Analysis: 4-3 vs 3-4
by keysh67 on Nov 12, 2008 3:58 PM EST
Email
PrintFor the past few weeks we've been complaining about the offense and it's predictability as well as it's inability to run the football with any success. I'm fed up of beating a dead horse!
I decided to turn my attention to the defensive side of the ball. From what I can see our D is performing within the muddled pack:
16th against the pass
15th against the run
13th in total yards
14th against 3rd down conversions
26th in sacks !!!!
It is obvious that we are EXTREMELY WEAK at the Defensive End position but how is it that we still are able to rank in the middle of the pack in all other categories? We often refer to our defense as a “bend but don’t break” and statistically that’s exactly what we are, boring as hell! We do not lead in any major category defensively speaking.
I wanted to better understand the relevance of sacks in the overall picture and how it related to the 3-4 vs 4-3 debate so here are my notes:
There are 9 teams that run a 3-4 defense (PIT, NYJ, DAL, MIA, BAL, SD, NE, SF & CLE)
The others all run a 4-3
Top 5 teams in total Defense are:
#1 Pittsburgh Steelers
#2 Baltimore Ravens
#3 New York Giants
#4 Washington Redskins
#5 Tennessee Titans
No surprise that the top 2 are 3-4 defenses, that’s 22% of the 3-4 teams are in the top 5
Top 5 teams against the run are:
#1 BAL (3-4)
#2 PIT (3-4)
#3 MIN (4-3)
#4 CHI (4-3)
#5 NYJ (3-4)
I am not entirely surprised by this stat because a 3-4 scheme specifically designed to facilitate the funneling of the running game towards the middle. What is surprising is that 3 out of the top 5 are 3-4 defensive teams. What makes this stat interesting is that there are only 9 teams overall that run a 3-4 so that means that 33% of the 3-4 teams are in the top 5.
Top 5 teams against the pass are:
#1 PIT (3-4)
#2 NYG (4-3)
#3 GB (4-3)
#4 CAR (4-3)
#5 TB (4-3)
Again the top team is a 3-4 which is a bit surprising because a 4-3 is designed to get pressure on QBs on every play. It does prove however that an aggressive 3-4 can also perform quite admirably against the pass.
The top 5 sack leaders are: (sacks/tackles)
#1 Joey Porter, MIA - OLB 12.0 / 33
#2 John Abraham, ATL - DE 11.0 / 24
#3 James Harrison, PIT - OLB 11.0 / 63
#4 DeMarcus Ware, DAL - OLB 10.0 / 49
#5 LaMarr Woodley, PIT - OLB 9.5 / 37
This stat confirms why a 3-4 defense leads in the Pass defense category. It also shows that the 3-4 is better suited to rush the passer. The beauty of sacks is the potential for fumbles & loss of field position. What I also like is the fact that you are making better use of the athlete, he not only is effective in sack production but also in tackles.
Now lets look at our team as it relates specifically to sacks
Stroud leads the team with 2.5 sacks & 26 tackles. His rank is 71st overall in the league.
Mitchell is second on the team with 2 sacks/51 tackles (ranked 82nd)
Then we have 5 guys ranked 146th overall (Denney 1/28, Kelsay 1/23, Schobel 1/19, Johnson 1/14 & Scott 1/28, Whitner 1/37, Williams 1/29, Youboty 1/20)
I am not certain that any conclusions can be made from all of this because in the end you need to have good players in order to play good football but one thing does stand out is that the ratio of good players / defenses tends to favor the 3-4 scheme. Another clear advantage for the 3-4 camp is that if 72% of the teams run a 4-3 it stands to reason that teams are more used to playing against a 4-3, so by extension it does provide the 3-4 teams with a bit of an edge.
More specifically as it applies to our situation in buffalo, I would tend to think that given our total ineptitude at DE, switching to a 3-4 could potentially provide some relief. Our best guy in our front 7 is Stroud, so funneling the play towards him makes some sense. Poz is great against the run and run-of-the-mill against the pass, which leads me to think that he could be quite dominant in a ILB type role. I also think that Mitchell would be amazing as OLB in a 3-4. Denney would be great as a DE in a 3-4 because he is excellent against the run and at 6’7” he often gets his hands up and gets the tip. Both Johnson & Williams could play the other DE position. We could cut Kelsay. I wonder if Schobel would be a decent OLB in a 3-4 scheme?
Summary
I think that our team benefit from integrating some 3-4 fronts in order to mix things up and provide more opportunities for our playmakers (ie Stroud/Mitchell/Poz) and it would take care of our major weakness this year – DE
I also conclude that the 3-4 is a more dynamic scheme that provides opportunities to confuse the opposing offenses and create mismatches. The key to an effective 3-4 seems to be the NT, ILB & OLB positions and we have 3 of the 4 parts with Stroud/POZ & Mitchell. I guess the biggest element of a 4-3 is that you are committing an extra guy up front permanently whereas with the 3-4 you have options. I think the 3-4 is a better scheme when you have the right personel to run it and I think we do.
-----------
So the idea of this post is to start a discussion, I like to know what you guys think?
Just another great fan opinion shared on the pages of BuffaloRumblings.com.
27 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I’d like a fourth option added to the poll, something along the lines of “I’d like to run a hybrid defense with both 3-4 and 4-3 looks”.
Buffalo Rumblings - all you care to know about the Buffalo Bills and more
by Brian Galliford on Nov 12, 2008 4:18 PM EST reply actions
I think
some of the stats are more indicative of which teams have the most talent on defense rather than the schemes.
The Ravens and Steelers, who are the 3-4 teams on the top of the lists, are also the most talented defenses. The other teams on the list who are not 3-4’s are also extremely talented, Giants, Cowboys, Bucs, Vikings, Packers.
What I mean to say is that all these teams have the most talent in the league on the defensive side of the ball.
If we look at the best offenses over the past few years, Saints, Cardinals, Colts, etc. I think there you will also find it has more to do with players than scheme. Brees, Warner, Manning throwing to Wayne, Harrison, Fitzgerald, Boldin, Colston, Bush.
Scheme is very important don’t get me wrong, it’s where the next two things I’m mentioning start, but I still think football, once its Sunday, is a game of how good are the guys on the field, and which coach is out calling the guy on the other sideline.
McKelvin and Hardy - rookies of the year
Look deeper
78% of the 3-4 teams are in the top half against the run, which is arguably one of the most important areas. Only DAL (18th) and CLE (26th) are not in the top half.
I think that it is also easier to get a top LB than a top DE and it is also a scheme that offers more flexibility by not always automatically committing that 4rth guy in on the rush. The lanes being wider also provide better opportunities for guys like Poz.
I am not arguing the fact that PIT & BAL have quality players, I am simply saying that their scheme is an intricate reason why it all works. Put them in a 4-3 and I am not so certain that they would be as dominant.
true but
couldn’t the fact that 78% of the 3-4 teams being in the top half against the run also be indicative of the fact that to run a 3-4 you need quality players?
I do find it interesting that the 3-4 is so strong against the run, and I am sure that scheme is a major part of it. But I also feel like to be able to run such a scheme you need certain types of quality players (pass rushing OLB, block occupying DT, etc.)
I just worry that if we were to go for a 3-4 our lack of talent at OLB (no one freak out but I don’t think Ellison is extremely talented) and DE would be a killer. I think we would need to get rid of Kelsay, find immediate talent at outside linebacker, and then find more MLB depth in case Digi can’t handle 16 games of duty.
I do think you raise a great point about scheme, but I also think that you have to have the talent to run the 3-4 and I don’t think the Bills do, or will, any time in the next 2 seasons.
McKelvin and Hardy - rookies of the year
I disagree
1. Mitchell would be a monster in a 3-4
2. Poz is ideally suited for a 3-4 as well – he is at his best shooting in against the run.
3. Stroud is a great NT in a 3-4 scheme. He is stout and holds his ground. Anything that come close to him gets gobbled-up. Today, because our DEs are so weak, opposing teams can commit and extra guy to Stroud limiting his push up the middle.
4. I think Crowell would do very well in a 3-4 as well (at OLB)
So in my opinion I think we are actually better built for a 3-4 right now then a 4-3 because we lack the dominating Defensive Ends. Extending Schobel & Kelsay was a huge error and now we are paying the price for it.
Not possible
We can’t run this this year, so I’ll leave this convo for the offseason.
That said, we’d need
at least TWO starting linebacker additions
at LEAST one starting DE addition
a new Defensive scheme/coach
With the holes we already have, i don’t think we could pull off this monsterous switch until after next season.
GO BLUE!!!
I agree that new coaching would be important
I could see it work well with Crowell & Mitchell as OLB & Digi & Poz in the middle, maybe upgrade Digi in the draft but we’d need some depth.
Who do you see at DE?
Great job keysh67
How many of those 3-4 teams are cold weather, non dome teams. We should join the club.
not sure I understand what you are trying to say...
There are 9 teams that run a 3-4 defense (PIT, NYJ, DAL, MIA, BAL, SD, NE, SF & CLE)
Most of these are outdoor grimy teams, not sure I follow you…
I am pretty sure is he trying to point out at least half are bad weather teams and have success so we should join the club and switch.
Er sarcasm cant tell
by Parrish11rules on Nov 13, 2008 6:51 AM EST up reply actions
Personnel wouldn’t be ideal for a switch right away. Too many quality DTs and not enough MLBs. But I would love to see Buffalo change to a 3-4.
Definitely Poz & Digi
But you are right we would need to draft one and possibly get one in free agency.
Mike Peterson (JAC) is on his way out of Jacksonville, he’d be a great candidate!
I’d like to move to a 3-4 in the future, but that will of course require a total reconstruction of the front 7. That would be fine by me, but I’m not sure the finances would work for the Bills.
I don’t see why we would consider running any 3-4 this year. We dont’ have the personnel. We barely have the personnel for the junk we run now.
The sack numbers don’t confirm why 3-4 teams seem to be better against the pass. Those sack numbers are due to having excellent pass rushers. It’s the not scheme as much as it is the players. I wished we had pass rushing talent like Pittsburgh or the Giants. Heck, I wish we had pass rush talent like anyone else than what we have….
~K
The reason why I think that..
In a 3-4 the OLB roam a lot and are often much closer to the line, it’s a lot easier to disguise who is blitzing whereas in a 4-3 the LBs are set a bit deeper which makes it a bit more obvious. A lesser athlete can be more effective in a 3-4 scheme by virtue of the element of surprise, whereas a pure DE in a 4-3 really needs to be dominant to be effective cause they know he’s coming on every play. Anyway, that’s my view of it, I might be wrong.
Both those teams definitely have great athletes.
I don’t know the nuances of the 3-4 all that well, but it sure seems that the teams that run it bring their OLB’s off the edge as if they were DE’s. Watching some of those teams this year, you’ll always see guys like James Harrison, Lamar Woodley, DeMarcus Ware, Calvin Pace, Terrell Suggs, Joey Porter, Kamerion Wimbley, etc etc etc rushing off the edge. They are simply good pass rushers. I’m not sure there’s much disguising going on to get those guys into the backfield, nor does it seem necessary. I don’t see how it’s much different than lining Kawika Mitchell up on the outside and threaten blitz with him. The O still doesn’t know if he’s coming or not. Plus in the 3-4, those pass rushers are coming more often than not….
~K
a few reasons
First: in a 4-3 the LBs are set back more so when they threaten to blitz it’s a bit more obvious.
Second: There are normally large gaps between the NT and both DE’s leaving a lot of options for both ILBs
Again I am a firm believer in the 3-4 with the right personnel and find that it provides a lot more opportunity for deception compared to the bread&butter 4-3.
3-4 defenses have the ability to confuse more than a traditional 4-3 which helps create sacks. The Giants are the exception, they have a stockpile of talented defensive lineman and also a coach who loves to call an agressive game.
I am a proponent of 3-4 defenses for three main reasons:
a) Linebackers are generally more athletic than Defensive Lineman, so having more/better athletes on the field is a good thing for a defense.
b) Already mentioned this but the ability to confuse.
…and probably the biggest reason…
c) Defensive Lineman are hard to draft (both tackles and ends), for some reason it is extremely difficult to project a college lineman’s game to the NFL level. I’ll spare everyone listing all the busts over the last ten years. Linebackers are typically the most successful position to draft, as well as having the most immediate impact to a team. Why not have a defensive scheme that is easier to replenish thru the draft?
Great poinbts Harris!
Is it just me or do linemen seem to be more lazy? Often we see them having problems controling their weight so you have to think that it could be a huge factor in slowing them down.
And if you run a 4-3 and do not have 2 really good DE’s, you will be picked apart- period. That’s exactly what happens to us each week. The reason why the run a deep shell is to prevent the big plays but there is nothing they can do for the short stuff.
Just look at recent years to see that LB’s often have an immediate impact on the game. I would also add that with 23 teams running a 4-3, the odds are that there is always going to be a lot of teams in the market for the top DEs, whereas the LBs are often taken later in the draft with less teams competing for the resources.
good points
Another thing, related to #3, is that finding pass rushing LB’s seems to be easier for the 3-4 teams than it is to find pass rushing DE’s for the 4-3. Plus, those teams tend to find these rush LB’s later in the draft. You see a lot of undersized DE’s moved to the position, guys with speed and rush ability. I prefer that as well
~K
One of the issues with a 3-4 is coaching
There are a lot less qualified coaches for the 3-4 scheme than the 4-3, so that would be a considerable downside but overall I think it would be much better than our existing 4-3.
Problem is, Jauron would never go for that, he barely understands the 4-3 – not sure that he’d be a proponent of changing, afterall there is no 3-4 in tampa 2!
I agree with some of this, but I think some is misguided too.
This stat confirms why a 3-4 defense leads in the Pass defense category. It also shows that the 3-4 is better suited to rush the passer.
How does having the individual leaders in sacks mean that a 3-4 is better suited to rush the passer? Those defenses are built around one or two players applying all the pressure. Here is the list of which TEAMS have 20 or more sacks:
Pitt – 34
NYJ – 34 (10 games)
NYG – 30
PHI – 28
DAL – 26
MINN – 25
TENN – 24
SEA – 22
ARZ – 21
MIA – 21
OAK – 21
DEN – 20
3-4 teams have gotten more pressure this year, but I think that is a pretty good mix of both schemes.
I’m also a believer that yards per game is a flawed stat. Yards per play is a much more accurate way to see how defenses have performed and when you look at those passing numbers you see that most of the top pass defenses are actually 4-3s. Here is everyone who is allowing under 7 yards per pass attempt:
PIT – 5.6
GB – 5.6
CAR – 5.9
TENN – 5.9
WASH – 6.0
TB – 6.3
CHI – 6.4
IND – 6.4
BAL – 6.6
DAL – 6.6
NYG – 6.6
PHI – 6.6
ATL – 6.7
CIN – 6.7
BUF – 6.9
The Bills obviously won’t switch to a 3-4, but for discussions sake, here is what I think our starting lineup and backups would be (assuming everyone were healthy):
DE – Kyle Williams – Ryan Denney
NT – Marcus Stroud – Kyle Williams – John McCargo
DE – Spencer Johnson – Chris Kelsay
OLB – Aaron Schobel – Keith Ellison
ILB – Paul Posluszny – John Digiorgio
ILB – Angelo Crowell – John Digiorgio
OLB – Kawika Mitchell – Keith Ellison
You got me
My choice of words in that phrase was wrong. My opinion of the 3-4 is that it is designed primarily to stop the run but it can be quite effective at pressuring the QB when executed properly. Whereas the 4-3 is designed to prevent the pass, by sending pressure on every down off both ends – as I said in the Pass Defense Section "Again the top team is a 3-4 which is a bit surprising because a 4-3 is designed to get pressure on QBs on every play. It does prove however that an aggressive 3-4 can also perform quite admirably against the pass. "
The stat that you point out concerning yards per play is interesting. I don’t really see the difference between per game or per play given that it is an average and they simply divide the total for the game by the amount of pass plays that were executed so it really is the same. But something jumps out when looking at the list and I believe that the teams at the top of this list all play man2man with their corners as opposed to a zone like us. I belive that PIT, GB for sure, CAR, TENN for sure, WAS ? all play man coverage primarily so it begs the question, is a physical man coverage better than a Cover Zone like we play?
Look at the way the NYJ covered Moss/Welker on Thursday. The Jets played flawless defense in the first half by pressuring these guys right off the LOS, the played Man on Welker and a HI/LO zone on Moss with Law bumping him right off the line, very effective strategy. Then for some reason the jets got greedy at halftime and mixed things up on defense (they were leading 24-10 at the half ??) and tried to move Law to Gaffney’s side and things went south. But my point is that they controlled Welker the whole first quarter, he only caught his first ball in the 2nd Quarter. Welker finished the first half with only 2 catches. So I think the stats you bring up are interesting and worth further analysis because teams who play man on the corners tend to also get more INTs but I’m not sure how that translates in the overall picture. It seems that teams that play a safe Tampa 2 give up more yards per game to the pass but because they don’t get beat as often by the long ones!
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
In Nix We Trust Pt 2 - #Billsmafia - (Massive Bills Analysis; must read Bills fans!) - (Updated 5/9)
Recent FanPosts
SBNation.com Recent Stories
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- Nick Mangold loses some chest hair on Jimmy Fallon
- Saints will honor suspended Sean Payton with empty chairs
- Junior Seau’s home burglarized just days after his death
- Ricky Williams dismisses concussion data in favor of ‘mind over matter’ approach
- Law school or the NFL? Ohio State linebacker chooses torts over tackles
