sarpilot Posted March 22, 2010 Posted March 22, 2010 I played against the 4-4 many years ago in High School. We didn't pass the ball much back then. It was very tough to run block against because the backers were always stunting a different way. Most times they would stack behind a D lineman and were hard to get to. It just won't work in the NFL. These passing QBs would cut it to ribbons. Can't cover all the passing zones with 3 DBs. Some version of it may work on goal line.
BillsWatch Posted March 22, 2010 Posted March 22, 2010 It would only work if the team had a unique hybrid LB-Safety who could cover as well as safety and that LB would sometimes rush and sometimes cover. Sort of the reverse of an in-the-box safety.
sarpilot Posted March 22, 2010 Posted March 22, 2010 Two words: Bud Wilkinson. Two more words: the "Oklahoma" defense. The 3-4 is a direct descendant of the 44 defense that Wilkinson invented. Football history is a cool thing. GO BILLS!!! You are correct K-9. It is getting tougher to classify the Pro defenses as a classic 4-3,3-4 ect ever since the Buddy Ryan BEAR 46 and all the zone blitz packages. Its easier to look at it as an ODD or EVEN front. If you have a down tackle in a 0 or 1 technique (NOSE TACKLE)its an ODD FRONT and if two tackles are in a 2,3 or shade 3 technique its an EVEN front. All the rest of the lineman and backers fall into a natural progression to cover A thru C GAPS on both sides.
rstencel Posted March 22, 2010 Posted March 22, 2010 I played against the 4-4 many years ago in High School. We didn't pass the ball much back then. It was very tough to run block against because the backers were always stunting a different way. Most times they would stack behind a D lineman and were hard to get to. It just won't work in the NFL. These passing QBs would cut it to ribbons. Can't cover all the passing zones with 3 DBs. Some version of it may work on goal line. We played a Hybrid version of 4-4 in High School as well. But ours was weird in that we had 2 safeties and one CB. Allot of the teams in our League ran a 3 back system anyway, but if they ran a Receiver out to that side, the LB on that side would slide out and Bump him and cover short zone if pass. The couple of teams that did pass, only had one descent receiver anyway, so our CB would just shadow him. Worked real well against the run and with 2 safeties, we didn't give up many long plays for pass either, but the one team that had a good TE gave us trouble with that defense. 4-4 in its truest since wouldn't work in NFL for anything but short yardage or red zone where don't have to worry about long ball, or have a big receiver for fade routes if in Red Zone, but see teams bring safeties up to where basically lined up in 4-4 formation often when they are struggling to stop the run. As mentioned earlier, they do so many variations now with stunting and varying coverages, tough to say what really running at times. Seen anywhere from 0 men down on line to 7 with same personnel with some of the Patriots defenses. The key being that don't telegraph where lining up by personnel on field too much where they can't as easily key on personnel to know what your going to do. That would be main issue with 4-4, as if have 4 true linemen, and linebackers, would be tough to stop a good offense from taking advantage in passing game.
SuperKillerRobots Posted March 22, 2010 Posted March 22, 2010 It has been discussed on this board about the challenges and changes that are necessary to make a switch back to the 3-4. I've read some websites that explain how each of these defenses generally operate; however, I'm wondering if there is a 4-4 defense (or some version of it in the NFL)? The Bills hadn't the most difficult time stopping the run last year. Wouldn't it make sense to have an 8th player in the "box?". I know that is usually a safety's responsibility, but what if the Bills had four defensive lineman and four linebackers to take away the run? This leaves the Bills will McGee, McKelvin, and Byrd in the secondary. Of course, on general passing down situations, the Bills could take away one of the defensive lineman/linebackers and add a safety or nickel corner in such situations. The secondary is the strongest part of the "D." In theory, we should be able to leave those guys on an island more and slow down the run game and the short passing game over the middle with a 4-4 defense. I believe the Bills should have their strongest 11 players on the field to make plays. With that in mind, here would be my 4-4 defense. LDE Marcus Stroud DT Kyle Williams NT Mt. Cody or Cam Thomas (2nd Round) RDE Dwan Edwards/Spencer Johnson on occasion OLB Kawika Mitchell ILB POZ ILB Davis OLB Maybin (3rd down passing situations go with Ellison or Scott, or a 3rd round LB who is better at coverage skills like Eric Norwood) CB McGee CB McKelvin Safety-Byrd It just seems like we have too many guys that don't fit a 3-4 or a weren't great at a 4-3 that are still on the roster (Schobel, Kelsay, Ellis). These guys aren't LB's either. If the run is our biggest problem, let's add another lineman to plug the holes. Is there a 4-4 defense? If not, is it realistic for the Bills to have a package like this? After all, considering the team hasn't been in the playoffs 10 years, I think even the idea of a 4-4 defense is worth a look. Thoughts? Suggestions? I think you said it all in the part I bolded. Putting the best 11 players on the field probably means we're playing nickle all the time. Put those three players in along with Whitner, Wilson, or Florence. A rookie DT or Ellison won't be as god as those DBs. The problem with running a 4-4 is that because teams are so good at passing, you'd have to worry about getting burned down field all the time.
Bob in STL Posted March 22, 2010 Posted March 22, 2010 That's not really the same as what he was talking about. 3 DBs on the field and an extra LB in the box is not the same thing as moving a safety down into the box. The safety is presumably faster than the LB, and would generally do a better job of covering receivers in downfield routes. It is the same thing. It is the formation that we are talking about. What's difference what the roster position of a player is? You can call a player a safety or a LB, ar anything else. Take Bryon Scott in last years defense. When he lines up in the box we look like a 4-4. He even played LB. Eight in the box can look like 4-4, 3-5, or 5-3, etc. I have seen the Pats* use 2-6, and even 8 players standing.
K-9 Posted March 22, 2010 Posted March 22, 2010 You are correct K-9. It is getting tougher to classify the Pro defenses as a classic 4-3,3-4 ect ever since the Buddy Ryan BEAR 46 and all the zone blitz packages. Its easier to look at it as an ODD or EVEN front. If you have a down tackle in a 0 or 1 technique (NOSE TACKLE)its an ODD FRONT and if two tackles are in a 2,3 or shade 3 technique its an EVEN front. All the rest of the lineman and backers fall into a natural progression to cover A thru C GAPS on both sides. I'd say that pretty much boils it down. People make it WAY too complicated than it has to be. What drives me even more batty (and it's a short drive to be sure) is how people confuse/intertwine fronts with pass coverages. As if your front means you don't play a cover-2 for example. I can't even respond to those posts anymore. I mean it's football 101 but it gets lost on so many around here. I think that has to do with Jauron's adoption of the "Tampa-2" more than anything. But that speaks more to personnel IN your fronts than anything else. I better stop. GO BILLS!!!
2003Contenders Posted March 22, 2010 Posted March 22, 2010 Remember "The Package"? Wade unveiled that on opening day 2000, when the Bills hosted the Titans on a Sunday night. (First game after MCM.) At that time, the Bills ran a 3-4, but for that game, since the Titans were a run-heavy team, Wade came up with the idea of having both Washington and Big Pat play DT -- along with Wiley and Hanson as DE. That was essentially a 4-4.
BillsWatch Posted March 23, 2010 Posted March 23, 2010 That is exactly what a DC ought to do and be prepared to change formations, especially after half time, if it is not working.
1B4IDie Posted March 23, 2010 Posted March 23, 2010 I don't recall it at all. Before Edwards was Groh for one year then Parcells. Edwards coached a Cover 2 I believe. And the pressure would have to be almost instant and even then I don't see it working. Last year! You clearly didn't watch the Jets Indy playoff game. Phil Simms wouldn't stop stroking Rex Ryan off and talking about how bold he is by calling 4-4 fronts against Peyton Manning. It wasn't successful but as many people have discussed 4-4 is not uncommon for certain situations and has been en vogue as Rex Ryan is the toast of the NFL. Its not taking out a CB for a LB\DL. Its taking out a Safety, in most cases it would be the safety that would have been the free lancing ball hawk position in exchange for a LB\DL in the box that can possibly blitz. Basically you have another possibility the O-Line has to take into consideration for a blitz. And given how fast LBs are getting, many teams have LBs that cover receivers just as well as a Safety. Its crazy but I've seen the Vikes and Pack send D-Line out in coverage against WRs semi-frequently. Those are teams that have learned how to use the freakish big-stronger-faster LB\DL Given Rex Ryan's predilection for going bananas with the blitzing you can see why he has been using that type of front more often.
JustMaxx Posted March 23, 2010 Posted March 23, 2010 a 4-4? its 8 men in the box out of a 4-3 defense, like wed play vs the fins. just a safety instead of a backer there ya go
1B4IDie Posted March 23, 2010 Posted March 23, 2010 a 4-4? its 8 men in the box out of a 4-3 defense, like wed play vs the fins. just a safety instead of a backer there ya go Good Point 4-4 would also be gaining popularity in defense of the WildCat.
justnzane Posted March 23, 2010 Posted March 23, 2010 I think you said it all in the part I bolded. Putting the best 11 players on the field probably means we're playing nickle all the time. Put those three players in along with Whitner, Wilson, or Florence. A rookie DT or Ellison won't be as god as those DBs. The problem with running a 4-4 is that because teams are so good at passing, you'd have to worry about getting burned down field all the time. agreed. the bills best would probably be a 4-2-5 or 3-3-5 now Last season would have been LE- High motor DE's (maybin on pass situations) 3technique- Stroud 1 technique- Williams (spencer on pass situatios) RE- Schobel ILB-Poz (ellison in on pass situations) ILB- Kawika CB-McGee CB-Florence S-Byrd S-Whitner S- Scott with either Scott or Whitner in the box (which was essentially Scott as a LB or Whitner as nickel, which he has done a lot more of than being a cover 2 shell safety.) Wilson could rotate with the deep safeties.
Recommended Posts