Why no linebackers?

#76
#76
DD4ME said:
I am not that dude but my mom used to give me the stink eye if I ever used irregardless.
I don't even recall the technical term for it, double negative maybe?
I'll save the stink eye and advise to just use regardless.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Saying you are not that guy, while you are being that guy..... And using "stink eye" while attempting a grammar lesson... Great post....
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#78
#78
Orngeblood said:
Saying you are not that guy, while you are being that guy..... And using "stink eye" while attempting a grammar lesson... Great post....
Posted via VolNation Mobile[/

I'm not cut out for it and you can check my posts I don't call people out for squat. Just one of those things drilled into my head that jumps out. My PSA is concluded. :)
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...
 
#79
#79
VolinArizona said:
I think 6, and potentially 7, DBs in ANY class regardless of current talent is a ton for a base 4-DB system. I think we'll see a ton of base nickel.
Click to expand...

We are signing alot of DBS because we are painfully thin. Several times the coaches said we were staying in base because they werent comfortable with the nickel back they could put out there. Read- with a couple injuries, we couldn't even field 5 competent(not good) DBS.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#80
#80
DD4ME said:
Orngeblood said:
Saying you are not that guy, while you are being that guy..... And using "stink eye" while attempting a grammar lesson... Great post....
Posted via VolNation Mobile[/

I'm not cut out for it and you can check my posts I don't call people out for squat. Just one of those things drilled into my head that jumps out. My PSA is concluded. :)

I will agree, you are not cut out for it.. :)
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...
 
#81
#81
we might see some 4-2-5 but there is no way that will be our base defense this year. Maybe in the future but other than a couple of players most of our secondary is going to be very young this year. You dont want to have 5 young and inexperienced DB's trying to tackle Trent Richardson. that could get very ugly.
 
#82
#82
namasteVOLfans said:
we might see some 4-2-5 but there is no way that will be our base defense this year. Maybe in the future but other than a couple of players most of our secondary is going to be very young this year. You dont want to have 5 young and inexperienced DB's trying to tackle Trent Richardson. that could get very ugly.
Click to expand...

We couldn't stop the run with a 4-3 with our roster this year, why would anyone think a move to basically add an extra safety and remove a lb be eminent? A 4-2-5 requires a heck of a d line
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#83
#83
Orngeblood said:
We couldn't stop the run with a 4-3 with our roster this year, why would anyone think a move to basically add an extra safety and remove a lb be eminent? A 4-2-5 requires a heck of a d line
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

i would take an extra LB over a Safety any day if im trying to slow down the run which is what the SEC is all about.
 
#85
#85
Orngeblood said:
We couldn't stop the run with a 4-3 with our roster this year, why would anyone think a move to basically add an extra safety and remove a lb be eminent? A 4-2-5 requires a heck of a d line
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

A 4-2-5 is an uncommon scheme to run as a base tcu does it very well. The thing about it is that is provides flexibility in how you can run and pass blitz a team making it harder for the offense to block correctly. Not saying that we are moving to it just pointing out that the 4-3 defence is the best to stop the run.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#88
#88
Brass_Vols said:
I meant 4-3 isn't the best to stop the run
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Why not? You mean as opposed to the 3-4, or are we talking 46? I think it depends on the personnel. With the best personnel possible I'll take a 4-3 against the run.
 
#89
#89
1) AJ Johnson is being recruited as a MLB. Doesn't mean he won't move to OLB or DE but for now he's being recruited for the inside.

2) Dawson is being recruited as either a SAM or Mike - meaning Strong side OLB or MLB.

3) We are not moving to a base 4-2-5 but Dooley and Wilcox have both said many times that they would like to run more nickel but didn't have the personnel for it last year, hence the recruitment of more DB's.
 
#90
#90
Brass_Vols said:
A 4-2-5 is an uncommon scheme to run as a base tcu does it very well. The thing about it is that is provides flexibility in how you can run and pass blitz a team making it harder for the offense to block correctly. Not saying that we are moving to it just pointing out that the 4-3 defence is the best to stop the run.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

I agree that 3-4 and 4-2-5 can both be effective defenses when employed correctly with the proper personell. I think your statement about blitzing probably applies more to the 3-4 (or really any base 3 defense) than the 4-2-5. The 4-2-5, like a 4-3, would ideally have the line handling rush duties without needing the blitz, while a 3-4, generally will have a lb coming as well as the line. A 4-2-5, at the heart, trades a lb for a ss. This means you have ss generally playing more run support than you would in a 4-3. Tcu plays alot of passing teams on it's schedule and the 4-2-5 is a good fit for that. A 4-2-5 gives a good base that won't require them to constantly play a nickel package.

The most effective offenses right now are either very balanced or actually prefer to run the ball. Look at auburn and Oregon. If you can't stop the run, they will run all day long. Even a pass oriented coach like spurrier shows that his offense is much more effective when he has lattimore and can run. Also look at florida when they were winning. Yes, they passed, but the offense was run driven. Look what happened when they stopped being able to run. Look at even miss st this year.

The point is that more and more good teams are run first. If tcu faced the teams teen does each year, I doubt they would stay with a 4-2-5, because all things being equal, it is not as good as a 4-3 at stopping the run. Ask almost any coach if they know a run is coming would they rather have an extra lb or a ss and I know what they will say.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#92
#92
Orngeblood said:
I agree that 3-4 and 4-2-5 can both be effective defenses when employed correctly with the proper personell. I think your statement about blitzing probably applies more to the 3-4 (or really any base 3 defense) than the 4-2-5. The 4-2-5, like a 4-3, would ideally have the line handling rush duties without needing the blitz, while a 3-4, generally will have a lb coming as well as the line. A 4-2-5, at the heart, trades a lb for a ss. This means you have ss generally playing more run support than you would in a 4-3. Tcu plays alot of passing teams on it's schedule and the 4-2-5 is a good fit for that. A 4-2-5 gives a good base that won't require them to constantly play a nickel package.

The most effective offenses right now are either very balanced or actually prefer to run the ball. Look at auburn and Oregon. If you can't stop the run, they will run all day long. Even a pass oriented coach like spurrier shows that his offense is much more effective when he has lattimore and can run. Also look at florida when they were winning. Yes, they passed, but the offense was run driven. Look what happened when they stopped being able to run. Look at even miss st this year.

The point is that more and more good teams are run first. If tcu faced the teams teen does each year, I doubt they would stay with a 4-2-5, because all things being equal, it is not as good as a 4-3 at stopping the run. Ask almost any coach if they know a run is coming would they rather have an extra lb or a ss and I know what they will say.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

as the the blitzes can come from basically any of the three safetys or 2 corners and nothing is lost in coverage the variation of blitzes is far superior in the 4-2-5 because anyone can come at anytime. I don't want to sound like I'm dissing the 4-3 just trying to say it's not the best to stop the run. Run blocking is about getting hats on hats and if the offence is confused by the presnap motions of the defence (patriots in the early half of 2000) the unblocked men will blow up the play. It's why alot of programs are switching to the 3-4 because it's hard to know who you are supposed to block and the same principles apply to the 4-2-5 only the presnap motion is in the defensive backfield not the front 7.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#93
#93
A 3-4 works when your talent is superior to the offensive talent or when you are dealing with an easily confused offensive group or when the offenses rarely see it.

There is a reason why, gimmicks aside, the vast majority of NFL teams have run the 4-3, or a 4-3 variant such as the 46, for 40 years.

The nickel is good for what it is for, which is stopping the pass. It is a one dimensional defense. Can it stop the run? Of course, with the right personnel. Is that its strength? Absolutely not.

I can see us running a lot of nickel in the next few years, because there is a time and place for it. Probably about a third of all plays are obvious, or at least probable, passing downs. That is when a good nickel package can make a huge difference, as long as we are competent enough in stopping the run out of it to prevent us from being taken advantage of.

I think we will stick to the 4-3, and with good reason.
 
#94
#94
RespectTradition said:
A 3-4 works when your talent is superior to the offensive talent or when you are dealing with an easily confused offensive group or when the offenses rarely see it.

There is a reason why, gimmicks aside, the vast majority of NFL teams have run the 4-3, or a 4-3 variant such as the 46, for 40 years.

The nickel is good for what it is for, which is stopping the pass. It is a one dimensional defense. Can it stop the run? Of course, with the right personnel. Is that its strength? Absolutely not.

I can see us running a lot of nickel in the next few years, because there is a time and place for it. Probably about a third of all plays are obvious, or at least probable, passing downs. That is when a good nickel package can make a huge difference, as long as we are competent enough in stopping the run out of it to prevent us from being taken advantage of.

I think we will stick to the 4-3, and with good reason.
Click to expand...

Both Super Bowl teams and the Broncos, Patriots, Browns, Chargers, Chiefs, Jets, Dolphins, Ravens, Bills, Cardinals, 49ers, Redskins and Texans disagree. That's just about half the league including a number of very stout defenses.
 
#95
#95
Smokefatty said:
Both Super Bowl teams and the Broncos, Patriots, Browns, Chargers, Chiefs, Jets, Dolphins, Ravens, Bills, Cardinals, 49ers, Redskins and Texans disagree. That's just about half the league including a number of very stout defenses.
Click to expand...

A year or two doesn't make a long term trend.

The 3-4 comes and goes in the NFL. There will often be several years go by where no one runs it. Then, someone starts. The offenses aren't used to seeing it. It is disruptive and works great because noone wants to revamp their offense for the one or two games a year they play a 3-4 team. Others copycat. They have success as well, but rarely equal to the trend setter. Then, the league achieves a certain degree of saturation. The novelty is gone. Teams have redesigned offenses and game plans. The 3-4 is exposed. Everyone goes back to the 4-3. Its cyclical.
 
#96
#96
Brass_Vols said:
as the the blitzes can come from basically any of the three safetys or 2 corners and nothing is lost in coverage the variation of blitzes is far superior in the 4-2-5 because anyone can come at anytime. I don't want to sound like I'm dissing the 4-3 just trying to say it's not the best to stop the run. Run blocking is about getting hats on hats and if the offence is confused by the presnap motions of the defence (patriots in the early half of 2000) the unblocked men will blow up the play. It's why alot of programs are switching to the 3-4 because it's hard to know who you are supposed to block and the same principles apply to the 4-2-5 only the presnap motion is in the defensive backfield not the front 7.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

First let me say almost any reasonable scheme given good coaching and coreect talented personnel can be effective. Patterson has done an excellent job with the 4-2-5 at tcu. But most defenses are biased one way or the other based on the scheme yes, but mainly in the personnel they employ. Given equal tallent and coaching and proper personnel a 4-3 is better at stop the run and a 4-2-5 is better against the pass.

I understand completely what you are saying about blitzs confusing the blocking assignments and agree completely that it is an effective tool for rushing the passer. Youve generally got a central target in the qb back there where you can overload one side with blitzers. The qb has less opportunity to get his blocking back lined up on the correct side, etc.

But when it comes to power running or option football i clearly will chose a third lb over a second ss. Everytime. The offense can now pick the side to attack. Even if the defense shifts to the strong side, i know against a 4-2-5 i have one less lb on the side to block. Generally a running play designed to block all but one guys and then its up to the runner to get by that one guy. As an offensive coordinator id love to have that one guy be the free safety and not the strong safety.

If i run a stretch play and my te seals a lb and ive got a blocking back out there either facing a ss or an olb/sam id much rather block the safety. Give another example - you have a qb/rb pitch option play to the outside, i would much rather have an olb/sam, not a strong safety, trying to bring down the qb or the rb. Especially since more and more mobile qbs are in the 230-250lb range now.

This is not an indictment of the 4-2-5 and praise of the 4-3, its just a comment on their inherent strengths.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#97
#97
Brass_Vols said:
as the the blitzes can come from basically any of the three safetys or 2 corners and nothing is lost in coverage the variation of blitzes is far superior in the 4-2-5 because anyone can come at anytime. I don't want to sound like I'm dissing the 4-3 just trying to say it's not the best to stop the run. Run blocking is about getting hats on hats and if the offence is confused by the presnap motions of the defence (patriots in the early half of 2000) the unblocked men will blow up the play. It's why alot of programs are switching to the 3-4 because it's hard to know who you are supposed to block and the same principles apply to the 4-2-5 only the presnap motion is in the defensive backfield not the front 7.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#100
#100
Brass_Vols said:
as the the blitzes can come from basically any of the three safetys or 2 corners and nothing is lost in coverage the variation of blitzes is far superior in the 4-2-5 because anyone can come at anytime. I don't want to sound like I'm dissing the 4-3 just trying to say it's not the best to stop the run. Run blocking is about getting hats on hats and if the offence is confused by the presnap motions of the defence (patriots in the early half of 2000) the unblocked men will blow up the play. It's why alot of programs are switching to the 3-4 because it's hard to know who you are supposed to block and the same principles apply to the 4-2-5 only the presnap motion is in the defensive backfield not the front 7.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

As to your point about the 3-4, your correct that the 3-4 is effective aginst the run, but its not because of the uncertainty, its because it employs radically different personnel. A 3-4 has a lot less in common with the 4-2-5 than a 4-3 does. An effective 3-4 requires much larger ends (like darius at ala, say 275-280lbs) and large nose gard (ala cody)
and much bigger lbs, almost hybrid defensive ends/linebackers. Its this greater size in the ends and backers that allows it to be successful against the run while giving up a down lineman .

Im oversimplifying, but a 4-2-5 is much more like a 4-3 with a ss subbed for a lb. You ared correct that the 3-4 and 4-2-5 rely more on blitzes to create a passrush, but thats where the similarities end.

I personally think that a tallented, well coached 3-4 with proper personel is the best, most flexible defensive scheme there is.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top