Posted: 1/25/2013 9:46 PM
bw wrote: One of the few teams that had true success with the 3-4 has always been the Steelers.Anyone not named LeBeau running a 3-4 in Cleveland doesn't interest me. Like that defensive genius, Romeo Crennel.Every time Tom Brady faces a good 4-3, he has problems. Real problems. The 3-4, he eats for lunch.With the emphasis on QB play that's been around for a while, the only reason to put a 3-4 on the field is to save money so you can spend it on the Offense. Good 4-3 DEs ain't cheap.If you can get pressure with the front 4 of a 4-3 Defense, you can drive a QB out of his mind.And with the success of the 'read-option' QBs this year, look for a lot of copycats.A 3-4 has no chance against one of them. None. A decent 4-3 can contain a scrambling QB much better than can a 3-4. OLBs in a 3-4 are just too slow, too awkward and not nearly athletic enough to catch a QB like Wilson, Koepernick, Cam Newton or RGIII.I don't know why the 3-4 hasn't been put on the scrap bin of NFL history. I don't like it. Never have. It's a poor excuse for a 'bend but don't break' defense.Now, there's also the 'attacking' 3-4 that is essentially a 5-2. I could live with that. Sort of. I'd still prefer a 4-3. More flexible, harder to stop, pressure with the front four is almost impossible to protect against.... Just a better scheme all the way around.My $.02
*Brownies with the 4-3 contained Moon very well.
MSN PrivacyLegalAdvertise on MSNAbout our adsRSS
© 2014 Microsoft|