[HUbison]

Originally Posted by UtterBlitz

It seems that there are only 6 gaps per our local expert. 7 and 8 would be considered running outside the box or the line....I think. They would not be gaps but areas to be covered by the defensive ends or the safeties ...maybe... possibily..can you tell that I am guessing?

A friend of mine mentioned that the 4-3 defense would be better against the run and the 3-4 defense would be used against the pass since it put players in better position to defend each situation. Is this a fair statement? or a silly statement?

From the institute....

Originally Posted by CIAFT

On the first topic, yes the addition of a TE (or 2) on running plays can create extra gaps, however the 6 interior gaps must be accounted for even without TEs.

On the second topic, contrary to what some might say, in theory, the 3-4 is actually better against the run, while the 4-3 is a better pass defense. The 4-3's main pass rush threat comes from a pair of DE's, pass rush specialists. In the 3-4, that pressure comes from an OLB and either another OLB or an ILB, the line really doesn't typically get a lot of pressure in a 3-4 D. On the flipside, the 4-3 is usually a 1-gap defense with linemen covering only 1 gap. That leaves a couple of gaps to be covered by LBs. IF a lineman can be neutralized by an individual OL, then the gap is now opened to the FB/RB combo on the LB. In a 3-4, the linemen have 2 gaps to cover, which, in theory occupies more OL'men and leaving 4 LBs open to plug the holes instead of 3.

All of this is theory, mind you. In practice, players make plays in both the 3-4 and 4-3. However, on the chalkboard, the 3-4 is a run stop defense and the 4-3 is a pass stop defense.