All else being equal, which alignment is more suited for slowing down the zone read and option game that some teams are running now? Is one inherently more effective than the other?

Also, could this factor into why we're switching? I'm not dismissing the other two possible reasons (personnel that's already in place, or the fact the DC we may or may not already have in mind is a 3-4 guy) but, just wondering if this may have played a role in the decision to switch

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by Davie Crocket

Member since Jan 2013

1072 posts

Posted on 1/24/13 at 9:45 pm to eddieray

quote:
All else being equal, which alignment is more suited for slowing down the zone read and option game that some teams are running now? Is one inherently more effective than the other?

I think the 3-4 is more effective having the 2 outside lbs standing instead of having a hand in the ground. It allows them to read the qb read option.

quote:
Also, could this factor into why we're switching? I'm not dismissing the other two possible reasons (personnel that's already in place, or the fact the DC we may or may not already have in mind is a 3-4 guy) but, just wondering if this may have played a role in the decision to switch

I don't think this was the sole reason why we changed. I think CSP saw what the defense was becoming and wanted to totally change the D

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by tigertown79

Lafayette

Member since Dec 2007

435 posts

Posted on 1/24/13 at 10:15 pm to Davie Crocket

The 3-4 is so much easier in disguising pressure and that's what I love about it. As far as the zone read it can stop the zone read but is still down to discipline and coaching. Look at the Packers and how bad they defended against Kaepernick. And look how bad the Cowboys looked against RG3.

Page 1