The Demise of the 3-4

[ZenUSC]

Originally Posted by fridayserv

I really agree. Also, the defensive gameplan of the soft zone on 3rd and 5 or better must stop. Did anyone see Georgia, Alabama, LSU on 3rd and 5 or better they sent 6 to hurry the QB. Our coaching staff sent 3 against 5 OL and 1 RB. The A&M QB had all day.

12 outta 17 on 3rd down for Tamu.

[kingofnerf]

"Private Joker, do you believe in the 3-4 Defense?"

[18IsTheMan]

Originally Posted by Dizzy01

the 10 yard cushion they give receivers on every play.

That's the Stephon Gilmore package.

[rioninusc]

I think it's a personnel issue. BAMA runs the 3-4 to almost perfection.

Here is their depth chart
https://alabama.rivals.com/cdepthtext.asp

03 308-323 pound NT's
06 265-315 pound DE's
12 215-268 pound LB's (All starters are 250+ pounds)

USC depth chart
https://southcarolina.rivals.com/cdepthtext.asp


I think the issue with USC in the 3-4 is the size of the players. Our NT are good size, but the DE sizes are lacking. Would have to move some of the DT to DE, and then on top of that the LB size is lacking, so would need to move some of the DE to LB.

[TAFC 5 1981]

I wonder if Johnny Ego returned for his Jr year and started , would SC had been better prepared for the game?

[ut_vols13]

The VOLS tried the 3-4 with Sal Sunseri in 2012 and it was an epic fail. Yes, you need the right guys to run the 3-4.

[bcolinc]

Originally Posted by TAFC 5 1981

I wonder if Johnny Ego returned for his Jr year and started , would SC had been better prepared for the game?

Haha


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Order 66]

Originally Posted by ZenUSC

Heck, I hit a cow in the road one night about a half mile from the Lex County Hospital. Actually there were two cows in the road but I only avoided one.

I hope you ate good for a while.

[FanofCarolina1]

Originally Posted by 18IsTheMan

That's the Stephon Gilmore package.

Are you sure it wasn't the Chris Culliver package??

[Dizzy01]

Originally Posted by FanofCarolina1

Are you sure it wasn't the Chris Culliver package??

Better than the Captain Munnerlyn package where every time you get beat grab your hamstring and cramp for one play.

[attaboy]

Originally Posted by rioninusc

I think the issue with USC in the 3-4 is the size of the players. Our NT are good size, but the DE sizes are lacking. Would have to move some of the DT to DE, and then on top of that the LB size is lacking, so would need to move some of the DE to LB.

This is exactly the answer, our defense has never looked so small out there. 6 of our starting 11 defensive players are LESS than 215 lbs, and three of the starters are under 200! One being 165lbs (al harris jr). Yes, they are athletic and quick but getting to a larger opposing player doesn't make him any easier to tackle and that disadvantage was clear. There were a few times a player on A&M's team appeared huge on tv while dragging our little guys down the field for y.a.c.

[FanofCarolina1]

Originally Posted by Dizzy01

Better than the Captain Munnerlyn package where every time you get beat grab your hamstring and cramp for one play.

That was genius on his part because it stopped the clock and gave the DC time to come up with a plan when we were getting our butts kicked

[AikenRooster]

Originally Posted by ColaCock

Not sure how much ball you played, but it really isn't that difficult of a concept to grasp...coverages and packages remain identical in the mind to adjust to a personnel setup, which is all we are facing.

Besides, it's not like these guys coming in, or that we currently have, have never played football before with other formations...in middle school, JV, varsity high school football you play with various personnel setups.

It's really not that big of a deal. Only thing that really changes is some people used to getting more snaps in a 4-3 will see less in a 3-4, and vice versa.

I do agree with your last comment, that was painfully obvious and it bothered me when we came out in 2nd half with no adjustment there. My grandma could have gained 4-5 yards on a WR screen.

Now, why do have to come off with insults like this? It's not a players' message board or a coaches' message board. It is a fans' message board. Whether or not one has playing time or not is irrelevant to one's football knowledge. Richard head.

[ccured]

Originally Posted by Dizzy01

It is a big change for guys in terms of lining up and the LBs making sure they know their assignments. Not to mention whether or not the DT you'd put in is able to pull their own weight and is conditioned to play.

The benefit of the 3-4 is supposed to be in sending a different LB every play in hopes of confusing the OL but the problem Thursday is the DL couldn't tie anyone up enough for the LB rushing to make a difference. If they're the best we have at this point I'm not sure we want the guy who couldn't beat them out on the field more.

I have not watched a the game on my DVR yet. Just watched it at the game. It appeared to me that the DL and LB were not on the same page as far as gap responsibility. I saw the LB run right up the back of the DL guy not correct gap.

[ra742002]

We don't have the personnel to run the 3-4. You essentially need three guys who are traditional defensive tackle sized guys. One of them has to be big and strong enough to play both "a" gaps. We do not have those guys! We MAY have 4 quality linebackers, but, that in and of itself does not lend itself to being able to effectively play in a 3-4 scheme. We may have 3 above average dt's, and several de's, but our ends r not fit for ends in the 3-4. Please go back to the 4-2-5, which is what we have been recruiting for, personnel wise since 2008.

[GSC2013]

Originally Posted by ColaCock

Not sure how much ball you played, but it really isn't that difficult of a concept to grasp...coverages and packages remain identical in the mind to adjust to a personnel setup, which is all we are facing.

Besides, it's not like these guys coming in, or that we currently have, have never played football before with other formations...in middle school, JV, varsity high school football you play with various personnel setups.

It's really not that big of a deal. Only thing that really changes is some people used to getting more snaps in a 4-3 will see less in a 3-4, and vice versa.

I do agree with your last comment, that was painfully obvious and it bothered me when we came out in 2nd half with no adjustment there. My grandma could have gained 4-5 yards on a WR screen.

You are very correct. I played at CCU in a Multiple 8. We could shift from 4-3 to 3-4 very easily, or even from a 3-4 or 4-3 to a nickel or 5-2 if needed. As long as you have some DE's and LB's that can shift and play that 9 technique, its not hard at all.

Only difference in a Cover 2 in the 3-4 and 4-3 is the LB's have bigger zones to cover. Same areas of the field, just bigger areas to cover.

I personally hate the 3-4. You better have 3 stud DL's or you get no pass rush. USC went to it...because they weren't confident in their DL....and are surprised they didn't get a pass rush???? If your DL isn't that good...then the 3-4 is GUARANTEED to hurt your pass rush.

[GSC2013]

Originally Posted by AikenRooster

Now, why do have to come off with insults like this? It's not a players' message board or a coaches' message board. It is a fans' message board. Whether or not one has playing time or not is irrelevant to one's football knowledge. Richard head.

I don't think he meant it that way. I think he just meant, and I agree, that many people sometimes think that when a team is a 3-4 team, that it cant play 4-3, or vice versa. A team only uses a base package, but they almost all can morph that into the other, or have other packages in that they can run.

The Texans base D is a 3-4, but I guarantee they have an entire chunk of their playbook that has Watt and Clowney at opposite sides in a 4-3. Whether they'll ever use it or not, who knows.

I don't think lining up and playing 4-3 would be that hard for USC. Or 4-2-5 like they normally played. Almost all teams can switch. Its not nearly as hard on D as it would be to switch philosophies on offense. Its just a matter of spending most practice reps that week working from that package, and not the 3-4.

[ReadR00ster]

Originally Posted by Dizzy01

Scrapping the 3-4 at this point may be worse than continuing to play with it. They spent two camps trying to install it with a bunch of guys who never played the 4-3 system the staff used before. If they were going to scrap something it would probably be better served to scrap the 10 yard cushion they give receivers on every play.

My understanding is they we were not planning on playing one style but being multiple and going more with what worked better... which was nothing we did. I have hard time believing that trying to play tight man coverage would have made a difference. They would have burned by Seals-Jones and Noil either way. We just have no one that can cover those dudes.

[Dizzy01]

Originally Posted by ccured

I have not watched a the game on my DVR yet. Just watched it at the game. It appeared to me that the DL and LB were not on the same page as far as gap responsibility. I saw the LB run right up the back of the DL guy not correct gap.

When you watch it back you'll see the LBs weren't on the same page with anyone including themselves. There was on play in the second half where A&M sent a man in motion and 3 of the LBs went to the same spot and just stood there looking at each other. It would have been funny if it wasn't so sad.

[Dizzy01]

Originally Posted by GSC2013

You are very correct. I played at CCU in a Multiple 8. We could shift from 4-3 to 3-4 very easily, or even from a 3-4 or 4-3 to a nickel or 5-2 if needed. As long as you have some DE's and LB's that can shift and play that 9 technique, its not hard at all.

Only difference in a Cover 2 in the 3-4 and 4-3 is the LB's have bigger zones to cover. Same areas of the field, just bigger areas to cover.

I personally hate the 3-4. You better have 3 stud DL's or you get no pass rush. USC went to it...because they weren't confident in their DL....and are surprised they didn't get a pass rush???? If your DL isn't that good...then the 3-4 is GUARANTEED to hurt your pass rush.

My point is we have a lot of young players who don't understand what hey are supposed to be doing as it is. To try and change things up on them now may not be the best thing. I'll agree that this team doesn't have the DT to run the scheme but that's what they've decided to go with.