The new coaching staff seems bent on playing some form of the 3-4 this upcoming season while making a complete transformation in the coming years. I may think the change actually is not that hard and will take a short amount of time, but I do think that the 3-4 defense will not utilize some of our more talented players. The 3-4 Defense requires line-man that can occupy blockers, fill gaps, and in general take up space. The ?play-making? responsibilities are usually gifted to the Outside Rushers and Inside Linebackers. Without responsible lineman, a 3-4 will prove ineffective and will cause for quicker offensive lineman (such as Kevin Mawae) to get to the second level with ease. In this sense the Nose Guard/Tackle is the most important player in a 3-4. He is in the middle and will substantially affect the offenses scheme. He has to have the wingspan to constantly take on double teams as well as the power to hold the offensive lineman from moving to the second level. This requires considerable endurance on part of the player. He is almost always in a two-gap technique and will line up at either the 0-gap or 1-gap. In fact, this position is so grueling that most teams have a very adequate replacement Nose Tackle who takes around 40% of the snaps. (These guys are getting pushed around by guards and centers ever play!) Techniques Gaps ? 0-Technique: The defender lines up face-to-face with the center. ? 1-Technique: The defender lines up on the center?s outside shoulder. The Dewayne Robertson Dilemma: The biggest detraction from the 4-3 to the 3-4 is there is no spot on the field suitable for Dewayne Robertson. He is tremendously talented, strong, fast, big but he just does not fit into the 3-4 defense. The NT/NG position: Robertson actually played some nose tackle last year. In fact, he was playing 1-technique all year long as he was filling up for the departed Jason Ferguson in the 4-3. In fact, the 3-4 NT split right or left to the center is essentially the same as the 2-gapping DT in the 4-3. Robertson was not that successful as you can tell from the 29th rated run defense. Nose Tackle over the center would just magnify that weakness. His prospect profile clearly stated: ?His size could be a problem in a two-gap system?. They also say he does not have much stamina which is a must as a 3-4 NT. The DE position: The Pittsburgh Steelers usually place both DE?s in the 5-technique position. (VIEW CHART FOR BETTER PICTURES) ? 5-Technique: The defender lines up on the tackle?s outside shoulder. If Dewayne Robertson lines up at the ?C-gap? he will have to draw away the Offensive Tackle away to help create room for the OLB to run into the backfield and Robertson also has to be quick enough so that the OLB cannot be caught by the OT. This is all well and good if the OT is slow but most premier LT?s run around 5.00 seconds in the 40 Yard Dash. If Robertson is successful, the OLB has a clear path to the ball-carrier (on a pass or a run). If Robertson fails the OLB will get MAULED by the OT. Shaun Ellis is better at this sort of position as he lines up between the Strong Side (Non-Blind Side) OT and TE in the base 4-3. He will be better at drawing away both the TE and OT and give the OLB room to make plays. No matter what the situation, two players in a 3-4 Base have to be double-teamed and one has to occupy the remaining Offensive Lineman. The single-teamed player is usually a DE who is occupying a premier speed lineman. (If the Center/Guard trio is fast the DE might line inside and the NT outside. The Patriots do this with Richard Seymour). I hope this has summarized why the 3-4 will not be a suitable option for the talented Dewayne Robertson. I know this is nitty-gritty but Robertson is best at straight ahead explosion and not jukes and spins. It is noted in his prospect profile that he is terrible at the ?spin? move getting to high.
Part 2 The Jonathan Vilma Problem: Jon Vilma has always been compared to Ray Lewis in terms of size, skill, speed, and instinct. Then we can also logically say that Jon Vilma will react the same way as Ray Lewis did. Now, Lewis is a great player who has always made plays whether it he was in the 3-4 or the 4-3, but the one thing I did note is that Lewis has more plays in the 4-3 than the 3-4. We want to maximize player strengths. Can we honestly say that putting 320+ lineman on our playmaking MLB is a smart move? The Genius behind the scheme however thinks differently in this case: Q: Someone asked Mike Vrabel how does your role change when you switch from the 4-3 to the 3-4 and he said really it doesn't change that much. Bill Belicheck: I've been saying that for six years. Really, we get into this 3-4/4-3 thing and you'd think you were talking about a spread offense and wishbone. Really, I feel like that's sometimes what people try to relate it to. I just don't see it. Thank you Mike Vrabel. I'd like to think that you could say that to probably eight or nine other guys on the field as well. Now, if you're right next to one of those positions, then there's a little bit of a change. But for everybody else... Here is some more from Bill: Q: It seems to me the Mike [MLB] changes though. It seems when [Monty] Beisel is playing that Mike in a 4-3 as opposed to one of the inside guys in a 3-4, that to me seems different for him. Is it? BB: There are some things that are a little bit different. Yes. There are some things that are a little bit different, but a lot of it is fundamentally the same. Q: Can you name one or two things that would be different? For Beisel? BB: Well if you have two linebackers that are off the line, okay, and they run certain plays to one side, then there's a fit that those two linebackers need to have. Whether it's this. Whether it's that. Depending on how you're going to play the play. In other words, if you have two inside linebackers, they both have to read the exact same thing on the play because if one guy goes here and the other guy's goes there, because I'm reading the guard and you're reading the fullback and we get some kind of split key, you're not going to be able to defend the play. So when there's only one middle linebacker, then the reads can really be based strictly for him. They don't have to be tied in conjunction with the other player. So on certain plays, you don't need to make those reads consistent. You could say, 'Hey look, anytime it is this type of a set, here's what your key is period.' I don't care what this guy is reading, because you don't have that guy anymore. You're playing it how you're playing it with the defensive line. It's the same thing when you're in a college 4-3, which I can't even call it the college 4-3 because it's what most of the teams in the NFL play, but it's the same thing. If they run the ball off tackle and the linebacker is lined up over the tackle. If he comes in and turns the ball back to the inside linebacker, then the inside linebacker has to play it from inside out. If the exact same play, he's going to come and knife underneath and kick that ball out, then the inside linebacker is going to run a much different course and he's going to hit that much wider than he would based on the way that that inside linebacker is playing it. So those two have to be tied in on certain plays against certain blocking schemes. It's the same thing when you have two inside linebackers. They have to be in coordination or you're going have two guys in the same gap. Q: In your 4-3 versus your 3-4, is the Mike going to have to take on less contact? BB: Tell me what the play is. Look, these linebackers, and I hear this all the time, 'Well, I just want to be free and run to the ball. I just want to be protected and run to the ball.' Well, who doesn't? What defensive player wouldn't want to not be blocked and run and make every tackle? But it just doesn't work that way. Every play that the offense runs is designed to have the most important guys on the play blocked. Maybe they are not going to block the free safety. Maybe they're not going to block the backside corner, but they don't run any plays where they don't block this guy or don't block that guy. As a defensive player, what your mentality really needs to be is, I have to defeat the guy who is assigned to block me to get to the ball. Now either I have to out-quick him, I have to outrun him or I have to somehow defeat him, disengage from him and make the tackle. So that whole concept of, 'Okay, well I'm going to play here in the heart of the defense and nobody is going to block me and I'm going to make every tackle,' it just doesn't exist. It just doesn't exist. Those guys that are making a lot of tackles, somebody is trying to block them. You think they're not trying to block Ray Lewis and Zach Thomas and [Al] Wilson and those guys? Every single play you call, you have to say, 'Well we have the block that guy. Somebody has to block him.' Now getting him, that's a different story. That's not that easy. But, the whole concept of, 'Yeah, I'm going to be free. I'm never going to have to take on anybody. I'm going to make a bunch of tackles,' I tell those guys, 'Hey, you're in a dream world. I don't want to hear about that. Forget about that. What you need to think about is how do I defeat the guy who is assigned to block me?' That's what defensive football is really about. Everybody is assigned to block somebody, how do I defeat him and get to the ball? Not, 'Where is the shortcut? How can I cut across this lot and get to that point without having to walk all the way around the sidewalk?' Well you know what? There's a fence there. It just doesn't work that way. You have to do that and you have to deal with whatever is in your way as you meet it. You interview these guys coming out of college, 'How do you see yourself as a defensive player?' [They will answer,] 'I can run to the ball, like when I'm just set free. I can cut it lose in pursuit.' Great. [There are] 11 guys on defense on who would love to have that. Nobody blocks them. They just run free. They make the tackle. It's so ridiculous. As you can see, Bill and I disagree on how to utilize Vilma in the 3-4 scheme. (IMO) Unless we manage to get an amazing defensive line that will make Vilma roam well, this will be an extremely hard phase for Vilma. The un-tapped potential and the positive: There are two players who excite me the most in this new hybrid 3-4/4-3 defense. The first and perhaps my favorite is Bryan Thomas. He is allowed to roam now, all over the place and considering that his biggest weakness is disengaging from the lineman, he now has time to move around and juke/spin around the lineman. Thomas IMO is going to have less trouble in the 3-4 than people anticipate. "John [Abraham] was not great at going backward," the personnel man said. "Bryan [Thomas] can go backward." I am excited to see what he can do. The rest of an article can be found here: http://www.jetsinsider.net/forums/showthread.php?t=118734 My in-depth analysis on Thomas can be found here: http://www.jetsinsider.net/forums/showthread.php?t=113631 The second player that intrigues me is Sione Pouha. I personally hated the pick then and he has done little to change my mind on that. Pouha does have a few things in his direction. He is a lean 300 pounds. Trust me, a lean 300 pounds is very difficult to find. Also, he has good speed and tremendous size and strength for the NT position in the 3-4. I still do not know what to expect. The rest of the D: LDE Shaun Ellis seems to be a perfect fit in the 3-4 by attacking the OT and TE on every play. In fact, playing strong side DE in the 4-3 will help is transformation greatly. RDE Kimo Van Oelhoffen is a perfect player as well considering that he played in a 3-4 and can also move to the NT position. IMO a poor mans version of Richard Seymour who could do much of the same. OLB Eric Barton is an interesting case because he has a good overall skill set and is perfect for the 4-3. I have no idea how he will react in the 3-4. ILB Victor Hobson can either play inside or outside but his lack of pass rush will probably move him inside where his run stopping skill will be better utilized. ILB Anthony Schlegel is similar to Hobson. Thoughts?
The keys to the 3/4 are the nose tackle, the outside linebackers and the strong safety. The Jets have one OLB and the safety. The Jets haven't been able to find a real nose tackle yet and the NT is the key to the entire 3/4 D. Thomas hasn't so much as defended pass one and you have him excelling in the 3/4 and Kimo is the poor man's Richard Seymour? That one brought a smile to my face. The 3/4 can be used as a change up D by Mangini but until the nose tackle question is solved the 4/3 has to remain the base. Why waste Robertson after paying him all that money just to prove you can play the 3/4 without the right group of players?
Casey Hampton seems to me to have the exact same skill set as Dewayne and he is a great NT. What do you see as the difference between them?
Same skill set? Robertson's game is to penetrate and make plays in the backfield if possible. A nose tackle has to have the patience to lay back and not commit because he has to cover both of the center/guard gaps. When he recognizes the play, he has to avoid getting pushed out of the way by the usual center/guard double team and drift to the correct side to help clog up the play. That is not Robertson.
Robertson's game was SUPPOSED to be to penetrate and make plays int he backfield and that certainly is the role they've tried to force him into, but that's not what I think he's best at. What I've seen is that he has a nice quick first step and great initial burst, but he does not ahve the best change of direction. He has a low center of gravity and great natural strength. He is aware and able to shed, but not able to defeat. I think because of his low center of gravity, his natural strength and leverage, not to mention his good awareness, he's perfect for an NT. Actually, I think those traits make him excellent anywhere along a 2-gapping line, but his size makes him perfect for the NT. To me, that is Robertson.
great post whether or not i agree with you conclusions, i think your post is awesome with all of the illustrations
Mangini is going to use a Belichick-esque scheme where FOOTBALL PLAYERS, as opposed to just athletes, are required to fill multiple roles. Von Oelhoffen has played DT and DE with effectiveness throughout his career. Ellis has excelled as a 4-3 end and 3-4 end. Hobson and Barton are both guys who could play inside or outside. Vilma will fill a Tedy Bruschi role, and I'm sure he'll have a lot of coverage responsibilities. The question mark is Dewayne Robertson. He has to step up and play the nose tackle. He's the key to the whole thing. I'm more than a little bit worried about him. That being said, I'm sure Mangini will be flexible. He's smart enough to know not to force what isn't working, and he's going to approach each game differently. I wouldn't be too worried about who fits where, I think you're going to see multiple faces to this thing, and it will keep teams off balance. -X-
I personally like 4-3 better but i think a 3-4 is better for us because the linebackers are what makes are Defense great and the mroe linebackers the better i think.
Arsenal1189 for Best Post of the Year that 3-4 defense post is the best piece of work I have seen from this place in a looong time
You'll need a solid NT in order to install the 3-4.... DRob is not a NT, and I'm not even sure the Jets have anyone on the roster who would be capable of holding down that position. You need guys who are wide, and take up more than one blocker to have success using the 3-4.... I'm sure Mangini will eventually be making the switch, he just needs time to bring in the right players, and to make it all come together. That may take another year or two, but rest assure it will happen...
The 4-3 gives you more power up front, but the 3-4 gives you more flexibility and mobility. Clearly the Jets in their Sack Exchange heyday benefitted more from a 4-3 approach, but the young, somewhat softer defense we have now would be best served by a 3-4. I think the best approach is to mix the 3-4 with the 4-3, get more players involved and alternately keep an LB or DT fresh as needed, but focus on the 3-4. DeWayne Robertson was never that effective when we had a 4-3, and configuring the defense to maximize or not minimize his potential seems a waste. Thanks for the hard work you did on this, Arsenal. I second the thought in the other thread about this being the post of the year, excepting those Death by Jets was writing about his son.
People are really bent on it being a black or white situation of either 4-3 or 3-4. Take a look at the Patriots defense. Are they always in a 3-4? Are they always in a 4-3? The answer to both is no. Heck Ive seen the Pats play w/ 10 men on the line. The bottom line is, this defense, like the Patriots will be about creating match ups. Whether they favor us, or cause weakness within the opposition. Yes, we will play some 3-4. We will also see some 4-3. But neither of which will be primary. That goes for now, and 3 years from now. We have a few players who can create match up problems whicch the scheme will reflect.. Ellis- Has the quickness and power to flourish Vilma- No explanation needed D Rob- He's been getting bashed this offseason due to the 3-4 talk, but he is a prime example of a match up nightmare for the opposition. His speed, power and low center of gravity can make him a match up nightmare for opposing offenses BT- If he can be versatile he's a guy w/ good size and natural speed to really shine through These will be the players for now who will make our defense tick no matter what scheme the situation calls for.
Exactly. All offseason people have been making assumptions here that we're making a full switch, while we haven't heard a peep about it from Mangini, other than that he'll run whatever scheme is right for the team/situation we're facing. At the end of the day, we probably won't be running any one scheme exclusively.
While this is a quality thread, I noticed the technique numbers do not match in the first two diagrams. In the first one, lining up on the tackle's outside shoulder is a 6-technique. It is shown as a 5-technique in the second diagram, unless I'm missing something. When he was a high school coach, Bum Phillips invented a way of numbering the alignment of defensive linemen. Many football coaches garble his system by assigning slightly different numbering, probably unknowingly. I will also add that there was a lot more to Bum Phillips? system than just alignment numbering. He had the linebackers on each side call out numerical alignments for the defenders on their side before every play. Each change in the defensive line configuration required a complimentary change in the alignment of the linebackers behind them. I think it is cumbersome terminology. The word ?technique? suggests a way of battling with an offensive lineman. But it?s just where the defender aligns in relation to the offensive linemen before the snap. Some coaches other than Phillips also add a zero to the number to indicate that it refers to the alignment of a linebacker. In most systems, a 0 technique would mean a nose tackle aligned nose-to-nose with a center. A 00 technique would mean a linebacker lined up nose-to-nose with the center, only several yards off the line of scrimmage. Because there are more than ten possible alignments, Phillips screwed up using numbers instead of letters. Had he used letters, every conceivable alignment could have been covered by a universal version of this way of identifying defensive line alignments. The first diagram is the one I like. The second one not so much. The gap diagram is good. Again, quality thread. I'm just pointing out that coaches use different numbering systems. It would make things easier if there was a universal system.
one hell of a great post, really enjoyed reading your arguments. I agree 100% on your Dewayne opinion, but I'm not sold on B. Thomas yet. He's amounted to a sack of $h!t in the time he's been here.
