4-3 vs. 3-4

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from patpscyho. Show patpscyho's posts

    4-3 vs. 3-4

    I have been to quite a few of the training camp practices and I have not seen the team set in a 3-4 once.

    Not that they will, but my thought is that if they do stick to a 4-3 base for the season, the LB corp will obviously be Thomas-Mayo-Guyton because all three have speed and power.

    We know Mayo is mike because he is mic'ed up for D communication. Sam is to align 5 yards deep with nose on outside of OT on strong side, and will is on strong shoulder of OT and usually covers B gap (sam covers C). 

    Both are responsible for the curl on the #1 receiver, and to wall the #2 using trail technique or at least push him, or everything else outside the hash. Both Thomas and Guyton have the ability to do this.

    The problem here is that we know Bruschi no longer has the speed and explosion to pull off the sam (we know they won't put him in will because that is strong side)- it would be a great regret, but it would be hard for me to see him stay on the roster, if they do stick exclusively to the 4-3. I wonder if they will release him prior to roster lock or allow him to voluntarily retire?

    If they do keep Bruschi, it will be a strong indication that they will do a balanced distribution of the 4-3 and the 3-4. So my prediction is to watch what happens to Bruschi, because it will indicate what happens to the defense.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: 4-3 vs. 3-4

    Ne will still run 3-4.

    But going 4-3 heavy isn'tworth toomuch noise. They ran way more 4-3 in 2001 than they did 3-4. The most common front was .. .

    Hamilton, Mitchell, Pleasant, Seymour

    Frankly, some combo of

    Burgess/Green, Warren, Fork, Sey with some Brace and Pryor mixed in, just stomps all over that line.

    And the 4-3 LB crew, which I assume is going to be Guyton, Mayo, Thomas, is much better as well.

    Of course we have yet to see if this secondary is as good as Law/Smith/Milloy, et al, but I am willing to bet they could get close.

    I think the 3-4 will be about 40-50% of the snaps which is a reversal.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: 4-3 vs. 3-4

    I think many people forget that NE began the 2002 SB in 4-3.

    I think they are going to use a bunch of different fronts this season, like 2001. Burgess can be 'like' Willie McGinest in that hybrid role. But they can also use others.

    It should be fun to watch. Especailly considering the 4-3 they showcased in that last game was not the elite group.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from 4Adam13. Show 4Adam13's posts

    Re: 4-3 vs. 3-4

    BB prepares an individual game plan for each team they face based on the other teams past play and personnel. They will always be a 3-4 on paper, but each game will bring soemthing different.

    Zbellino is right, they should be very fun to watch. Once the secondary gets more familiar with each other and a few games under their belt, they should be the best D the Pats have fielded for a few years.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from joe81b. Show joe81b's posts

    Re: 4-3 vs. 3-4

    Z, right on about the defensive alignments but that avatar is pretty creepy looking, seems like its staring at me as i read.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from wozzy. Show wozzy's posts

    Re: 4-3 vs. 3-4

    If we face a D with a strong running game we will start in the 4/3, preseason isn't time to give away all of your secrets, eveything is vanilla during preseason.  Bill will always have the 3/4 as the base because it has more versitility than a 4/3.  Also defensive lineman who can control the line of scrimmage are highly paid (see Albert Haynesworth) and fewer D lineman means one less premium contract.

    Why are we obsessed with the formation of our D, play the matchups and win, who cares what we label our D as, just win baby.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from NEGAME. Show NEGAME's posts

    Re: 4-3 vs. 3-4

    Joe, I think your avatar is creepier.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Belenus555. Show Belenus555's posts

    Re: 4-3 vs. 3-4

    In Response to Re: 4-3 vs. 3-4:
    [QUOTE]Z, right on about the defensive alignments but that avatar is pretty creepy looking, seems like its staring at me as i read.
    Posted by joe81b[/QUOTE]

    I agree with you about the avatar.....that may be the intended effect.....LOL!!
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from mosseffect43. Show mosseffect43's posts

    Re: 4-3 vs. 3-4

    this is what practice is all about.practiceing the 4-3 gives the opportunity to utilize every player at once.and seeing if the pass rush is better with the burgess,brace added ect.you look at the giants defense,and they are relentless.yes i cant stand them,but watching them last night in there pre-season game,there defense is stout as ever.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from themightypatriots. Show themightypatriots's posts

    Re: 4-3 vs. 3-4

    In Response to 4-3 vs. 3-4:
    [QUOTE]I have been to quite a few of the training camp practices and I have not seen the team set in a 3-4 once. Not that they will, but my thought is that if they do stick to a 4-3 base for the season, the LB corp will obviously be Thomas-Mayo-Guyton because all three have speed and power. We know Mayo is mike because he is mic'ed up for D communication. Sam is to align 5 yards deep with nose on outside of OT on strong side, and will is on strong shoulder of OT and usually covers B gap (sam covers C).  Both are responsible for the curl on the #1 receiver, and to wall the #2 using trail technique or at least push him, or everything else outside the hash. Both Thomas and Guyton have the ability to do this. The problem here is that we know Bruschi no longer has the speed and explosion to pull off the sam (we know they won't put him in will because that is strong side)- it would be a great regret, but it would be hard for me to see him stay on the roster, if they do stick exclusively to the 4-3. I wonder if they will release him prior to roster lock or allow him to voluntarily retire? If they do keep Bruschi, it will be a strong indication that they will do a balanced distribution of the 4-3 and the 3-4. So my prediction is to watch what happens to Bruschi, because it will indicate what happens to the defense.
    Posted by patpscyho[/QUOTE]

    A few questions from the football illiterate:

    1.  Sam would be Thomas?  Strong side is the side with the TE?  What if there are two TEs?  What if there are 3 WRs, the D still uses 3 linebackers? 
    2.  Will would be Guyton? 
    3.  B gap is between OT and OG?  C is between OT and TE?
    4.  How can linebackers on opposite sides of the field be responsible for curl routes from the #1 wide receiver?  Do you mean, Sam is responsible for curl by flanker, and Will is responsible for curl by split end (Z taught me those)?  Who covers the TE?  What does it mean to Wall the #2 receiver?

    Generally, isn't the 4-3 a much more predictable defense than the 3-4?  Seems to me the best defenses year in and year out are the 3-4s (Pitt, Baltimore, San Diego, New England).  The Giants D hasn't done that well during the regular season, at least during 2007 anyway.  Wouldn't we need special players to make the 4-3 work, i.e. better pass-rushing DEs than TBC and Burgess?
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from mosseffect43. Show mosseffect43's posts

    Re: 4-3 vs. 3-4

    the giants D has been in the top three.compared to our no 20.and they were at there best in 2007,with the injury bug getting to them last year.i may not like them,but i will give credit where its due.

     
  12. This post has been removed.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from JohnHannahrulz. Show JohnHannahrulz's posts

    Re: 4-3 vs. 3-4

    Agree with ZB. If you have the personel to execute a good 4-3 D alignment that can stuff the run and provide a good pass rush (BB's Blitz packages left to the imagination ) in certain situations you employ that D. You can still have a good 3-4 base with solid line play and good coverage. All this after trading Smith. The key might be which LB is versatile enough to play rush OLB  and play endin 4-3 if necessary. My guess is Burgess. Thomas has been good in coverage and Mayo will take the Mike. Where does this leave Woods. Crable Guyton etc.....? Having Willis and Mayo at LB would be a nightmare scenario for OCs. The real key could be who plays ILB in the 3-4 and is he any good. I hope Guyton steps up.

    Oh and the coverage.

    PS. Never post pics unless you have Gamer quality cuteness or a kick a-- screen saver...BB as Obi-Wan Kenobi will do.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from antleite. Show antleite's posts

    Re: 4-3 vs. 3-4

    I predict a lot of switching between the 3-4 and 4-3 defensive fronts by the pats to give different looks at the offense. This will give opponents less time to figure out and attack the weaknesses in the defense. Some teams may warrant a consistent 3-4 formation and others may require a 4-3 defensive front. Either way I like the fact that the pats are working on different options for the defense. The goal for the defense this season is to stay under 300 points allowed during the season and be a defensive force as we once were.

    On another note, the giants defensive line looks like a beast. They are definitely going to be a problem this season for anyone.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from patpscyho. Show patpscyho's posts

    Re: 4-3 vs. 3-4

    In Response to Re: 4-3 vs. 3-4:
    [QUOTE]In Response to 4-3 vs. 3-4 : A few questions from the football illiterate: 1.  Sam would be Thomas?  Strong side is the side with the TE?  What if there are two TEs?  What if there are 3 WRs, the D still uses 3 linebackers?  2.  Will would be Guyton?  3.  B gap is between OT and OG?  C is between OT and TE? 4.  How can linebackers on opposite sides of the field be responsible for curl routes from the #1 wide receiver?  Do you mean, Sam is responsible for curl by flanker, and Will is responsible for curl by split end (Z taught me those)?  Who covers the TE?  What does it mean to Wall the #2 receiver? Generally, isn't the 4-3 a much more predictable defense than the 3-4?  Seems to me the best defenses year in and year out are the 3-4s (Pitt, Baltimore, San Diego, New England).  The Giants D hasn't done that well during the regular season, at least during 2007 anyway.  Wouldn't we need special players to make the 4-3 work, i.e. better pass-rushing DEs than TBC and Burgess?
    Posted by themightypatriots[/QUOTE]

    1. Yes Thomas plays Sam, and yes strong side is the TE side or the QB's blind side which you know must be the best part of the OL. Patriots have traditionally been a left handed team (Brady's blind side) you know they love to break for the run on Logan and Matt. They don't switch players, just responsibilities. LB's do not cover WR's, only the flat or assist in coverage, or blitz.

    2. yes

    3. easy way to remember this is that it always start with NT, the gaps on either side of NT is always A, and it goes up either side of him, the farther you get (B, C, D, E)

    4. Not #1 in terms of depth (because #1 WR can line up anywhere on LOS, and wherever they line up is where the responsibility is assigned to which LB), but the #1, #2 option in their zone or flat, if they know what play is coming, they adjust according, but if they don't know what is coming, they go to default responsibilities, e.g., #1 receiver, #2, etc.  Wall is the same thing as containment- since it is tricky for LB to tackle WR, you generally just want to force them outside or funnel to SS (again the conservative philosophy of BB's "bend but don't break").

    4-3 can be just as tricky as 3-4, depending on who the coach is and how creative he is.

    The key is to remember that it is easy to go from a base 3-4 to a 4-3 but hard for a base 4-3 to go to a 3-4, so McDaniels has his hands full in Denver.

    Remember that today is the last day of practice open to the public- this may be where they start to sneak in some work on the 3-4 before the regular season.

    Honestly if I were BB, I would be flipping between 3-4/4-3 during the regular season unpredictably because it forces the other team to do twice as much homework, and if they are not a disciplined team, forget it. This gives us an extra and dangerous edge.

    Again what I am doing here is trying to guess BB's strategy. I have been wrong many times but for me the fun is in outthinking and outguessing strategy, or in general just thinking about what our strategy against the other team is. If BB was such a predictable coach, I would not be having so much fun.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from tagandtrade. Show tagandtrade's posts

    Re: 4-3 vs. 3-4

    I think I have said this a million times but the reason we have a hybrid like Burgess is so we can play him on and off the ball in unpredictable situations. I think we will find that BB runs a 3-4 all the time in his mind because if he runs a fire or a blast c switch that DE whether it be Seymour or Burgess is coming off the line and covering the flat regardless of who they are.  The signing of Ron Brace was not to replace Wilfork it was so Wilfork could be Wilfork  When we got this guy his down fall was that he forced the pocket too much and created wider running lanes rather than clogging them up so he had to learn when to bull rush and when to hold the ;point of attack. Now with Wilfork and Brace in the fold Brace can play side by side the guy he is going to replace next year and get a crash course on NFL schemes while in the game I would suggest that the patriots are going to start their season with 3 defensive packages set in stone             1) Warren, Wilfork, Brace, Seymour,                         4-3 look                        Guyton, Mayo, Thomas            Bodden, Meriwether, Sanders, Wilhite             2) Green, Wilfork, Seymour                                       3-4 look            Woods, Bruschi, Mayo, ThomasBodden, Meriwether, Sanders, Springs             3) Warren, Seymour, Wilfork, Burgess                       nickel lookGuyton                        Mayo Bodden, Chung, Meriwether, Springs, Wheatly              4) Dime take Mayo output Guyton in the middle, move Chung to rover and Sanders back to SS 


    NOT SURPRISINGLY THERE DEFENSE IS STARTING TO LOOK LIKE THE ONE THAT BEAT THEM IN THE 07 SUPER BOWL!!!

    PEAS IS A 4-3 GUY ANYWAYSCool

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from MVPkilla. Show MVPkilla's posts

    Re: 4-3 vs. 3-4

    As long as Bill Belichick is the head coach of this football team we will be a base 3-4 defense. We have always been able to switch back and forth between the 4-3 and 3-4 and maybe we use more 4-3 then in years past this year but we will always be a base 3-4 defense. And rightfully so, the 4-3 is old news and washed up.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from FLACFAN. Show FLACFAN's posts

    Re: 4-3 vs. 3-4

    In Response to 4-3 vs. 3-4:
    [QUOTE]I have been to quite a few of the training camp practices and I have not seen the team set in a 3-4 once. Not that they will, but my thought is that if they do stick to a 4-3 base for the season, the LB corp will obviously be Thomas-Mayo-Guyton because all three have speed and power. We know Mayo is mike because he is mic'ed up for D communication. Sam is to align 5 yards deep with nose on outside of OT on strong side, and will is on strong shoulder of OT and usually covers B gap (sam covers C).  Both are responsible for the curl on the #1 receiver, and to wall the #2 using trail technique or at least push him, or everything else outside the hash. Both Thomas and Guyton have the ability to do this. The problem here is that we know Bruschi no longer has the speed and explosion to pull off the sam (we know they won't put him in will because that is strong side)- it would be a great regret, but it would be hard for me to see him stay on the roster, if they do stick exclusively to the 4-3. I wonder if they will release him prior to roster lock or allow him to voluntarily retire? If they do keep Bruschi, it will be a strong indication that they will do a balanced distribution of the 4-3 and the 3-4. So my prediction is to watch what happens to Bruschi, because it will indicate what happens to the defense.
    Posted by patpscyho[/QUOTE]

    What great insight!  You were right on with Bruschi.  How big an impact do you see with the trading of Seymour?  Do you think we have the personnel left to cover his loss?  Do you think we will pursue another LB?
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: 4-3 vs. 3-4

    I think using Thomas and Burgess they way they used Vrabel and McGiness will cause other teams problems. They can make any alignment a 3-4 or 4-3 on any play. Warren can be a DE or DT in these situations.

    When they go "pure" 4-3 they can stick 675lbs of Wilfork/Brace in the middle then rush 2 out of Burgess, Green and Warren. That's not too shabby either.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from mstringr. Show mstringr's posts

    Re: 4-3 vs. 3-4

    The key being: lots of variability and unpredictability. One game at a time.
    Bills first.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from adam4522. Show adam4522's posts

    Re: 4-3 vs. 3-4

    I can see the 3rd and ten or fifteen of green, warren, pryor, burgess up front with tbc, mayo, and thomas behind them.  I bet they get a push.  How about 4th and one with warren, folk, brace, and wright upfront with mayo thomas and guyton behind them.  I see the beef.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from FLACFAN. Show FLACFAN's posts

    Re: 4-3 vs. 3-4

    In Response to Re: 4-3 vs. 3-4:
    [QUOTE]I think using Thomas and Burgess they way they used Vrabel and McGiness will cause other teams problems. They can make any alignment a 3-4 or 4-3 on any play. Warren can be a DE or DT in these situations. When they go "pure" 4-3 they can stick 675lbs of Wilfork/Brace in the middle then rush 2 out of Burgess, Green and Warren. That's not too shabby either.
    Posted by rameakap[/QUOTE]

    Sounds good to me.  I feel very confident in our front seven.  Our flexibility is going to be a consternation to a lot of DCs.  I'm not so sure about the CBs and Ss.  I wish we had seen more (any?) of Springs.  I have not been impressed by Wheatley, Chung, or Butler.  I sure hope it is just a matter of playing more and more as part of the overall Defensive unit.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share