3-4 defense? Try 3-3-5

[football karma]

Per Jurecki from camp this morning (with all the normal caveats):

expect the Cards D to spend a lot of time in a 3-3-5 alignment with Adrian Wilson playing the role of hybrid safety/lb, lining up all over the place near the line of scrimmage. Holt and Francisco would be the two safeties in this alignment.

Jurecki also said that this staff was 1. Much more organized 2. Much more professional and 3. Much harder working. For contest, Jurecki was a big Denny hater, but he seems to love Wis thus far.

 

[Brent]

Id love to see some of this on certain situations. This would put the best athletes on the field, as essentially Fransisco would be replacing either Berry or Okeafor. And I think Wilson as a OLB/SS hybrid and Fransisco as the 3rd safety is a better combination than Wilson at SS and Berry/Okeafor at OLB. This all depends, however, on how well Berry/Okeafor adapt to the switch to OLB. But on passing situations, this seems like the best, most athletic lineup.

 

[SuperSpck]

It's a very interesting idea, I'll grant that.

 

[Pariah]

i like that...suits our personnel.

 

[SECTION 11]

I like this a lot.

 

[Stout]

I can dig it.

 

[kerouac9]

We did a lot of this last season. I don't know why we'd stop now.

 

[TigToad]

I like

I like any defense that lets Adrian Wilson be one of the center pieces.

We should be emphasizing our strengths.

 

[BirdMan21]

Building a gameplan around your personnel to put the best players on the field instead of trying to fit players into a scheme....don't know if it will work but its worth a try.

 

[RugbyMuffin]

We did a lot of this last season. I don't know why we'd stop now.

Agreed.

But we blitzed less and that was the downfall. Plus Dansby was hurt and he is one of the main pieces that make this "3-3-5" work.

Having Dansby, Wilson and Fansisco all of the same field gives you a lot of options.

 

[dreamcastrocks]

This year, we finally have the personnel to play a 4-3, and we are moving to the 3-4.

I prefer the 3-4 to the 4-3, but not with our personnel. The drafting of Branch (along with Watson) gives us two bonefided tackles that have the ability to create a shutdown defense, and yet it appears that for most of the game we will only see one of them at a time. (at least that is the impression that we are getting)

I hope that we will see a lot of Branch/Watson this year, especially on 1st and 2nd downs.

 

[Redrage]

South Carolina had a bumper crop of running backs one year. The next year, Lou Holtz brought in two RBs better than all of the others. So, he converted all of those RBs to DBs and switched to a 3-3-5.

It worked well for them for a couple of years. That system works especially well when you have tweeners who can play bothe DE and LB (Kalimba Edwards at South Carolina/Bert Berry here) and safetys who can play LB (see A. Wilson).

 

[sundevil04]

Go

This year, we finally have the personnel to play a 4-3, and we are moving to the 3-4.

I prefer the 3-4 to the 4-3, but not with our personnel. The drafting of Branch (along with Watson) gives us two bonefided tackles that have the ability to create a shutdown defense, and yet it appears that for most of the game we will only see one of them at a time. (at least that is the impression that we are getting)

I hope that we will see a lot of Branch/Watson this year, especially on 1st and 2nd downs.

Im not convinced we'll see as much of the 3-4 as we think. I think we'll see a lot of 4-3 with the 2 big dt's on the field together. Even in the 3-4 though I think we may see branch at de with watson at nt.
________
Hispanic / Latino Recipes

 

[sundevil04]

Go

I like the idea of this defense since we free up Dansby in the move from slb to the weak side ILB in the 3-4 and let AW roam free.
________
The cigar boss

 

[JeffGollin]

I like the idea of many different fronts, schemes and false looks.

From the standpoint of an OC or QB having to face us, I love the idea that - if we keep 'em guessing - they won't have a clue as to what the bleep we're about to do.

There's no reason why we have to be in a "base anything" defense - just so long as the 11 guys on the field and the situation subs can handle the mental aspects of a hybrid, multi-look, false-look defense that can take any form at any time.

 

[Divide Et Impera]

Per Jurecki from camp this morning (with all the normal caveats):

expect the Cards D to spend a lot of time in a 3-3-5 alignment with Adrian Wilson playing the role of hybrid safety/lb, lining up all over the place near the line of scrimmage. Holt and Francisco would be the two safeties in this alignment.

Jurecki also said that this staff was 1. Much more organized 2. Much more professional and 3. Much harder working. For contest, Jurecki was a big Denny hater, but he seems to love Wis thus far.

I proposed this very idea about 2-3 years ago on here. It was widely panned by you guys as not a good idea. Look it up....

Glad to see it happening, though....

 

[Gaddabout]

We did a lot of this last season. I don't know why we'd stop now.

I was going to point this out, but to mention that it was iffy at times because the 3-3-5 is not a scheme you "tinker" with. It requires some sophistication to really make it work at the pro level, otherwise offenses audible to run right at the open gap. You can run stretch zone plays all day against a team without decent gap control. You don't want to end up with, say, Wilson trying to shed a 330 lbs. guard.

 

[Mitch]

The 3-3-5 is a wrinkle...not a base defense...but certainly can come in handy at key times.

Thanks, en fuego, for this astute post...you beat me to it, as I was preparing an article on this hybrid, which now is posted on the front page.

 

[Gaddabout]

The 3-3-5 is a wrinkle...not a base defense...but certainly can come in handy at key times.

It really depends on how you perceive where the game is going. 30 fronts used to be really popular, but the four-man look took over in the 70s with press coverage, and maintained popularity into the 90s because of the success of the 86 Bears with their "46 Defense."'

But 30 fronts were still popular during that time. The Giants showed a 30 front, but it was a 30 hybrid because LT often rushed out of the 9 technique. Later on during the 80s the Chiefs did the same thing with Derrick Thomas. I would consider Bill Cowher as the 30 front disciple of the 90s, but he really laid the ground work for more than just a 3-4 because of all the complicated zone blitzing they implemented ... and I would say it's really in the Fritz Schurmur line of "Big Nickel" or "30 Flex" looks because they really took away the middle of the field that West Coast offense teams needed to make the short passing game work.

Defenses have become so complex with defensive ends behaving more like outside linebackers, linebackers behaving more like big safeties, and safeties being asked to do just about everything. The complexity is at a point where I don't think you can really look at a defense these days and define them by their front. One-gap defensive tackles are glorified nose guards these days, and three-gap defensive tackles are expected to get to the quarterback like defensive ends. These days, 40 fronts can be morphed into 30 concepts by personnel application, and 30 fronts can be morphed into multiple looks for the same reason. A 40 front can become an old-school 50 front by shifting strong or weak, but it's more of a scheme to combat a two-back system, so you don't see that as much as the pro level where one-back looks rule.

So ... to say a 3-3-5 is just a wrinkle ... it's hard to say what's base and what's not anymore.

The only thing that's really out-dated as a base defense is the Bears 46 and the Texas Nickel, both of which demand sending numbers with press coverage. They started to become passe' on Dec. 5, 1985, when the Dolphins and Marino showed how to torture the scheme: pepper the heart of the defense with the tight end and then throw to a spot to the receivers downfield. Basically, punish a defense that dares to break Cover 2 principles.