Is it time to start implementing a 3/4?

very few college teams have a DT big enough to handle a 3-4.

Iowa does not at all, and really never has had one. Maybe Ballard.

These guys are typically huge, with 300# being the minimum size.

If anything, we need to go to a 5 front like we did in 2005 with Greenway being that walk-up #5 on the DL in 2005.
 
CAARHawk said:
Wrong. Alston (typo) is more than capable to play the middle in a 3-4.

Also, this isn't about letting your opponent dictate your scheme to you. This is about adjusting to your own personnel issues.
Click to expand...

Usually when a person says wrong, they have data to back up their claim. You're saying a guy that is 220 is capable of playing ILB in the 3-4 based on what? His extensive time playing there this season?

Come on man, you're saying that we don't have enough serviceable linemen to be decent up front, but that adding another inexperienced played to the LB corps and expecting them to manage their assignments well enough on the few occasions that we decide to slip a 3-4 in is reasonable?

Players get better through repetition. Some of these guys are going to see more of that now that Alvis is gone. I have more faith in that and the occasional blitz from a 4-3 than I do adding new packages.
 
That's a good point about converting the LB.

Might be an interesting thing to do with Derby. He wouldn't have to relearn much at this point.

Not sure if he would be strong enough yet.

Anything to get the best 7 on the field.
 
imported_ankle23 said:
very few college teams have a DT big enough to handle a 3-4.

Iowa does not at all, and really never has had one. Maybe Ballard.

These guys are typically huge, with 300# being the minimum size.

If anything, we need to go to a 5 front like we did in 2005 with Greenway being that walk-up #5 on the DL in 2005.
Click to expand...

That's something a lot of teams do in a 4-3. It's nothing more than shifting the LB's over to match the strong side of the formation.

It also didn't hurt that Greenway was an NFL talent.
 
DuffMan said:
That's something a lot of teams do in a 4-3. It's nothing more than shifting the LB's over to match the strong side of the formation.

It also didn't hurt that Greenway was an NFL talent.
Click to expand...

agreed on the greenway comment.

this team reminds a lot of the 2005 team in that they lost a ton (i think 3) of DL to the NFL. so while they still had great LBs, they got eaten up due to our 'weakness' at DL. so they used greenway more as the season progressed walking down to the DL.

so if anything, we need to strengthen our DL by addition, not subtraction.

3/4 is a pipedream.

did anyone notice the size of the DL in the lsu/bamer game?
 
I am all for different looks to keep the other team guessing. However to implement this effectively they would have to have been practicing this already. They cant just practice an additional 10 hours a week to learn this. I think they are better off sticking with what the players already know. I just want to see them bring out an extra DB on obvious passing situations. Tanner Miller had some good blitzes as well Saturday. I think what you asked here makes sense I just think its way to late to try it.
 
Let me interpret CAARHawk if I may... CAARHawk, tell me if I'm wrong.

In Parker's 4-3 pass defense:
(1) The main pass defense is the DL getting pressure on the QB.
(2) Iowa's DL isn't getting any pressure on the QB - this year or last year.
IMO, this is the beginning of a trend.
(3) Iowa's secondary plays a soft zone so most Iowa defenders allow the pass catch but, presumably, yards after catch are prevented.

In Parker's 4-3 pass defense, if the opponent gets past the pass rush, there isn't much pass defense against the completion... hopefully, the big play is prevented.

CAARHawk wants a more athletic pass defense with the ability to challenge the pass completion because more B1G offenses are using 'spread' techniques.
 
It isn't a terrible idea, but I think it is too tough to implement with three games left. moving a lb to de is a good idea. Who are the candidates? Derby, Alston or even Nielsen? The best bet is for a dlineman already on the roster to step up like davis, gaglione or hardy. I was very encouraged by the calls and execution saturday. I say hope that an unknown steps up and continue to blitz 6 players and trust prater and hyde on the outside
 
HomerChampless said:
Let me interpret CAARHawk if I may... CAARHawk, tell me if I'm wrong.

In Parker's 4-3 pass defense:
(1) The main pass defense is the DL getting pressure on the QB.
(2) Iowa's DL isn't getting any pressure on the QB - this year or last year.
IMO, this is the beginning of a trend.
(3) Iowa's secondary plays a soft zone so most Iowa defenders allow the pass catch but, presumably, yards after catch are prevented.

In Parker's 4-3 pass defense, if the opponent gets past the pass rush, there isn't much pass defense against the completion... hopefully, the big play is prevented.

CAARHawk wants a more athletic pass defense with the ability to challenge the pass completion because more B1G offenses are using 'spread' techniques.
Click to expand...

Yes, the cover 2 is predicated on the Dline doing all the pressuring. I don't think this is the beginning of a trend though. We have had this defense for years now and it has proven to hold up quite well. However, it demands a lot of discipline and some years we have not had as much as we should have. A couple of things to keep in mind. We have missed a lot of tackles this year compared to how we usually do. That doesn't affect the the pass rush, but it has allowed some drives to continue that shouldn't have. It also demands fast LBs. Tyler Nielsen, like Mike Klinkenborg, is a technically sound player, but hardly fast enough to keep up with RBs and slot receivers. That has killed us at times.
 
CAARHawk said:
Hitchens and Donatell could play some. Donatell has been exposed as a 4/3 backer, but might be able to be covered up a bit in a 3/4.
Click to expand...
Actually, the opposite is true. Much easier to hide/cover up a small OLB backer in a 4-3 scheme than a 3-4 scheme. 3-4 backers have to be bigger and more physical than 4-3 backers to run the defense effectively since they are exposed to OL more often and must shed blocks.
 
rodg12 said:
Actually, the opposite is true. Much easier to hide/cover up a small OLB backer in a 4-3 scheme than a 3-4 scheme. 3-4 backers have to be bigger and more physical than 4-3 backers to run the defense effectively since they are exposed to OL more often and must shed blocks.
Click to expand...

Donatell would not be a 'Clay Matthews' type of 3-4 linebacker.
 
Where on our roster do you see a tackle weighing in over 320 plus to anchor the center of this silly thread? There is no way in hell we will ever pull in a DT that big to pull this off. We have all but 1 defensive player weighing in over 300 that has seen any playing time.

We are already undersized in the middle and honestly other than Binns we would need another bigger DE to hold down the other side.

I think we have the linebackers to pull it off, that I can agree with, but we drastically lack size for the front 3.
 
anyone asking this question doesnt understand the 3-4 vs the 4-3.

4-3 is a defense built on penetrating dl that forces at least 1 person to be double teamed. this defense puts more of an ownership on your dl being able to make more plays. also it should allow your lbs to freely roam with less obstruction from ol because 4 dl should cause at least 1 double team. this allows for you to play with smaller dl and lbs because the focus is more team and gap oriented.

3-4 is a defense built on confusion from different blitz packages as most teams will always blitz at least 1 player so they are rushing 4. this defense focuses on larger lineman and basically taking an athletic de and turning them into olbs. which means our personnel wont work. the closest nt we would have is davis and a nt in a 3-4 needs to stalemate a double team and force a double team at all times. davis hasnt been able to stalemate 1 on 1 when he is on the field. then the de in a 3-4 is a hybrid of the de and dt of a 4-3 which daniels and binns might do ok at but this would actually play away from binns strengths. the worst is actually our lbs because you cant hide undersized lbs in a 3-4 when your olbs are actually more like athletic de. the best player there would actually be nielsen. after that i dont think a single lb would work. dl must be space eaters in this defense and you have to have bigger lbs. plus a switch in the middle of a season is pointless unless the season is lost and you are switching defenses next year.

the 3-4 we do play is just a 3 man rush when we know it is pass to get an extra body out to make the zone tougher. nothing you can run consistently and stop the run. our run defense has been suspect most of the year. this would just make it worse.
 
SECisCRAP said:
We have other DL that will play and I know people here want to see what Cooper can do. I really doubt that Norm will ever shift away from a 4-3 to a 3-4. I may be wrong but I really don't see it happening.
Click to expand...
You really want to burn a redshirt with three games to go?
 
Hell yeah, let's toss in a defensive scheme our guys haven't played before...with 3 games left! This sounds like a fantastic idea!
 
I find it interesting how people keep saying we don't have the personnel to run a 3/4 like we would have the personnel to run a 4/3 if another lineman went down.

Seriously, did you see what the line looked like without Nardo?

With Daniel, Nardo, Daniels, and Binns. Iowa might be able to hold up. But if one of those guys goes down it is game over unless something completely unexpected happens.
 
like foval mentioned above, we've gone to a 3-4 look already a few select times this year.

i doubt the OP was saying we need to switch completely, just that we could be utilizing it more, especially in those 3rd and longs that we're soooo good at defending.
 
big10fan said:
like foval mentioned above, we've gone to a 3-4 look already a few select times this year.

i doubt the OP was saying we need to switch completely, just that we could be utilizing it more, especially in those 3rd and longs that we're soooo good at defending.
Click to expand...

If Iowa wants to get better at 3rd and long they should probably stop putting LBs, who always seem to have their backs turned to the QBs for the entire play, on wideouts and go to a nickel package instead and send another rusher or spy the running QBs in this league who always seem to break the big one on 3rd down, because the LBs are covering wideouts with their backs turned to the QBs...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top