Pete"s fetish with 3-4 defense, why?

[toffee]

It would be reasonable to assume that Pete has been determined to go with 3-4 defense. Any logical reason why? Not all recently successful teams ran 3-4, but Pete seems to on some sort of mission to go with some sort of hybrid 3-4.

Why?

 

[Scout]

The one gap 34 offers flexibility in terms of roster building. LBs are cheaper on the franchise tag and in terms of overall average salary. Plus, you can disguise the 4th man pressure.

But the 34 whether one gap or two gap requires a capable NT and I think the Hawks are looking to address that along with ILB situation.

Honestly there isn't much difference these days between a one gap 34 or one gap 43.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

For a coach like Pete who likes versatility in his players and imposing his will on defense, 3-4 is suited to both those things.

It's also a better scheme to disguise alignments, coverage and blitzing.

My guess is before the next decade is over most if not all NFL teams will be using the 3-4. It's where the modern game is going with all the passing and 4 and 5 WR sets. Much easier to defense, obviously with the right personnel. Which was our problem last year. Had neither the D-line or LB's to play a 3-4 well.

 

[Jerhawk]

It would be reasonable to assume that Pete has been determined to go with 3-4 defense. Any logical reason why? Not all recently successful teams ran 3-4, but Pete seems to on some sort of mission to go with some sort of hybrid 3-4.

Why?

Jerhawk can see three potential reasons:

1.) He wants to stick it to all the haters like me who said he's too old, too stubborn and resistant to change. What better way to stick it to the doubters than to go against the grain?

Or
2.) Clint Hurtt is a bully, and literally strong armed Carroll into changing the defense or he'll "make this a problem." Carroll finally bent to Hurtt's will and did as he commanded.

Or
3.) If Jamal Adams is literally that big of a liability in a 4-3 at safety that they need to move him to a hybrid linebacker, then this trade has proven even more disastrous than thought.

Other than that, I don't see why we're running this defense. It's paper thin against the run, and we don't have the personnel to run it.

 

[toffee]

Jerhawk can see three potential reasons:

1.) He wants to stick it to all the haters like me who said he's too old, too stubborn and resistant to change. What better way to stick it to the doubters than to go against the grain?

Or
2.) Clint Hurtt is a bully, and literally strong armed Carroll into changing the defense or he'll "make this a problem." Carroll finally bent to Hurtt's will and did as he commanded.

Or
3.) If Jamal Adams is literally that big of a liability in a 4-3 at safety that they need to move him to a hybrid linebacker, then this trade has proven even more disastrous than thought.

Other than that, I don't see why we're running this defense. It's paper thin against the run, and we don't have the personnel to run it.

Pete should pack for retirement if he allow himself to be bullied by non other than Clint Hurtt.

 

[toffee]

For a coach like Pete who likes versatility in his players and imposing his will on defense, 3-4 is suited to both those things.

It's also a better scheme to disguise alignments, coverage and blitzing.

My guess is before the next decade is over most if not all NFL teams will be using the 3-4. It's where the modern game is going with all the passing and 4 and 5 WR sets. Much easier to defense, obviously with the right personnel. Which was our problem last year. Had neither the D-line or LB's to play a 3-4 well.

By letting Poona, Jefferson, Woods, Collier Barton go, we are making wholesale changes to our front seven.

How do you think we should replace those players?

 

[CallMeADawg]

Pete should pack for retirement if he allow himself to be bullied by non other than Clint Hurtt.

I don't get the fetish on this site to can one of the best coaches in the game.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

By letting Poona, Jefferson, Woods, Collier Barton go, we are making wholesale changes to our front seven.

How do you think we should replace those players?

3-4's require a war daddy Vita Vea type in the middle, two versatile inside and edge setters on both sides, two inside LB's that can fill gaps and two outside twitchy edge/LB's that can cover in space AND rush the passer.

So take your pick on who we need to fill all those roles, only 2-3 of which are filled already with the guys on the roster and new signings.

But to answer your question, youth, that's what we need. No more bargain basement over the hill vets who break down by week 11 or 12 with diminished return.

Some of those guys can be rotation guys, but not depended on to start. We gotta get young in the front seven.

Again, why I think 75% of our draft picks this year are going to be front seven.

 

[renofox]

1) PC has been trying to build an effective 4-3 defense for years and has had no success - maybe he thinks the 4-3 is not suitable to the current evolution of the NFL without lots of star players?

2) Personnel needs are different types for each scheme. Maybe he sees that there is and will be more/better players available that fit his version of the 3-4? The great defenses from 2012-2015 were built using many player types that were unconventional and undervalued (therefore available more easily and cheaply) and forced the entire NFL to reevaluate player archetypes.

3) 3-4 is a better defense against the pass. If PCJS can build another top defense while keeping a stout offense, they won't have to worry about the run because they will be forcing teams to pass. This can make a good defense into a great defense even if they are weak against the run.

 

[chawx]

The one gap 34 offers flexibility in terms of roster building. LBs are cheaper on the franchise tag and in terms of overall average salary. Plus, you can disguise the 4th man pressure.

But the 34 whether one gap or two gap requires a capable NT and I think the Hawks are looking to address that along with ILB situation.

Honestly there isn't much difference these days between a one gap 34 or one gap 43.

This is the right answer. Flexibility in scheme, salary cap, and players can move around to where their talents are best suited easier—but mostly, I think it's about money. 4-3 edge rushers get paid big money these days, if you can get pressure on the QB from an OLB that's cheaper who may also be able to get back in coverage, that's a win. Pete knows what he's doing, we just need the dogs

 

[Scout]

3-4's require a war daddy Vita Vea type in the middle, two versatile inside and edge setters on both sides, two inside LB's that can fill gaps and two outside twitchy edge/LB's that can cover in space AND rush the passer.

So take your pick on who we need to fill all those roles, only 2-3 of which are filled already with the guys on the roster and new signings.

But to answer your question, youth, that's what we need. No more bargain basement over the hill vets who break down by week 11 or 12 with diminished return.

Some of those guys can be rotation guys, but not depended on to start. We gotta get young in the front seven.

Again, why I think 75% of our draft picks this year are going to be front seven.

To continue the Vea example the Bucs under Bowles are a 3-4 defense that prioritize defending the run. But yes the 3-4 does give flexibility to also defend against the short passing game.

The value of the 34 is that if you drop one OLB in zone coverage in a fire zone blitz for example you can blitz one of the ILB up the A gap. So you are still bringing 4 man pressure but it is varied and can change play to play. That confusion can work to your advantage to throw the offense off rhythym.

The Hawks are basically 2 DL (Nose and Five tech) and a ILB away from being able to run the 34 properly long term. Presumably DreMont Jones is the three tech and Reed is the five tech with Mone as the Nose. But you need young guys waiting in the wings for rotation and as depth due to possible injuries.

Obtaining Wagner and Bush is big in that both are well suited to be ILB in a 34 as they can stack and shed in traffic. Hopefully with better nose tackle and up front play it keeps Brooks clean to flow to the ball. But I still see the Hawks drafting an ILB as both Bush and Wags are just short term plugs.

 

[Maelstrom787]

I think the real answer is that we're getting far too caught up in the semantics of 3-4 vs. 4-3 when the defense has always been super multiple in nature, especially since 2020.

They were essentially running 3-4 alignments in base for years. The bigger difference is how they handle gaps.

These binary labels don't fit cleanly in today's NFL. Everyone is multiple. Seattle included.

 

[pittpnthrs]

I think its a combination of a lot of things. I think its because most teams have shifted to the 3-4 and Pete is trying to jump on that trend because its probably easier to build and Pete and company have failed miserably trying to revive the 4-3 for years now.

 

[nanomoz]

For a coach like Pete who likes versatility in his players and imposing his will on defense, 3-4 is suited to both those things.

It's also a better scheme to disguise alignments, coverage and blitzing.

My guess is before the next decade is over most if not all NFL teams will be using the 3-4. It's where the modern game is going with all the passing and 4 and 5 WR sets. Much easier to defense, obviously with the right personnel. Which was our problem last year. Had neither the D-line or LB's to play a 3-4 well.

The bolded bit is what everyone on staff highlighted last year.

I'm dubious on this value if you've got an among-the-worst run defense. But we'll see.

 

[Frozenropers]

Even Pete’s old 4-3 had a lot of 3-4 characteristics. More of a 3-4 OLB type running the LEO and a bigger style DE/DT running the Elephant LDE Position.

 

[Maelstrom787]

Even Pete’s old 4-3 had a lot of 3-4 characteristics. More of a 3-4 OLB type running the LEO and a bigger style DE/DT running the Elephant LDE Position.

Any defense that had Red Bryant playing the 5 technique to great success has some definite 3-4 elements to it

 

[CalgaryFan05]

I think the real answer is that we're getting far too caught up in the semantics of 3-4 vs. 4-3 when the defense has always been super multiple in nature, especially since 2020.

They were essentially running 3-4 alignments in base for years. The bigger difference is how they handle gaps.

These binary labels don't fit cleanly in today's NFL. Everyone is multiple. Seattle included.

I agree with this - just because I hear so many 'hybrid' versions of 34/43 - either someone's brought up or left back -

I think it's all hybrid and should be adjusted by the reads during the game.

 

[chris98251]

It takes about three years to assemble your personnel and have them get comfortable with the system and each other to make it dominant. Players have to stay and the coaches have to use them to their strengths as well. We are in year 2.

 

[TheLegendOfBoom]

Could be a multitude of reasons, he may be running out of ideas and doesn’t believe todays college players are equipped to play a 4-3 as well as previous eras did.

The NFL rules today are set to make offenses dictate game flow. Maybe Carroll believes a 3-4 defense can better handle offensive schemes he is now seeing and more consistently.

There was a thought years ago that during the Super Bowl 2013 year that Seattle occasionally throws in a mix of different concepts on defense to add certain wrinkles to the game. Remember Seattle’s NASCAR package? That’s basically a 3-4 concept that was played during Seattle base 4-3 defense.

I think a lot is made on this 3-4 defense Seattle runs but Seattle and Carroll almost never plays a certain scheme 100 percent of the time and nothing is ever predetermined and permanent.

What is consistent is rather a hybrid approach Carroll employs and believe it, goes back to the 2013 season as well from what I’ve observed.

 

[Fade]

I think the real answer is that we're getting far too caught up in the semantics of 3-4 vs. 4-3 when the defense has always been super multiple in nature, especially since 2020.

They were essentially running 3-4 alignments in base for years. The bigger difference is how they handle gaps.

These binary labels don't fit cleanly in today's NFL. Everyone is multiple. Seattle included.

It does expose who's casual as hell and doesn't really know what they're watching, though.

With that being said, I don't like this Fangio/Carroll scheme. They have to gut the front 7 as most players don't fit, and Pete still isn't cool with blitzing with his stay on top at all costs philosophy.

They've made things more complicated for the players for essentially no reason, screwing up their run fits as they guess which gap they have.

They will have to blow it up and start over on defense again after this season, me thinks. As I expect another lackluster season from Clint Hurtt.