Still in favor of the 3-4 defense ?

[Chawker]

Who is still digging the 3-4 defense ?

 

[Maelstrom787]

Incredibly misleading, considering they're running 4 man fronts in nickel and showed some 4-3 odd front stuff in this past game.

 

[Chawker]

And 4 LBers all day, crys 3-4

 

[Maelstrom787]

And 4 LBers all day, crys 3-4

If one of them is a rush backer and lining up where the Leo lines up, then it's just a matter of semantics (unless you want to get into individual gap assignments, which... I don't think would be a consideration for you)

 

[Chawker]

But if you wish to defend our defense tell us how good we are please !

 

[Maelstrom787]

But if you wish to defend our defense tell us how good we are please !

I didn't say that. Keep up.

 

[Chawker]

So you are in favor of our defensive schemes ?

 

[Maelstrom787]

So you are in favor of our defensive schemes ?

I didn't say that either, I'm just pointing out that its dishonest to imply that they're running a basic, binary 3-4 and were running a basic, binary 4-3 before when its been a hybrid defense run out of hybrid fronts ever since they did that base 4-3 stretch in 2019

 

[Maelstrom787]

The base front they were running, the bear front, is not a 4-3 front and it was their base front in both 2020 and 2021

 

[Spohawks]

If one of them is a rush backer and lining up where the Leo lines up, then it's just a matter of semantics (unless you want to get into individual gap assignments, which... I don't think would be a consideration for you)

Thats cold

 

[Chawker]

Its not a 4-3 and it sucks .

 

[Maelstrom787]

Its not a 4-3 and it sucks .

The 4-3 under is barely a 4-3. Shares a ton with the 3-4. It presents, alignment wise, more similarly to a base 3-4 than a base 4-3 like you're thinking of. The Seahawks ran the 4-3 under base for many years - pictured below. Contrast that with the following image of a 4-3 over front.

 

[Spohawks]

Ummm so my vote is to throw whatever style we currently have into a burning pile of poop and set it on fire!

"The 3-4 takes time". Well I am all out of time and this crap is embarrassing!

 

[Maelstrom787]

Ummm so my vote is to throw whatever style we currently have into a burning pile of poop and set it on fire!

"The 3-4 takes time". Well I am all out of time and this crap is embarrassing!

Pete let 'em change the verbiage of the D and take it in a different direction, but the direction is still a natural progression of what they'd already been doing the previous years.

I gotta contend that the issues go deeper than "its a 3-4 now and was a 4-3." The reality is much more nuanced and harder to breakdown

Whatever it is, they gotta do something. Pete's gotta put on the DC hat more than he currently is if they don't start improving organically here.

 

[LeaveLynchAlone]

But if you wish to defend our defense tell us how good we are please !

The Seahawks' defense is really, really good.

 

[TwistedHusky]

It feels like we have some pieces for a 4-3 and some for a 3-4.

A 3-4 needs exceptional LBs. We don't have that. Not sure why we went to a scheme that hinges on great LB play when we seem tremendously average to below average at LB.

But a 3-4 is the better defense in a passing league.
To make it work you need to apply pressure from different spots, angles, players, etc. You cannot be vanilla. There is no default defense. The whole thing works because of the constant change and potential areas of attack.
Giving the benefit of the doubt on this that either we don't have the people to run it or we don't have the plan yet.
But I see 4 man fronts often enough, it feels like we are not committed to it. Maybe we cannot be without the horses.

 

[Chawker]

Ummm so my vote is to throw whatever style we currently have into a burning pile of poop and set it on fire!

"The 3-4 takes time". Well I am all out of time and this crap is embarrassing!

I agree 100%

 

[gmor]

I didn't say that either, I'm just pointing out that its dishonest to imply that they're running a basic, binary 3-4 and were running a basic, binary 4-3 before when its been a hybrid defense run out of hybrid fronts ever since they did that base 4-3 stretch in 2019

Thanks professor.

 

[Mad Dog]

Biggest issue is that all the exotic stuff on passing downs goes out the window when teams can run all over you. I think you'd see Hurtt and Desai shine if they could convince the players to commit to stopping the run. That's never a scheme thing. That's winning your one on ones and manning up.

 

[AgentDib]

Arguing about 4-3 vs. 3-4 seems misguided when we've been playing two LBs on half our snaps and one LB on the other half. They can label Taylor and Nwosu as whatever position they want but neither is dropping into coverage like you'd expect from 3-4 OLB edge rushers (to vary which four are rushing the QB each down and keep the offense guessing). We're just playing standard 5-2 bear front stuff is strong against the run when our personnel aren't letting us down.

If we bring a safety down into the box, and then Taysom Hill runs it anyway, and then neither ILB nor the box safety can tackle him at all... well, I struggle to see how that's a scheme issue.