re: Lets talk about switching to a 4-3 and how it affects recruiting

quote:

---

Shelvin and Ika both play NT though. 3-4.

---

Most teams who play a 4-3 use a nose guard. You put a guy over the center and you play a DT who either plays an overshift or an undershift depending on the offensive look. (Logan and Farrell can both play that, though if Farrell were to drop some weight he's a perfectly good 4-3 strongside defensive end.)

A 4-3 doesn't necessarily hamper Shelvin, Ika or Guillory at all.

quote:

---

You put a guy over the center and you play a DT who either plays an overshift or an undershift depending on the offensive look.

---

The concepts really emerged in the 1970s in the NFL - with 4-3 over/undershifts pioneered by Dallas (and ultimately others) - by the mid-80s, with west coast offense coming into vogue, replacing the old school "pro set" an extra backer was valuable in covering TEs and backs out of the backfield. At some point in the 1990s, and this percolated down to colleges, too , a huge rift formed.

Typically, teams that focused on stopping the run "first" played a flavor of 4-3. Teams that focused on the pass, tended to have a 3-4. Things like the base 4-2-5 emerged as a "hybrid" with a dedicated nickel instead of a third backer.

All the other bases are typically a shift off one of these - the 3-3 stack is basically a hybrid of the 3-4 and 4-2-5 base and is a "modern" defense designed to defend the spread (as was base 4-2-5). Typically in HS and College, the 3-3 has not been widely adopted by the NFL because it is easier to scheme against with NFL personnel.

Bama has ran 3-4 for quite some time. Seems to work fairly well for linebackers and d line. So, yeah, that’s not an issue.

quote:

---

4-3 will be the defense we run next year .

---

except for when we run a 3-4 or a 4-2-5 or some other variation depending on the opponent, the down and distance, or on just what the new DC thinks will work on any given play. No doubt there will be times we line up with 4 defenders with their hands in the dirt. How he wants to list the depth chart, 4-3 or 3-4, doesn't really matter.

quote:

---

4-3 or 3-4, doesn't really matter.

---

No kidding. The defenses that gave our offense the most trouble were Auburn (3-3-5) and Clemson in the first quarter (3-2-6). Modern defenses need to be versatile and able to adapt from week to week. The days of being in base (3-4/4-3) on first and second down and then nickel/dime on third down are pretty much over.

While both those defenses lines up with 3 down linemen,

Clemson usually is a 4 down linemen team.

Gettin to the QB while Rushing 4 (whether the 4th guy is standing or has his hand in the groun) is the only way to defend modern offenses.

Clemson didn’t have the DL talent to do this this year.

Man we look weak at OLB. Other than freshmen, I don’t have a whole lot of confidence in any of those upper classmen becoming dominant players much less two or three of them...this defense looks a lot better with Queen and Phillips still on the field...

dude we run both, dont worry about what label the defense is regarding 4-3 or 3-4, things have changed over the years and it is irrelevant IMO. Whether you call Chassion a 4-3 DE or a 3-4 OLB is just semantics.

Coaches decision