4-3 Defense

Sat Nov 07, 2009 5:53 pm

It's time to switch back to the 4-3 defense. As you have already seen, our depth at linebackers are OVERRATED and too slow to get to the QB. So why even blitz them? I say switch to back to the 4-3 and rush 4.

Sat Nov 07, 2009 6:11 pm

I'm a huge fan of the 4-3... I hate, absolutly HATE a 3-4 defense. I run a 6-3 with my youth team and I swear it could do better than a 3-4 in D1

Sat Nov 07, 2009 6:28 pm

3-4 works if you have a talented group of linebackers with different skill sets. You need bigger guys in the middle and quicker guys on the edge. Our linebackers aren't bad, but they are all kind of the exact same player. You need specialized skill sets for a 3-4 linebacker.

Not matter if you have a 4-3 or a 3-4 you need a good speed rusher to disrupt passing teams like BYU. That is what we need more than anything else. Patrick Chuckwurah where are you?

Sat Nov 07, 2009 8:00 pm

I'd be more inclined to just blame the entire secondary - they start 10 yards off of the receivers, to the QB need all of 0.5 seconds' worth of protection before throwing.

Sun Nov 08, 2009 1:15 am

I noticed today that we ran the 4-3 before I left in disgrace in the second qtr....

it was fletch, givens, purcell, and unrein...

purcell looks like a keeper for sure

Sun Nov 08, 2009 7:41 am

The positive of the 3-4 over the 4-3 is recruiting. It is much easier to recruit linebackers than defensive linemen. I think we need to stick with the 3-4. I agree we don't have the depth or talent at all of the linebacker positions but let our new coach Fanoga do some recruiting and lets see what happens.

Mon Nov 09, 2009 8:58 am

thirtyseven wrote:The positive of the 3-4 over the 4-3 is recruiting. It is much easier to recruit linebackers than defensive linemen. I think we need to stick with the 3-4. I agree we don't have the depth or talent at all of the linebacker positions but let our new coach Fanoga do some recruiting and lets see what happens.

Doesn't help with Hendricks & Knapton hurt on the sideline either...

Mon Nov 09, 2009 6:35 pm

Of course any defense requires talent... but a 3-4 requires a monster at NT. Then again a 4-3 requires 2 good DT's. The more I study it, the 3-3-5 stack is something I like against the modern spread offense which most teams run now.

We could talk X's and O's all day but it still comes down to Talent, execution, and coaching with any offense/defense.

Tue Nov 10, 2009 10:27 am

With Hendricks out this week and with Purcell (isn't he another true frosh?) playing pretty well (relative, I know) against byu, I'd bet you'll see a 4-3 against sdsu. Coach C was pretty vague about his intentions for defense with BH out in the papers. I think he stated when he got here that he was more of a 4-3 believer but realized he had the personnel and recent success to stay at a 3-4 for the foreseeable future.

Sat Nov 14, 2009 10:03 pm

We are running the 4-3. I don't like it one bit.

Sat Nov 14, 2009 10:19 pm

OrediggerPoke wrote:We are running the 4-3. I don't like it one bit.

We could run any defensive scheme in the world and look like complete dog s**t right now. Our d-line is completely unable to put any pressure on the QB, and our secondary just plain sucks. This season is over.

Sun Nov 15, 2009 1:04 am

WYO1016 wrote:
OrediggerPoke wrote:We are running the 4-3. I don't like it one bit.
We could run any defensive scheme in the world and look like complete dog s**t right now. Our d-line is completely unable to put any pressure on the QB, and our secondary just plain sucks. This season is over.

Not quite yet.

Go Pokes!