No announcement yet.

3-4/ 4-3 defense

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • 3-4/ 4-3 defense

    I do not know much about defense since i played offense ever since i was a kid.

    Can someone tell me the positives and negatives of a 4-3 defense
    And can someone tell me the positives and negatives of a 3-4 defense

    Which formation would you like to see the Rams running?

  • #2
    Re: 3-4/ 4-3 defense

    As I understand it the 3-4 defense relies more on a three man rush while dropping more guys into coverage around the middle of the field. By taking the mid field passes away (idealy) you force the quarterback to hold onto the ball longer, allowing the three man rush to be more effective. Of course your front three needs to be a different kind of player than your front four in a 4-3.

    I don't particularly see one defense as more effective than the other, they both have glaring weaknesses and a break down in one part of the defense in either case can be exploited for a big play by the offense.
    "I've been saving the Universe for over a thousand years. I figure it owes me just this once."


    • #3
      Re: 3-4/ 4-3 defense

      actually, the 3-4 will almost always still use a four man rush, its just that you dont know which one of those linebackers is going to be coming. Thats why a lot of OLBs in the 3-4 are converted college defensive ends, such as Terrel Suggs and DeMarcus Ware

      id like to see the Rams run a 4-3, because the team simply doesnt have the personnel to run a 3-4 right now. For example, they dont have the big NT required


      • #4
        Re: 3-4/ 4-3 defense

        Well, right, I should have said four man front, rather than rush.
        "I've been saving the Universe for over a thousand years. I figure it owes me just this once."


        • #5
          Re: 3-4/ 4-3 defense

          The 4-3 is more of a conventional defense that lines up four true defensive linemen (bigger, more stout looking guys with emphasis on primarly lining up in a 3 point stance.

          3-4 is more of a hybrid type of defense that mostly uses more athletic and versatile players in the base of hte defense. (you ever heard the name placed on a guy coming out of college of tweener? it's a guy that is a de/lb and primarly used in 3/4 defense that can be used to rush the passer off the edge or drop in coverage.3/4 defenses can usually dial up more exotic and more versatile blitzes for the most part beacuse of the combo of atheticism of the players in the defense.
          I personally like a 4-3 since I played in one in HS and college so I'm a lil biased towards it lol but 3-4 can be very effective.
          But there are some basic facts about both of em..


          • #6
            Re: 3-4/ 4-3 defense

            It seems to me like all the successful defenses now a days run a 3-4 :/


            Related Topics


            • San Diego Ram
              3-4 and 4-3 defense
              by San Diego Ram
              I am not sure where this post goes....

              I know the Rams run a 4-3 defense, but when watching other teams play, they have different defenses.

              The Colts have a cover 2 I believe.
              The Steelers have a 3-4
              along with the chargers, cowboys and patriots. there are others, but I'm not going to list all the teams.

              I am wondering what are the advantages and disadvantages of of 3-4 and a 4-3. I remember reading posts in the past stating the rams should convert to a 3-4 defense. some players play better in a 3-4 than a 4-3.

              Now I'm not saying we should convert, i am just trying to see what are the differences between the two. Thank You
              -10-05-2010, 09:18 PM
            • ramsplaya16
              on Rams 4-3 Defense.
              by ramsplaya16
              from Profootballweekly:

              The Ramsí defense isnít being discussed much lately with more concerns these days regarding the teamís offense, but weíre told defensive coordinator Jim Haslett is leaning toward retaining a 4-3 base scheme, with 3-4 elements liberally incorporated in passing situations.

              I know another topic on the Rams defense. I thought it noteworthy enough to post this. I know alot of posters want the switch to a
              3-4 defense. I think this is what we will see.
              -01-21-2008, 04:58 PM
            • Guest's Avatar
              Rams Should Run The 3-4 More
              by Guest
              Move Leonard Little to play some OLB and DE in passing situations. The 3-4 also forces you to bring pressure almost on ever play. That is, you can't just rush 3 linemen for the most part so I think it inherently makes for a more aggressive defense.

              Then finally, the 4 linebackers allows you to really help your defensive backs in coverage and by confusing the QB. We could also play Carriker at his natural position - Defensive end on occasion. He's the perfect 3-4 defensive end.

              On passing downs we ran Glover at the nose spot! lol
              -11-26-2007, 01:39 PM
            • AvengerRam_old
              I see a 3-4 defense in the Rams' future
              by AvengerRam_old
              First, let me be clear. I don't think the Rams have the right personnel to run a 3-4 defense right now. However, I do see the some building blocks who, with a couple of additions, could be part of a 3-4 unit.

              Here's how I see it:

              DE: In a 3-4 lineup, you need larger DEs who can hold up at the point of attack and stop the run. Adam Carriker would be a very good fit in this role. Victor Adeyanju could be as well.

              NT: The 3-4 DT needs to be a big, space-eating, run-stuffing kind of player. Clifton Ryan is our best candidate for this role. We'd probably need to add another NT to the roster... some 350 lb. sumo wrestler type (who often are available in mid to late rounds of the draft).

              OLB: The ends need to be good edge rushers and versitile enough to play in space as well. Chris Long fits this role (don't get me wrong, he's doing a fine job so far as a 4-3 DE, but I think he could succeed in either type of defense). Leonard Little could also fit, though his time is dwindling. Quinton Culberson is a possible candidate as well. Most likely, though, the Rams would probably draft someone for this role, as colleges are developing more and more of the DeMarcus Ware/Shawn Merriman types.

              ILB: Witherspoon would make a very good 3-4 ILB. We'd need another one.

              With a new coaching staff likely to be in the Rams' near future, this is something to think about.
              -09-16-2008, 07:27 AM
            • Curly Horns
              Defending the defense while offending the pessimists
              by Curly Horns

              Defending the defense might seem like a tough task to a lot of Rams fans these days. Why I choose to take on such a low, down, dirty task is beyond me. Maybe I'm the consummate Rams fan. The type that has always been in love with a bit of an underdog. Hey, if you have been a Rams fan for very long, you know what I'm talking about.

              So where does one begin to defend this defense amongst all the pessimism? Since we can not predict the future, I say history is the best option.

              Most of us remember what it was like to be a perennial basement dweller only to rise to the top after the '99 season with a shiny new Lombardi and high hopes for a repeat the following season.

              And why not a repeat? We had the GSOT and a pretty good defense. Granted the defense was not the best, but it was no slouch. The majority of defensive starters returned, the defensive coordinator returned, the same scheme returned, and yet we all know that the bottom fell out in 2000.

              Hmmm. Just goes to show how easily a group of players can rise and fall from season to season. Scheme, coaching, talent level are certainly factors, but ultimately it comes from within the group of players. They can rise. History has proven it.

              So how good does this defense really need to be to win a championship? Our own Rams history and very recent history has proven they do not need to be the best defense in the league. They simply need to be good enough when it matters most.

              Let's look a little deeper into that magical season of '99. There are those who claim that your best defense is a potent offense. I'm quite sure this is not entirely true. However, we have seen it work to our advantage. The potent offense of the '99 squad certainly helped the defense. The offense was able to score quickly and often. This put the defense in a good position against opposing offenses as they were forced to play catch-up. Our 2007 offense has the ability to be quite potent. This can help the 2007 defense. History has proven it.

              Now Let's look at recent history. Most of us know that Baltimore had the #1 defense last season and where that got them. Did most of you also know that the Raiders had the number #3 defense in the league? I'm sure we all know where that got them. Our Rams of course came in at #23. Not good enough, some might say. Okay let's look further. Remember the Colts of last season? They finished at #21. Well, the Rams have no pass rush, some say. True, to some extent, however they were #8 in pass defense and #3 against receiving. Ah, but the Rams run defense is crap, some might add. Well that is correct. The Rams run defense finished just ahead of the last place Colts run defense.

              Hmmm. How good does the defense need to be to win a championship? Certainly not the best. History has proven it.

              Ultimately the best way to defend our...
              -03-12-2007, 08:43 PM