Switching to 3-4 Was a Mistake

[Fade]

First of all they're getting none of the benefits with all of the detriments. The point of a 3-4 is to confuse the opposing offense and bring pressure from different areas. The Seahawks don't blitz much so this is null and void. They have guys like Poona Ford playing out of position. Pete's insistence to play vanilla on the back end is the icing on the cake.

They need to go back to 4-3 under and 4-3 over, it will tie in much better with the backend and how simplified Pete wants to play. They can be a respectable defense, not dominant, but respectful.

As is, they will get no pressure, won't stop the run, and be one of the worst defenses in the NFL.

Brooks is regressing, Taylor is regressing, Poona is miscast and under performing. Al woods is playing great, but he would also play great in a similar role in a 4-3.

Meanwhile on offense, the Seahawks went from being a dominant running team with an explosive passing game down the stretch with Penny and Wilson, to one of the worst offenses in the league. 3.4 ypc (3rd worst). 8.3 yds per completion (Dead last.) And they haven't scored for going on 6 quarters and counting. But it's expected and not surprising as they don't have a QB.

There is no excuse for the defense as their front 7 is loaded with veterans, and coaches that wanted to shift to this because they thought it fit their personnel better, and they could do more (they were wrong.)

I don't see Pete sticking with the blandest 3-4 in the league, they either have to heat it up and start bringing more pressure, or go back to doing it the old way.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Damn, I wish this smoke would go away.

 

[knownone]

It's been two games. It's hard to call it a mistake with such a small sample size. And if the coaching staff believes that a 3-4 is better long-term for the defense, then the misfits won't be here very long.

 

[nanomoz]

There was always going to be growing pains. I'm not saying you're wrong, but I'm willing to give it some more time. Several players that are key players have really fallen short of expectations. They could turn it around, I think/hope.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Everything you're saying is true Fade, but it's WAY too soon to scrap the 3-4.

The 3-4 is a far more complex scheme than the 4-3, so it could take a couple years to not only implement it, but to find the personnel to play within the scheme.

IMO if we ever want get out of the dark ages, then we have to give the 3-4 a chance. It's how the modern NFL is being played, fast, deception, sideline to sideline as opposed to plodding north and south trying to depend on being more athletic and physical than your opponent.

Which we've found out the last 7-8 years isn't a recipe anymore for playing good defense.

 

[TwistedHusky]

Well that was my concern.

We were running out a 3-4 without the players for it.

But weirdly it seems that not only does it not match the players but it doesn't even match the predilections of the coaching staff.

I gave up trying to understand nonsensical moves like this some time ago.
If Fangio came in and tried to roll it out? Sure, makes sense.
But Clint was here for the whole time, he is used to working in the 4-3.
3-4 is better for pressure against the passer. But IF you send people from different spots at different times. Maybe losing Adams hurt that.

Still a complete question what we are doing, and more importantly, why.

 

[Maui12thman]

2 weeks in. Thanks for the advice Einstein.

 

[samwize77]

I won't pass judgment just yet. If they want to concentrate on something, try tackling first.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Well that was my concern.

We were running out a 3-4 without the players for it.

But weirdly it seems that not only does it not match the players but it doesn't even match the predilections of the coaching staff.

Mafe was specifically taken because he's a 3-4 type of edge setter/rusher, and Adams WAS going to fit in better in a 3-4 that allows him to run around, make plays and not have to drop back into coverage as often with 4 LB's.

Again, is the personnel here now? No, it's going to take another draft or two.

Also again, 3-4 is the modern defensive scheme for the NFL, more and more teams are switching to it every year or two. More quickness, more flexibility with personnel.

Takes time though, and without a franchise QB? We've got time.

 

[Chawker]

Did somebody say thatt the 4-3 is better then 3-4 . I do sir.

 

[CalgaryFan05]

First of all they're getting none of the benefits with all of the detriments. The point of a 3-4 is to confuse the opposing offense and bring pressure from different areas. The Seahawks don't blitz much so this is null and void. They have guys like Poona Ford playing out of position. Pete's insistence to play vanilla on the back end is the icing on the cake.

They need to go back to 4-3 under and 4-3 over, it will tie in much better with the backend and how simplified Pete wants to play. They can be a respectable defense, not dominant, but respectful.

As is, they will get no pressure, won't stop the run, and be one of the worst defenses in the NFL.

Brooks is regressing, Taylor is regressing, Poona is miscast and under performing. Al woods is playing great, but he would also play great in a similar role in a 4-3.

Meanwhile on offense, the Seahawks went from being a dominant running team with an explosive passing game down the stretch with Penny and Wilson, to one of the worst offenses in the league. 3.4 ypc (3rd worst). 8.3 yds per completion (Dead last.) And they haven't scored for going on 6 quarters and counting. But it's expected and not surprising as they don't have a QB.

There is no excuse for the defense as their front 7 is loaded with veterans, and coaches that wanted to shift to this because they thought it fit their personnel better, and they could do more (they were wrong.)

I don't see Pete sticking with the blandest 3-4 in the league, they either have to heat it up and start bringing more pressure, or go back to doing it the old way.

I'm not super X and O guy.

BUT DAMN. This. This This This. AND tackling. They are not mutually exclusive.

I've been saying for a week that it looks like you can drive a truck right through the center of our dline on the run game.

Even pete said "we need to get more guys closer to the ball". Duh. Get them in the box. Go back to what you know.

 

[Maelstrom787]

I'm not really convinced they're even running more 3-4 stuff than they did last year. I think the terminology change and turnover has them sloppy on their run fits. The tackling, I dunno. They're allergic to it for some reason.

 

[Appyhawk]

4-3 would help to mitigate our short LB room and make it tougher to run against IMO, but we would give up options for rush. I think one reason for 3-4 was to make it easier to capitalize on Adams strengths. Now that we don't have him that is null and void. As Mafe improves we might be able to take better advantage of the alignment, but we HAVE to take the run off the table for our opponents. So far that is only happening sporadically. Another reason was an attempt to bolster our rush overall AND make it easier for our DBs to play aggressively, thereby increasing turnover opportunities. None of those thigs has happened yet. That is no indictment against the scheme as much as it is merely illuminating our current personnel situation. Lack of execution has been by far the most prevalent problem with how we may be misusing the 3-4.

 

[CalgaryFan05]

First of all they're getting none of the benefits with all of the detriments. The point of a 3-4 is to confuse the opposing offense and bring pressure from different areas. The Seahawks don't blitz much so this is null and void. They have guys like Poona Ford playing out of position. Pete's insistence to play vanilla on the back end is the icing on the cake.

They need to go back to 4-3 under and 4-3 over, it will tie in much better with the backend and how simplified Pete wants to play. They can be a respectable defense, not dominant, but respectful.

As is, they will get no pressure, won't stop the run, and be one of the worst defenses in the NFL.

Brooks is regressing, Taylor is regressing, Poona is miscast and under performing. Al woods is playing great, but he would also play great in a similar role in a 4-3.

Meanwhile on offense, the Seahawks went from being a dominant running team with an explosive passing game down the stretch with Penny and Wilson, to one of the worst offenses in the league. 3.4 ypc (3rd worst). 8.3 yds per completion (Dead last.) And they haven't scored for going on 6 quarters and counting. But it's expected and not surprising as they don't have a QB.

There is no excuse for the defense as their front 7 is loaded with veterans, and coaches that wanted to shift to this because they thought it fit their personnel better, and they could do more (they were wrong.)

I don't see Pete sticking with the blandest 3-4 in the league, they either have to heat it up and start bringing more pressure, or go back to doing it the old way.

Well, and the other thing that's p****sing me off is that - why are we stuck in one mode.

Just like last year - it just seems that we can't make adjustments. I hear lots of excuses. 49ers have a punishing run game. Great - then why the hell are we running a 3-4 against them without changes.

Take what the other team is giving you and respond. But, seems like we just like to bash our heads against a pre-programmed brick wall.

Is that a little much? Maybe - I'm sure there's some adjustments - but I'm talking about adaptability. Geez.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Well, let's see if this YOUNG TEAM figures it out. The thing about a YOUNG TEAM is that they are learning on the fly, at least these rookies.
Will be fun to watch this YOUNG TEAM improve over the season.

 

[Fade]

If it takes two years to learn it, you got the wrong scheme.

So by the time they learn it, there contracts are up, or they got old and retired. I don't see many of these guys in the front 7 being here in two years, essentially having to start over again.

=======

The weird thing is these guys have played in 3-4 in their past.

DE - Q. Jefferson played in a 3-4 in Denver.

NT - Al Woods, first of all he is a NT, but played in a 3-4 in Pitt, i think in Indy as well.

DE - Shelby Harris played in a 3-4 in Denver.

OLB - Nwosu played in a 3-4 with the Chargers.

OLB - Taylor did both at Tennessee sometimes with his hand in the dirt, sometimes as a standup lining up on the edge. It shouldn't take 2 years to learn how to set the edge in the run game, and rush the passer. Either you have it or you don't.

ILB - Cody Barton played in a 3-4 at Utah.

ILB - Jordan Brooks - miscast, he is a downhill go straight ahead 4-3 LBer. This defense hurts him the most.

DT - Poona doesn't fit, 4-3 1-tech. Actually this defense hurts Poona, not Brooks the most.

6 of 8 have played in the 3-4 in their past, and they shouldn't look this bad. Poor coaching.

 

[Fade]

Well, let's see if this YOUNG TEAM figures it out. The thing about a YOUNG TEAM is that they are learning on the fly, at least these rookies.
Will be fun to watch this YOUNG TEAM improve over the season.

So young... Read my above post. They are experienced playing in the 3-4.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

I'm just messing with you from your stop calling them a young team post. Go Hawks

 

[toffee]

Poona is having a miserable year, along with Taylor.

 

[Rosco]

First of all they're getting none of the benefits with all of the detriments. The point of a 3-4 is to confuse the opposing offense and bring pressure from different areas. The Seahawks don't blitz much so this is null and void. They have guys like Poona Ford playing out of position. Pete's insistence to play vanilla on the back end is the icing on the cake.

They need to go back to 4-3 under and 4-3 over, it will tie in much better with the backend and how simplified Pete wants to play. They can be a respectable defense, not dominant, but respectful.

As is, they will get no pressure, won't stop the run, and be one of the worst defenses in the NFL.

Brooks is regressing, Taylor is regressing, Poona is miscast and under performing. Al woods is playing great, but he would also play great in a similar role in a 4-3.

Meanwhile on offense, the Seahawks went from being a dominant running team with an explosive passing game down the stretch with Penny and Wilson, to one of the worst offenses in the league. 3.4 ypc (3rd worst). 8.3 yds per completion (Dead last.) And they haven't scored for going on 6 quarters and counting. But it's expected and not surprising as they don't have a QB.

There is no excuse for the defense as their front 7 is loaded with veterans, and coaches that wanted to shift to this because they thought it fit their personnel better, and they could do more (they were wrong.)

I don't see Pete sticking with the blandest 3-4 in the league, they either have to heat it up and start bringing more pressure, or go back to doing it the old way.

The 4-3 is going the way of the dinosaur. Seattle just doesn’t have All the personnel necessary to run a 3-4.
4-3 pass rushing DEs are almost harder to find than franchise QBs.
Seattle made the right move just need the personnel.