no content
AdBlocker active?
It seems you are using software to block advertisements. You could help us if you could switch it off when visiting redzoneaction.org.
The reason is very simple: Advertisements help us running the site, to offer you the game in a good quality for free. So if you like the game, please support us by purchasing a Supporter Account or disabling the AdBlocker on this site.
Thank you very much!
| Main / Discussions / the 4-3 defense Search Forum | |
| Navigation: |< 2 > >| | |
| Poster | Message |
|
scottishbronco
|
posted: 2013-04-26 18:17:28 (ID: 93601) Report Abuse |
|
looking to gather other player's opinion as to why this defense is not so great.
I think that having that extra LB in coverage must work well when using the 3-4, and the dline doesn't suffer too much from being one man down |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Loretta
|
posted: 2013-04-26 18:34:43 (ID: 93603) Report Abuse |
|
It is all about the quality of the D-line!
If you have good players three man on the line are enough. In reality 1-2 LBs can enforce the line, but how does it work in this game? |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
holmeboy
|
posted: 2013-04-26 18:37:37 (ID: 93604) Report Abuse |
|
On scrimmages I always seem to give big passing TDs with the 4-3... 4-4 seems more solid strangely.
This is from my limited number of scrimmages though. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
scottishbronco
|
posted: 2013-04-26 18:52:06 (ID: 93606) Report Abuse |
|
Loretta wrote:
It is all about the quality of the D-line! If you have good players three man on the line are enough. In reality 1-2 LBs can enforce the line, but how does it work in this game? All i can tell you is that defenses are in zone coverage here. I have been putting the poor performances down to low teamwork but even the bigger teams are saying the 4-3 defense should be avoided. @holmeboy - The 4-4 is a really good run defense vs certain formations and i think the 4 LB's help defend the pass too. This doesnt hurt teams as much as the 5-3-3 where you loose the LB and SS Edited to spell homeboy's name right  Last edited on 2013-04-26 18:54:26 by scottishbronco |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Loretta
|
posted: 2013-04-26 20:44:20 (ID: 93621) Report Abuse |
|
Yeah I had to suffer this in a friendly today.
4-3-4 and Dime just worked bad against pass. I have to find out how it works. With my experience as an OT in real life, I would appreciate some formations to work better than they do in this game. But no failure no progress! |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
bwadders76
|
posted: 2013-04-26 21:01:18 (ID: 93624) Report Abuse |
|
The nearest a 4-3-4 should come to a playbook is when scrolling past it to another formation
|
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
holmeboy
|
posted: 2013-04-26 21:19:16 (ID: 93628) Report Abuse |
|
scottishbronco wrote:
@holmeboy - The 4-4 is a really good run defense vs certain formations and i think the 4 LB's help defend the pass too. This doesnt hurt teams as much as the 5-3-3 where you loose the LB and SS I agree that 4lbs can help defend the pass but against formations like Proset and I-formation, should the extra LB make a big difference v 1 TE? Considering its zonal D. Against the run I've found it is slightly better than 3-4 (like it should), but I'm not sure about its ability to defend v the pass. Personally I love it when teams use 4-3-4 against the I-formation because I know I'm pretty much guaranteed some big yards passing. It should be in between 3-4 and 4-4, but from my experience its well behind both of them. Agree with bwadders it should be avoided at all costs... Edit: After my league game on Tues I pulled out the foil hat and played a few scrimmages: I-formation 4-4-3 24 / 80 / 3.3 I-formation 4-4-3 33 / 130 / 3.9 I-formation 4-4-3 23 / 136 / 5.9 I-formation 4-4-3 24 / 96 / 4 I-formation 4-4-3 18 / 72 / 4 I-formation 4-4-3 20 / 94 / 4.7 No deep TDs I-formation 4-3-4 25 / 309 / 12.4 4 deep TDs I know its only 1 game, but still 4 deep v 0 in a few games with 4-4. The other formation in the last game was 5-2: I-formation 5-2 40 / 236 / 5.9 Last edited on 2013-04-26 21:29:23 by holmeboy |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
scottishbronco
|
posted: 2013-04-26 21:24:40 (ID: 93629) Report Abuse |
|
the extra LB would be a "spare man" imo vs 1 TE. If we had more blitzing control we could set the free LB to blitz.
|
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
dgrid
|
posted: 2013-04-27 05:05:22 (ID: 93646) Report Abuse |
|
So the main gripe against the 4-3 is the pass def?
Im fairly new in this game, but use 4-3 alot, and seem to have good results with it, on average. holmeboy wrote:
Edit: After my league game on Tues I pulled out the foil hat and played a few scrimmages: Holmeboy, did you have def set up vs pass for these tests? Assume you did. Any idea how weighted the formations vs formations thing is? Would the 4-3 "disadvantage" outweight LBer coverage skills, etc...? |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Lohengrin
|
posted: 2013-04-27 12:14:47 (ID: 93685) Report Abuse |
|
dgrid wrote:
So the main gripe against the 4-3 is the pass def? Im fairly new in this game, but use 4-3 alot, and seem to have good results with it, on average. holmeboy wrote:
Edit: After my league game on Tues I pulled out the foil hat and played a few scrimmages: Holmeboy, did you have def set up vs pass for these tests? Assume you did. Any idea how weighted the formations vs formations thing is? Would the 4-3 "disadvantage" outweight LBer coverage skills, etc...? I've used the 4-3 a lot also, but that's primarily because I have better linemen than linebackers. I've got strong and fast DLs that make good 4-3 DEs. It's hard to say one way or another how it works vice 3-4 because I'm playing at a lower level of competition. I'll try out 3-4 for a few matches, just for a comparison |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| reply Mark this thread unread | |
| Navigation: |< 2 > >| | |
| Main / Discussions / the 4-3 defense | |
