3-4 one gap defense

[Techster]

Great read!


"With high tech information now available to us we've seen offenses evolve like never before. You no longer have to travel to another school and visit for weeks like Bear Bryant did when he installed the wishbone formation that Texas was using in the late 60's and early 70's. I see old wing-T misdirection and sweeps, variations of the power I schemes, triple option concepts, and west coast passing traits all coming out of a no huddle spread formation. The NCAA Championship game between Auburn and Oregon combined two explosive offenses that averaged over 40 points a game for the year. I've always believed running the football is essential in winning championships. On the year, Auburn averaged 284 yds. and Oregon 286 yds. on the ground. Those are good numbers. Each offense was diverse enough to overcome large deficits against quality opponents on their way to the championship game. Oregon threw for 244 yds. a game and Auburn averaged 214 yds. on the year. The misdirections and ball fakes that keep defenses on their heels combined with option plays and quick throws to speedy receivers create a dilemma for defenses. If you bring extra defenders into the box in order to attack this style offense, QB's have an easier time throwing from the shotgun to receivers that have out leveraged their defenders. Wider splits from these receivers usually allow QB's to see which defender will give up the most leverage before the ball is ever snapped. This lends toward shorter high percentage throws that easily raise completion percentages. So how do you stop these types of diverse, balanced offense

At Wofford, we determined that we were better at defending wing-T plays and option schemes from a 50 alignment. Using 3-4 personnel allowed us to put faster defenders on the field. For example, our defensive ends align over the offensive tackles. They rarely get double teamed so the higher priority for us is their quickness. Quick hands and feet make better pass rushers. Many of the offensive linemen we play against today are three hundred pounds or more. This past season our defensive ends weighed two hundred and thirty pounds. Their speed and quickness allowed us to not only rush the passer better but to gain leverage vs. cutoff or reach blocks. We get off those blocks quicker than if we played with heavier, slower footed defensive linemen. Our pursuit against scrambling QB's and receiver screens is better with athletic type ends that can run and almost always their stamina into the fourth quarter is better than a bigger lineman. I don't believe a bigger defensive end that weighs an additional thirty or forty pounds will put fear into an opposing lineman. An offensive lineman fears the guy that is too quick and athletic to block. No doubt the bigger and stronger you can get an athletic, quick end the better, but everyone is looking for that type of guy. If you settle for a smaller frame then you need to help him vs. the combination or double team blocks. We do this by not asking him to play down in the gap between the guard and tackle where he may be double teamed and knocked off the line into a scraping linebacker. We align him in a head up position on the tackle where double teams are less likely to happen. Our ends can be linebacker type bodies that play with their hand down. In the last eleven years we've had an All-Conference end eight times.

Our nose aligns over the center. This is the one defensive lineman that size matters to us. We still want good feet and lateral quickness but he will be doubled by the center and guard on the majority of plays. He must maintain his gap integrity without being knocked off the line of scrimmage. He must be quick enough to penetrate into our opponent's backfield if he gets a reach block from the center or scoop block from the guard. Our nose may be the most critical position in our defense. Finding a bigger guy that can still move quickly and with good balance is the hardest player for us to recruit. In an even front you need two of those guys. In an odd front you just need one of those guys on the field. Eight of the last eleven years we've had an All-Conference nose with several of those gaining All-American honors. Jack Teachey coaches our Defensive Line and has coached sixteen All-Conference defensive linemen in the last eleven years with six All-Americans.

Another reason we play a 3-4 front is that offenses don't easily distinguish which gap our nose or ends are playing. There is a distinct advantage to playing a front with a built in disguise. Our three defensive linemen have been very successful beating blocks and creating pressure out of this front. To complement our disguise up front we use two outside linebackers that stem in and out of the tackle box. Offenses have to account for either or both outside backers rushing from a protection standpoint and the QB must take into consideration the drop of either or both outside backers. Going back to the original concept of getting the quicker more athletic guys on the field, we recruit body types more similar to safeties than backers. There are a lot of guys out there that fit that mold. We are a school of about 1400 students with academic requirements that fall somewhere between the service academies and Ivey League schools. Finding the right fit for Wofford is essential to our success. We expand our recruiting pool by playing with four linebackers. In the recruiting process we can choose between fullbacks, running backs, safeties, or fast linebackers. When many defenses are turning to nickel and dime packages, we are able to leave our base personnel in the game vs. three or four wide-outs. Practice opportunities are maximized by playing with the same personnel. Blitz packages are easier to execute with the extra stand up player and pursuit turns up a notch with the faster players on the field. Nate Fuqua coaches our outside linebackers. He is a former Wofford All-American and four times All-Conference player. He is in the Wofford Athletics Hall of Fame.

Our inside backers generally are a little bigger than our outside backers. They take on blocks from linemen and backs just as our outside backers do, but usually in tighter space. We've been fortunate over the years to be able to move an inside backer to outside and vice versa. If you want to get your best eleven on the field, having the ability to interchange an inside or outside backer helps with depth as injuries occur. With the type of player we recruit at outside backer we've been fortunate to move some of them to safety when needed and some of our safeties to outside backer. Whether the flexibility for these position changes is a necessity or a luxury, it's an advantage either way. "

Awesome find!

Holy smokes. This is the guy I've been looking for to be our DC but didn't know existed until now...particularly because of those last 2 paragraphs.

1: I've always thought the 3-4 was the best fit for GT. LBs are so much easier to find than war daddy DLs. Pretty much spot with CNW's philosophy.

2: Recruit the best athletes, and move them to other positions if that maximizes their value to the team, and ability to get on the field. I've beat the drum that some of our players needed to be moved to other positions so much that you guys probably want to take that drum and throw it into the river. Guys like Jalen Johnson who get little playing time at DB because they're tad slow or don't have the range to play DB, but at 6'3 with very good speed for LB, why not give him a shot there? A LB like Brant Mitchell who's a liability playing in coverage...why put him in scheme (4-2-5) that emphasizes covering ground for LBs when that's his weakness. Put him in a 3-4 where he has help, and his strengths are maximized! Our recruiting pool opens up because of the way you can project some SAs to other spots on the field.

3: Scheme versatility. Defenses can do SO many things in a 3-4 because of the athletes used in that scheme. It's so much more versatile against the spread offenses, but it's also good against traditional power running teams. In an era where practice is limited and you want to get SAs the most reps, but also maximize those reps, CNW's philosophy does just that.

Don't know about you guys, but this is the first time in a LONG time I'm excited about spring because of the defense and not the offense.

 

[Oldgoldandwhite]

The 3-4 Woody plays is an update of the 5-4 made famous by Bud Wilkenson at Oklahoma in the 50's and tweaked by USC in 60's and used by many coaches in the 70's and 80's before the pros made the 4-3 popular. Over the years the OLB's and DB's have adapted to the more spreaded field passing game but the basics of the 3-4 are quite old.

We got a new HS coach in 1958 and a new D, a 5-2 with a rover and 3 deep and this D has transitioned to Woody's 3-4 (using more line stunts and slants and specialized hybred athletes at OLB). Main difference is nomenclature: The old DT's are now DE's , old DE's are OLB's, and the old rover is now the SS. I coached the 5-2 with a rover for 25 years and I could easily adjust to the Woody 3-4 which I really like.

Yep! Not much difference between the 5-2 and the 3-4 in my eyes. Bama ran the 5-2 last night, basically.

 

[1939hotmagic]

Scroll down the linked posts for info regarding 1-gap 3-4 approaches . . .

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2007958-nfl-101-the-basics-of-the-3-4-defensive-front

http://insidethepylon.com/football-...101/2016/05/31/itp-glossary-3-4-base-defense/

 

[ilovetheoption]

One interesting thing to me is that he lines his NG heads up on the center and his DE's heads up on the OT's.

The reason for this is that the offense won't know which way the defense is slanting, and thus it makes doubleteams harder to coordinate, because the guards don't know which side they'll be attacked on presnap.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

One interesting thing to me is that he lines his NG heads up on the center and his DE's heads up on the OT's.

The reason for this is that the offense won't know which way the defense is slanting, and thus it makes doubleteams harder to coordinate, because the guards don't know which side they'll be attacked on presnap.

When the OL guess wrong, you get a busted play or a sack. But when the OL guess right....

 

[ilovetheoption]

When the OL guess wrong, you get a busted play or a sack. But when the OL guess right....

You get a doubleteam, and perhaps still one that's harder to execute because of hesitation.

FWIW, I'll say this now before the season:

Sometimes, being a riskier defense means you're going to get gashed. Every now and then, an offense is going to guess right a lot in one game, and light GT up. The very best offenses are probably going to be able to take advantage of you being risky and punish you.

The defense will probably cost the team at least one game this year, just by being risky.

The thing is, the very best offenses were going to beat you if you were more conservative, as well.

I don't need a scheme to be perfect. Bud Foster's scheme isn't perfect. He leaves his corners on an island and dares you to beat them one on one. Some teams can, and they light up VT.

The thing is, MOST teams can't. If you've got an opportunity to have a schematic advantage MOST of the time, you go with it, and worry about the margins later.

GT isn't in the business right now of having NO flaws. That's who GT is. It's not who GT is going to be. If GT gets to the point where they're winning 9 or 10 games every season, and they just can't get QUITE over the top and make the playoffs because the scheme is too risky, you can worry about that, then, but that's not an issue at the moment.

I actually really respect Foster's model. Be aggressive, have an advantage more often than not, and get 3 extra wins and 1 extra loss a season. With those 2 bonus wins, build recognition and excitement, and recruit a little better, and get a 3rd bonus win a season. With 3 bonus wins a season, suddenly the picture is a LOT different.