Defensive Scheme

#1
KnoxVillain

KnoxVillain

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 31, 2010
Messages
11,691
Likes
1,321
#1
Anyone else follow Wes Rucker on Twitter? He follows the Vols and writes for the Chattanooga Times Free Press. He said our defense will be based on a 4-3, but we will have a "multiple 40". I have no idea what this means and I can't find any info on it on the internet...any ideas?
 
#2
#2
I haven't found that much either other then this guy Jerry Campbell who writes books on football schemes...

I think it's some variation of the 4-3 that is supposed to be able to match up with multiple sets on offense
 
#3
#3
#4
#4
KnoxVillain said:
Anyone else follow Wes Rucker on Twitter? He follows the Vols and writes for the Chattanooga Times Free Press. He said our defense will be based on a 4-3, but we will have a "multiple 40". I have no idea what this means and I can't find any info on it on the internet...any ideas?
Click to expand...

4 being a four man front...so nickel (2lb) and dime (1 lb) packages on top of the 4-3 base package would be my guess
 
#6
#6
Glad to hear that we are sticking with 4-3.

Multiple 40 = 4-3 def.(43), 4-4 def.(44), 4-2-5 def(42). From what I gather, "multiple
40" is basically saying that your are going to have 4 down lineman in all you packages.
 
#8
#8
JALeon04 said:
Glad to hear that we are sticking with 4-3.

Multiple 40 = 4-3 def.(43), 4-4 def.(44), 4-2-5 def(42). From what I gather, "multiple
40" is basically saying that your are going to have 4 down lineman in all you packages.
Click to expand...

Ah, that makes a lot of sense.
 
#10
#10
I've been going over this all day in my head!!! I thought for sure with no DT coming in we would have to go with a 3-4 defense! I just don't see the numbers here! i like the 4-3 better but we dont have enough DT's to make it work! and if one gets hurt! We are done.
 
#11
#11
pargolf423 said:
I've been going over this all day in my head!!! I thought for sure with no DT coming in we would have to go with a 3-4 defense! I just don't see the numbers here! i like the 4-3 better but we dont have enough DT's to make it work! and if one gets hurt! We are done.
Click to expand...



we are sure closer player-wise to the 4-3 than the 3-4 . Whereas you think by going with a 3 down concept that we would increase our depth ...it would actually decrease our depth. For the 4-3 we have some of the players that fit the concept ...for the 3-4 we have none of the concept players . Maybe a couple could develope ...but we just don't have 3-4 guys right now .

We would give up 50 points a game going 3-4 with our 4-3 personel.
 
#12
#12
don't forget the 4-1-6 run out of the M40 . The 1 lb is a DE . Excellent against the spread
 
#13
#13
I agree. Staying with a 4-3 is the best thing for us. I imagine someone will get converted into a DT when all is said and done. It won't be the best solution, but it will be a temporary fix. Here's to our DT's staying healthy all year!
 
#14
#14
majic73 said:
we are sure closer player-wise to the 4-3 than the 3-4 . Whereas you think by going with a 3 down concept that we would increase our depth ...it would actually decrease our depth. For the 4-3 we have some of the players that fit the concept ...for the 3-4 we have none of the concept players . Maybe a couple could develope ...but we just don't have 3-4 guys right now .

We would give up 50 points a game going 3-4 with our 4-3 personel.
Click to expand...

Well said! Basically what people are forgetting is that the ends in a 3-4 are more like athletic DT or run stopper ends. They aren't your Jacques Smith, Corey Miller Type rush ends. They would play more of an outside linebacker position in that scheme. Plus, I am not sure we have a huge Nose Guard that would require double teams and hold his ground which is paramount in the 3-4.
 
#15
#15
oK ok Ok I JUST PUT ALL THE NAMES ON PAPER YOUR EXACTLY right!!!! we have a good foundation set! I would like to fatten up bohannon and williams! a little bit and put them in there with brown,hughs,nelson,walls and jeffery!!! DE we are stacked with talent. linebacker is alot better too with 15 prospects!!! SO I say YOUR RIGHT ON!!
 
#16
#16
To offset some lack at DT it'll have to be built around speed, offsets, blitz packages and multiple looks. With Justin Wilcox this may well be up his alley and his strong suite.
 
#17
#17
I don't think he said "multiple 40". I think he said multiple sets but a 40 base. meaning 4 dlinemen then, you know, 42 (nickle), 43 (stack), 44 (you get the picture). I think Rucker wasnt listening right. I read his tweet right after the press conference and thought he had it wrong then too.
 
#18
#18
Keep in mind that the beauty of the DC hire is that he even ran a 3-2-6 against TCU. I watched the presser with DD and thought he was aiming more at... we will be flexible and not pigeon hole ourselves. Remember Boise State is known for making 2 and 3 star players into national title run teams. They will use our talent in many ways. Monte used a 4-2-5 hybrid and moved players around alot depending on the team being played. Like with Florida Monte had EBerry fill the back side waiting on Tebow's cut backs. I think we have one of the best young defensive minds going. The way he shut TCu and Oregon down is nothing but strong!
 
#19
#19
we are going to have alot of new things thrown in though. our new DC is known for making up some crazy Defenses to confuse offenses
 
#20
#20
Is anyone familiar with his style? Does he blitz a lot, or does he prefer a standard four man rush? Didn't they normally run a 4-2-5 out at Boise?
 
#21
#21
FBInc said:
Keep in mind that the beauty of the DC hire is that he even ran a 3-2-6 against TCU. I watched the presser with DD and thought he was aiming more at... we will be flexible and not pigeon hole ourselves. Remember Boise State is known for making 2 and 3 star players into national title run teams. They will use our talent in many ways. Monte used a 4-2-5 hybrid and moved players around alot depending on the team being played. Like with Florida Monte had EBerry fill the back side waiting on Tebow's cut backs. I think we have one of the best young defensive minds going. The way he shut TCu and Oregon down is nothing but strong!
Click to expand...


I agree with the multiple stuff for our situation . People have blamed Monte for the defenses shortcoming in the second part of last season and late in games...but the reason for it was lack of depth in the defensive line.

The depth issue with linemen is cumulative. It weres on them down the stretch. The lineman position is more like weightlifting , whereas the other positions are more like running . Anybody that has lifted weights nows how it feels to be overtrained , and the injuries start piling up.

If we can't have a 10 man dline rotation to cut the season cumulative reps down on our starters ...exotic formations can be used ( 3-2-6 ) Libebacker speed fronts, ect . If you can use enough of this stuff and be effective and spell you starting linemen some reps ...the may stay fresh longer and have less injuries down the stretch .

In any case ...no matter who is brought in ...they inherit the D line depth issue.
 
#23
#23
alwaysorange81 said:
I don't think he said "multiple 40". I think he said multiple sets but a 40 base. meaning 4 dlinemen then, you know, 42 (nickle), 43 (stack), 44 (you get the picture). I think Rucker wasnt listening right. I read his tweet right after the press conference and thought he had it wrong then too.
Click to expand...

Exactly the same thing. Both describe a defense based on a four man line and then whatever you need(or whatever you have) behind it. His point is that we don't have the linemen for a three man front.
 
#24
#24
A "40 Front" is 4 down linemen. Pretty much what we've always run - 2 DE's and 2 DT's.

Not much info besides that. We still don't know if we'll be more Zone based or Blitz/Man based. That's equally as important in projecting players, ie. Jacques Smith could be an OLB in a 4-3 Zone Blitz scheme, but it a Cover 2/Tampa 2, would likely be a DE.
 
#25
#25
TitanHope said:
A "40 Front" is 4 down linemen. Pretty much what we've always run - 2 DE's and 2 DT's.

Not much info besides that. We still don't know if we'll be more Zone based or Blitz/Man based. That's equally as important in projecting players, ie. Jacques Smith could be an OLB in a 4-3 Zone Blitz scheme, but it a Cover 2/Tampa 2, would likely be a DE.
Click to expand...

No way smith is a will or Sam in 4-3. I guess he might be in a 3-4 which can feature a lot of zone blitzs, maybe that's what you meant, but we're not going to run a. 3-4
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top