixing the secondary and getting a MLB that’s actually suited to the Tampa-2 before I’d mess with the one area of the defense that’s actually still pretty good.
Allen is great. He is as good a pass rusher as is. He is not even adequate in coverage. I don’t know how good he could get with repetition, but at this point he would be a train wreck in coverage. His lateral speed and change of direction just aren’t good enough in zone defense.
I know its not a popular opinion around here (the only person more awesome than Allen is Chuck Norris), but he is too large to play a 3-4 OLB and too small to play on the line. I think it would completely marginalize his talents.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Daily Norseman
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- Former high-school star Brian Banks does serious time on trumped-up charge, now hopes for an NFL shot
- Former ‘idiot kicker’ Mike Vanderjagt in trouble after accosting junior-high heckler
- Adrian Peterson blows teammates away in footraces; appears to be on the mend
- UPDATE: Charlie Sheen didn’t buy Lawrence Taylor’s Super Bowl ring
- Alex Smith gets blown up by Jon Beason over Cam Newton comments
