On another thread, I saw someone post that maybe we should switch to a 4-3 so I wanted to ask the more knowledgeable fans a question (or two)
1) What is the difference in responsibilities between the OLB in a 3-4 vs a DE in a 4-3?
2) Does a switch fit our LB group better or not?
Now before anyone says it, I know a switch can take a few years to do properly in order to get the right players and for those players to learn their assignments. You never do a switch like this mid-year.
I am not advocating for a switch, this is simply a discussion on alignments.
Their responsibilities can be the exact same thing on any given play, but I tend to think of a 3-4 OLB as an EDGE guy who will go all-out in rushing the QB MORE OFTEN than a 4-3 DE. The 4-3 DE will MORE OFTEN play the run-pass on a more balanced/equal basis.
But I could be wrong.
Wink uses so many different alignments and loves his DBs so much, that he doesn't really use either enough to call it a base defense.
Their responsibilities can be the exact same thing on any given play, but I tend to think of a 3-4 OLB as an EDGE guy who will go all-out in rushing the QB MORE OFTEN than a 4-3 DE. The 4-3 DE will MORE OFTEN play the run-pass on a more balanced/equal basis.
But I could be wrong.
I think in 4-3/3-4, the DE and OLB are interchangeable edge defenders. I.e., KT in a 3-4 is a stand up OLB defender, but in 4-3, he is a hand in ground rusher (like Strahan).
The biggest difference in 4-3 is that it require 3 good LBs (1 MB, and 2 ILBs). Where as a 3-4 or 2-4 only requires 2 ILBs. So harder to find good LBs for a 4-3 system.
But I could be wrong also.
Wink uses so many different alignments and loves his DBs so much, that he doesn't really use either enough to call it a base defense.
I had the same thought. When we traded for Simmons, we said this was a positionless defense. If we make that argument, isn't trying to discuss moving from a 3-4 to a 4-3 baseless?
I don't think the front 7 formations matter as much in the modern NFL b/c of the multiple secondary packages taking LBs off the filed, but modern 4-3 Defenses seem to favor bigger DEs (TJ Watt) and 3-4 Defenses seem to favor faster LBs.
The Giants D seems like it has enough guys to play "positionless" football, but in all honesty they might play faster if they had defined roles/responsibilities and less to worry about from down to down.
And when we were running a 4-3 defense, you guys wanted to go back to the 3-4.
This is more of an even vs odd d-line alignment. Ultimately a 3-4 is a 5 man line.
And when we were running a 4-3 defense, you guys wanted to go back to the 3-4.
You're probably right but maybe if Wink ever wanted to try it...
DE Leonard Williams
DT Dexter Lawrence
DT A'Shawn Robinson
DE Jihad Ward or Boogie Basham (neither ideal)
SAM Kayvon Thibodeaux
MIKE Bobby Okereke
WILL Azeez Ojulari or Isaiah Simmons
Football 101: The Defensive Front Seven - ( New Window )
Again, Wink doesn't run traditional defenses regardless. Naming his defense 3-4 or 4-3 is a futile exercise. At different times, he has different numbers of DLs, LBs, and DBs on the field.
There is a need in some people to label and categorize. I suspect it's built into their DNA.
Quote:
don't have the personnel to run a 4-3 defense.
And when we were running a 4-3 defense, you guys wanted to go back to the 3-4.
You're probably right but maybe if Wink ever wanted to try it...
DE Leonard Williams
DT Dexter Lawrence
DT A'Shawn Robinson
DE Jihad Ward or Boogie Basham (neither ideal)
SAM Kayvon Thibodeaux
MIKE Bobby Okereke
WILL Azeez Ojulari or Isaiah Simmons
KT as ILB reminds of when we had Mathias Kiwanuka out of position at LB when he was a natural DE, since we were loaded at DE. I remember those "can't have enough edge rusher" days... now we have none.
I don't think the front 7 formations matter as much in the modern NFL b/c of the multiple secondary packages taking LBs off the filed, but modern 4-3 Defenses seem to favor bigger DEs (TJ Watt) and 3-4 Defenses seem to favor faster LBs.
The Giants D seems like it has enough guys to play "positionless" football, but in all honesty they might play faster if they had defined roles/responsibilities and less to worry about from down to down.
Sy thought the same as you a couple years ago after the Tampa Bay game with getting more rigid with a base.
We may run four down linemen, but do we ever actually run a 4-3?
I've run this site for almost three decades.
Every time any New York Giants defense struggles, you want to change it schematically. It's like clockwork.
To the point where BBIers were furious Spags was running a 4-3.
Again, Wink doesn't run traditional defenses regardless. Naming his defense 3-4 or 4-3 is a futile exercise. At different times, he has different numbers of DLs, LBs, and DBs on the field.
There is a need in some people to label and categorize. I suspect it's built into their DNA.
Eric, question, as we cannot label this defense and we all call it a position less defense, isn’t that the cause of our struggles? Shouldn’t we commit to one or the other?
This is Wink, who ran top tier defenses for four years in Baltimore.
Again, if the defense wasn't struggling for the first two games, you wouldn't even be asking this question.
Last year, Wink somehow managed to put together a viable defense with castoffs. It was also a severely unit with its best players being sidelined except for Dexter Lawrence, who Wink has turned into a stud.
Wink will adjust, but you're using a rhetorical exercise to try to fix a larger problem.
Strange.
Well, that depends on who is calling the plays...
Quote:
Those guys aren't really 4-3 defensive ends.
Again, Wink doesn't run traditional defenses regardless. Naming his defense 3-4 or 4-3 is a futile exercise. At different times, he has different numbers of DLs, LBs, and DBs on the field.
There is a need in some people to label and categorize. I suspect it's built into their DNA.
Eric, question, as we cannot label this defense and we all call it a position less defense, isn’t that the cause of our struggles? Shouldn’t we commit to one or the other?
The problem with this defense hasn't been that players don't know their assignments b/c it's a position less defense. It's been an execution problem.
Someone with more expertise can correct me, but to my eyes it looked like - at least for the first 3 quarters against the Cardinals - that the ILBs/OLBs aren't executing properly - as in, not setting the edge, not filling the right gap, missing tackles, being hesitant when they need to attack, etc.
I realize that Wink is a great coordinator Eric, not saying he sucks atall. I am just trying to understand the 60 points in 6 quarters.
Quote:
when San Fran dominates the Giants OL on Thursday, we'll be back to Daboll and Kafka suck.
I realize that Wink is a great coordinator Eric, not saying he sucks atall. I am just trying to understand the 60 points in 6 quarters.
The defense didn't throw a pick six or allow a punt being blocked for a touchdown.
Defense has not been good, but the offense and special teams have contributed to points against and bad field position.
Quote:
don't have the personnel to run a 4-3 defense.
And when we were running a 4-3 defense, you guys wanted to go back to the 3-4.
You're probably right but maybe if Wink ever wanted to try it...
DE Leonard Williams
DT Dexter Lawrence
DT A'Shawn Robinson
DE Jihad Ward or Boogie Basham (neither ideal)
SAM Kayvon Thibodeaux
MIKE Bobby Okereke
WILL Azeez Ojulari or Isaiah Simmons
So you're suggesting a 4-3 under (referring to Eric's post on the Defensive Front Seven) with Kayvon as the SAM?
Based on Rams, hard to predict SF performance on D. Rams led most offensive catagories (yds, 1st downs, 3rds, TOP, passing yds, fewest punts). (2) Stafford picks a large difference. SF had 1 sack by a LB. Underwhelming...
In a 4-3, your talent is at DE, MIKE, and WILL, and is predicated on SPEED. Your DEs are the rush, your MIKE and WILL hunt down the ball as the edges contain and funnel inside to them.
KT and Ojulari are definitely not 4-3 fits at SAM or WILL, you'd be wasting them as square pegs in round holes. Okereke is the player would do fine in either front, but it would take time to reverse the build, just like it has to get to this point where their personnel is better suited to 3-4 base. Read Joey's thread.
In a 4-3, your talent is at DE, MIKE, and WILL, and is predicated on SPEED. Your DEs are the rush, your MIKE and WILL hunt down the ball as the edges contain and funnel inside to them.
KT and Ojulari are definitely not 4-3 fits at SAM or WILL, you'd be wasting them as square pegs in round holes. Okereke is the player would do fine in either front, but it would take time to reverse the build, just like it has to get to this point where their personnel is better suited to 3-4 base. Read Joey's thread.
Well Jon that's the thing in that the multiple approach doesn't appear to be working and hasn't for a number of years; we're nominally a 3-4 base but switch to a 2-4 when we don't have the personnel to run it well.
Wink's calling a very weird game so far, he's trying to protect the youth, namely the secondary. But, the front seven are also off to a slow start, and the lack of run defense and pass rush makes it all much harder.
Starting with high expectations only fuels the lack of perspective when a unit gets off to a slow start.
They're working through it, hopefully the last 20 minutes in AZ are an indicator they're waking up and beginning to play on instinct.
I am concerned that we don't have the personnel for it.
It involves blitzing and getting home plus having physical corners and LBs who can cover the middle of the field
The Cardinals gauged us in the middle for 2 quarters and Athens first drive if the 3rd.
Not sure exactly what changed but it was just in the knick of time
So in that case everyone's possibly two-gapping by engaging the lineman head-on and trying to read the flow?