three four

CornerBlitz

CornerBlitz

To be the man you have to beat the man
Joined
Mar 6, 2016
Messages
1,153
As we know, the next DC is an extremely important hire for CPJ. I believe Nate Woody is a 3-4 guy. Our defense under Groh was a major disappointment. I’m not personally a fan of the 3-4, as it has some fundamental weaknesses...particularly against the run. These become glaring deficiencies without a NT commanding a double team.

That said, I’m trying to remain open minded. On paper, our personnel seems to better fit a 3-4 than the 4-3 or 4-2-5 or 4 whatever. We could conceivably get more production from the tweeners we have at DE and the alignment allows us to put more speed on the field. Many pro teams run versions of the 3-4, which should provide some type of recruiting boost. There are also some intricate blitz packages....which were noticeably absent under CTR.

Like anything else, our defensive success likely depends on the DC’s ability to simply communicate his scheme in a manner allowing the kids to play fast, aggressive and instinctive football. Under Groh, I recall our guys struggling with their reads, often appearing confused and out of place.

That said, what do y’all think of moving to the 3-4? or does it matter? What are the positives/negatives....or should we bring back Vad Lee?
 
FWIW I don’t think it is a good fit for our current personnel.
 
CornerBlitz said:
As we know, the next DC is an extremely important hire for CPJ. I believe Nate Woody is a 3-4 guy. Our defense under Groh was a major disappointment. I’m not personally a fan of the 3-4, as it has some fundamental weaknesses...particularly against the run. These become glaring deficiencies without a NT commanding a double team.

That said, I’m trying to remain open minded. On paper, our personnel seems to better fit a 3-4 than the 4-3 or 4-2-5 or 4 whatever. We could conceivably get more production from the tweeners we have at DE and the alignment allows us to put more speed on the field. Many pro teams run versions of the 3-4, which should provide some type of recruiting boost. There are also some intricate blitz packages....which were noticeably absent under CTR.

Like anything else, our defensive success likely depends on the DC’s ability to simply communicate his scheme in a manner allowing the kids to play fast, aggressive and instinctive football. Under Groh, I recall our guys struggling with their reads, often appearing confused and out of place.

That said, what do y’all think of moving to the 3-4? or does it matter? What are the positives/negatives....or should we bring back Vad Lee?
Click to expand...


As it is for any defensive scheme it depends on your personnel & your defensive coaching staff to teach the system inside and out. You're right about a dominant nose man,
 
*
Does GT have a man that can be a NT?

The 3 front linemen for the 3-4 are usually large. The nose man in the 3-4 will challenge the offense's center for dominance, control the gaps between the center and his guards, guarding for rush through those gaps.
 
I have only see the Woody D version once so I don't claim to be an expert. It seems his style is much more aggressive than Groh. It was even mentioned during the game that Woody had said himself they don't have much size and he wants to beat you with speed. Any aggressive defense will be leaving itself open to busted plays if people can't stay in the right place. That said, I welcome it. I much prefer something aggressive over lay back and wait for them to mess up.
 
I dont know much about the 3-4 other than everyone who is successful at it (mostly NFL) uses very large linemen and OLB/DE hybrids. Those guys dont grow on trees.
 
Woody does not run the same 3-4 as Groh, based on my limited research. I don't believe he relies on two gap linemen, so I don't see any personnel concerns aside from those we would have under any different scheme.
 
BainbridgeJacket said:
Woody does not run the same 3-4 as Groh, based on my limited research. I don't believe he relies on two gap linemen, so I don't see any personnel concerns aside from those we would have under any different scheme.
Click to expand...

From what I remember of the research I did when groh was here, groh was the only guy in FBS to run a 2 gap 3-4. Grantham at uga ran a 1 gap, and Kelly ran a kind of 3-4 over 1 gap when he took over for groh. Even in the NFL it seemed to be used situationally, setting up individual linemen to run 2gap if they were good enough to control both.
 
BainbridgeJacket said:
Woody does not run the same 3-4 as Groh, based on my limited research. I don't believe he relies on two gap linemen, so I don't see any personnel concerns aside from those we would have under any different scheme.
Click to expand...

Thumbs up to this. We did not have the horses to 2-gap the 3-4 like what the Patriots do. If you 1-gap it then schematically it's not that much different than a 4-3. 1-gap is more about penetration and disruption from the DL. 2-gap is about eating blacks, stonewalling at the LOS and having the LBs run free and make plays.
 
GSUsTALON said:
*
Does GT have a man that can be a NT?

The 3 front linemen for the 3-4 are usually large. The nose man in the 3-4 will challenge the offense's center for dominance, control the gaps between the center and his guards, guarding for rush through those gaps.
Click to expand...

Yes we actually have a rather large individual on the team, name of Adams
 
JoeCakeEater said:
Thumbs up to this. We did not have the horses to 2-gap the 3-4 like what the Patriots do. If you 1-gap it then schematically it's not that much different than a 4-3. 1-gap is more about penetration and disruption from the DL. 2-gap is about eating backs, stonewalling at the LOS and having the LBs run free and make plays.
Click to expand...

Ftfy
 
JoeCakeEater said:
2-gap is about eating blacks
Click to expand...

96f9dd53fa7e40bf581a295fac92da98--english-test-meme-rage-comics.jpg



....I think I was trying to say "blocks"
 
H-town said:
We never will be successful with the 3-4. Already tried it. Didn’t work. Dominant NTs go to the factories not Tech.
Click to expand...
If that is the criteria to what we run as a defense, we're screwed. We've tried them all and none of them worked.
 
App States NT was a tiny dude, and they stonewalled Toledo. Did it by changing alignments a lot within the 3-4 while still being assignment sound.

I only watched the bowl game.
 
Just because 3-4 hasn't worked in the past doesn't mean it won't work in the future. Heck, the 4-3 hasn't worked either.

As long as recruiting improves and the staff gets good athletes to play, the defense will improve regardless of scheme.
 
I watched the App State bowl. Their 3-4 usually had one LB up on the line in 2 pt stance so not much difference from regular 4 man front to me. Sometimes both DE were in 2 point stance.
 
GSUsTALON said:
*
Does GT have a man that can be a NT?

The 3 front linemen for the 3-4 are usually large. The nose man in the 3-4 will challenge the offense's center for dominance, control the gaps between the center and his guards, guarding for rush through those gaps.
Click to expand...


I think Brandon Adams would be a good NT
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top