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 / Defensive Line in 3-4 vs 4-3 Search Forum | |
| Navigation: |< < 1 2 3 >| | |
| Poster | Message |
|
dark_wing
|
posted: 2013-05-05 20:28:51 (ID: 94863) Report Abuse |
|
Lohengrin wrote:
The defense alignments are very similar, really - I think if you compare them over the past few years, the 3-4 and 4-3 will be statistically equivalent in defending the pass and the run. The primary difference I believe, and this was the crux of my original question, is the type of personnel to fill the schemes. DEs in a 4-3 are like OLBs in a 3-4: speedy, agile, and quick. DEs in a 3-4 are like DTs: gap-fillers and run stoppers. The player "builds" for a 3-4 vs a 4-3 are very different You are right! Is hard to play with 4 linbackers, if You have just one good! |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
dark_wing
|
posted: 2013-05-05 20:29:56 (ID: 94864) Report Abuse |
|
dgrid wrote:
Lohengrin wrote:
The defense alignments are very similar, really - I think if you compare them over the past few years, the 3-4 and 4-3 will be statistically equivalent in defending the pass and the run. The primary difference I believe, and this was the crux of my original question, is the type of personnel to fill the schemes. DEs in a 4-3 are like OLBs in a 3-4: speedy, agile, and quick. DEs in a 3-4 are like DTs: gap-fillers and run stoppers. The player "builds" for a 3-4 vs a 4-3 are very different 34 def is almost like a 5-2, with very versatile DEs. I wrote it here many months ago. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Leijona
|
posted: 2013-05-06 09:59:45 (ID: 94945) Report Abuse |
|
hosh13 wrote:
dgrid wrote:
34 def is almost like a 5-2, with very versatile DEs. ....apart from that tiny little detail of there being no OLBs in the 5-2 and the consequent huge vulnerability to passing and outside runs. He's obviously talking about real life football. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
dgrid
|
posted: 2013-05-06 14:30:20 (ID: 94969) Report Abuse |
|
Leijona wrote:
hosh13 wrote:
dgrid wrote:
34 def is almost like a 5-2, with very versatile DEs. ....apart from that tiny little detail of there being no OLBs in the 5-2 and the consequent huge vulnerability to passing and outside runs. He's obviously talking about real life football. Yep i was, thanks! |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
hosh13
|
posted: 2013-05-07 01:56:33 (ID: 95005) Report Abuse |
|
Well ok, irl, where do the 2 LB of your 5-2 line up? Both as ILBs? Do the DEs drop into coverage?
Sorry, but irl or in RZA, there are no OLBs either way - I call that (2 LBs vs 4 LBs) a BIG difference!  |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
dgrid
|
posted: 2013-05-07 16:06:41 (ID: 95059) Report Abuse |
|
hosh13 wrote:
Well ok, irl, where do the 2 LB of your 5-2 line up? Both as ILBs? Do the DEs drop into coverage? Sorry, but irl or in RZA, there are no OLBs either way - I call that (2 LBs vs 4 LBs) a BIG difference! yep, the 2 LBers in 5-2 would be in middle. It's an outdated defense, hasnt been used in nfl for decades, other than certain circumstances. Im not sure if the DEs dropped into coverage when the 5-2 was used, but later on, they would in the 4-3. When they did, often the LBers would blitz, creating the zone blitz. designed to confuse the offense as to who was attacking. I think Dick Lebeau w/ Pittsburgh started this, but not sure if he was the first. So in terms of the 5-2, and introducing zone-blitzing, the modern 3-4 is like a 5-2. Esp considering 3-4 OLBs are often "hybrid" undersized converted DEs. Last edited on 2013-05-07 16:11:47 by dgrid |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
gccsteel
|
posted: 2013-05-10 20:47:50 (ID: 95364) Report Abuse |
|
5-2 and 3-4 are in the same family. The DEs in the 5-2 are like the neanderthal to the 3-4 OLBs homo sapien. FYI, Arizona Cards ran a 5-2 set quite a bit last year. And yes, Dick Lebeau is the inventor of the zone blitz.
This all gets quite complex when you add gap responsibility into the fold. I am not sure RZA has any interest in getting that complex with the engine. Generally speaking, a 43 defense has 1 gap responsibilities while 3-4 maintains 2 gap. In practice, most defenses encorporate a bit of both. I am a huge proponent of the 34 defense and really would like to see it implemented properly in this game. One of the reasons it is so effective is because it has the ability to defend the run like a light version of the 52 and also defend the pass like a 43 with one LB becoming the 4th rusher on the same play. Add the confusion that the OL and QB endures trying to figure out where the 4th rusher is coming from. The big issue I see is that the DE is essentially a DT in the 3-4 with most of the pressure coming from the LBs. In RZA, the DEs are the only players providing consistent blitz pressure. So not only do the DEs consitute 2/3 of the run defense, they also are 2/3 of the pass rush. Where in a 43 they are only 1/2 of each and have the extra DT to boot. One solution would be to make DE be the 43 End and 34 OLB. DT would be the 43 DTs and 34 DE. NT would be utilitzed only in 34. OLB would be OLBs in 43 and buck ILB in 34. MLB would be MLB in 43 and Mack in 34. This is probably too complex for the game engine and user base, but is probably a more accurate portrayal. Another solution would be to make LDE and a random LB blitz on every 34 set. The remaining 3 linebackers would fill to cover like a 43 unless another blitz occured. Again, maybe too complex? |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
scottishbronco
|
posted: 2013-05-10 21:17:41 (ID: 95370) Report Abuse |
|
This is why I love the game so much...a game of chess on the -TOG-
The above post is defence but i'm not convinced that this is the direction in which RZA wants to go. That's why I play 2 other football browser games though...to get stuck right into the gory details. Just wish I could say I was good at it  Last edited on 2013-05-10 21:18:03 by scottishbronco |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
dgrid
|
posted: 2013-05-12 02:26:13 (ID: 95483) Report Abuse |
|
gccsteel wrote:
One solution would be to make DE be the 43 End and 34 OLB. DT would be the 43 DTs and 34 DE. NT would be utilized only in 34. I think you could do this by using the depth chart. Let's say you have a base of 3 heavy D-linemen and 2 lighter/faster 4-3 DEs. You'd want 2 heavies to play DE in the 3-4, and switch to DTs for 4-3. plus a dedicated NT. So, your depth chart could look like this: NT: Nosey Ned DT: Heavy Harry Heavy Hank DE: Heavy Harry Heavy Hank Fast Freddie Fast Frank Sorry about the dumb names lol! So Harry & Hank would automatically switch to DTs when you played a 4-3. I tried this once, and it seemed to work, but I have no idea about the effects of fatigue with this system, and god forbid an injury! Maybe you mix in one more player in each list, and "sort of" have this rotation. You could also use this for bouncing an OLB to ILB by listing him as #2 ILB. But DE/OLB rotation, Im guessing the OOP would kill ya. Maybe Pete could add an exception to those positions, like KRs. If so, this may get us closer to a true hybrid D. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
gccsteel
|
posted: 2013-05-13 04:58:57 (ID: 95582) Report Abuse |
|
Thats a pretty good idea. The biggest gripe would be that Heavy Harry/Hank would be the only semblance of a pass rush on passing downs outside of the occasional blitz.
I would think that 1 LB, usually an OLB would need to rush every play to more accurately reflect a real 34. However, this probably wouldn't be much different than the 43 in the current engine outside of positioning of the DL. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| reply Mark this thread unread | |
| Navigation: |< < 1 2 3 >| | |
| Main / Discussions / Defensive Line in 3-4 vs 4-3 | |
