Page 1
Page 1
Started By
Message
locked post

4-3 vs 3-4

Posted on 9/11/21 at 3:33 pm
Posted by Louisianaboy87
Alabama
Member since Dec 2014
345 posts
Posted on 9/11/21 at 3:33 pm
Coach O was confident that switching to the 4-3 would give us an aggressive/ attacking style defense. I’m no expert, but seems to me the 3-4 was working a lot better. Why is he so sold on the 4-3?
Posted by Madking
Member since Apr 2016
70016 posts
Posted on 9/11/21 at 3:38 pm to
3-4 is the better of the two for defending offenses right now. It’s easier to disguise looks and has more versatile athletes on the field which lends itself to defending spread offenses. If you go through the history of modern football as more pass leaning wide open offenses come into style the 3-4 comes along with it. When defenses become too light and the running game gets back into fashion the 4-3 becomes more prevalent. So of course Orgeron is going in the exact opposite direction of where he should, he’s an incompetent idiot.
Posted by Kingd92
Member since May 2018
374 posts
Posted on 9/11/21 at 3:41 pm to
3-4 gives you more options to disguise blitzes/pressure.

4-3 can work if you have 4 horses that you know will win one on one.

Unfortunately, our ends (Gaye, Anthony) seem better suited for the 3-4. We don’t have guys that can hold the edge. No monster Bosa/Chase Young type DEs.
Posted by Madking
Member since Apr 2016
70016 posts
Posted on 9/11/21 at 3:46 pm to
Not sure it’s out front that’s the problem. If you notice as far back as last season and last week you’ll often see teams motioning guys into situations where we have a LB positioned on the boundary matched up with a WR. This happened because our coverages and alignments are too easy to read. Those crossers they killed us with last week happened because they knew what we were in. A 4 man front can work if you’re willing to mix things up on the back end and use safety hybrid types in place of LBs but O seems content to stay basic with basic looks and little blitzing making it very easy on opposing play callers and QBs.
Posted by SammyTiger
Baton Rouge, LA
Member since Feb 2009
79361 posts
Posted on 9/11/21 at 3:47 pm to
I’m no expert but I feel like most defenses would work better with White, Queen and Jacob’s than with Baskerville and Clarke.
Posted by Kingd92
Member since May 2018
374 posts
Posted on 9/11/21 at 3:50 pm to
Agreed.

We have a major personnel issue at LB and S.

Should be a 4-2-5, allowing us to get more athletes on the field.

With Mike Jones and Sage Ryan out there. Not sure yet who should be the other LB or the other S.

And can we get a new nickel?! I’m tired of Flott getting burned.
This post was edited on 9/11/21 at 3:51 pm
Posted by jbraua
Oklahoma City, OK
Member since Oct 2007
7792 posts
Posted on 9/11/21 at 3:51 pm to
43 times there’s been a thread about this
Posted by Madking
Member since Apr 2016
70016 posts
Posted on 9/11/21 at 3:58 pm to
I think you’re right on both fronts. Personnel has to change, we’ve seen guys like Clarke and Harris for multiple seasons now and they can’t play in this D. If you’re really pulling all these great recruits you should be able to use them in specialized roles to get better results. This should fit into the alignment issue, go positionless, matchup athletes on the backend for what you need depending on the situation. If you’ve got a youngster who can cover or can blitz or has good instincts small area coverage play them in small doses in those roles. But you can’t have Clarke, Harris or others out there playing that poorly just because they know the defensive language.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram