posted at 7/24/2010 7:24 PM EDT
First off, I gotta apologize- I sorta jumped into this thread under the presumption, that we were gonna be tearin' into Kim Basinger...I ahh, I don't really know WhoTH Brian Baldinger is. Kim's husband? Scr#w it, but seeing as I'm here, I'll give the topic an actual shot...
RE: The Remarks about The NE Patriots Defensive Scheme being outdated...
Kim's husband is sorta right but wrong, I'll explain: New England & Belichick use The Most Classic (1st developed) form of the 3-4 Defense, the first was Chuck Fairbanks, then it was tweeked a bit by Hank Bulloughs, I believe? Either way, The MOST original 3-4 version, Is NOW simply called "The Fairbanks-Bulloughs" 3-4 Defense. Ya see, alot of the newer 3-4 D's do things like play 1-gapping D-Lineman (meaning: the D-Linemn are tryin to spearhead through the spaces in between the O-Lineman)-<See Bum-Philips /> San Diego does this I think. OTHER 3-4 D's use 1 or 2-gapping D-Lineman, BUT they do a ton of zone-blitzing with their LBs and Safeties (sorta like massively overcrowding and running over 1 side of the O-Line)-Dallas does alot of this I think. Finally, some D's smply through every page in the 3-4 textbook at the Offense-zone-blitzing, 1-gapping D-lineman, scissoring The D-Lineman and LBs (D-line shifts one way, and TheLBs shift another), and even sending D-lineman & the LB switching jobs, As the D-lineman gets sent out to play a short zone area as the ball is hiked, and Now the LB is rushing the O-line... Anyway, It gets crazy (see-Pittsburgh's D).
Here's the thing: New England AND Belichick uses the Most original/classic 3-4 D (Fairbanks-Bulloughs). And HERE is where Baldinger/Springs, just might be somewhat correct (in their ambiguous and nondescript point @ NE's specific form of the 3-4)... Now, As most here nowalready, NE most often has their 3 D-Lineman 2-gapping the O-Linemen-Meaning (in layman's terms): The job of the 3 D-lineman is to occupy NOT the single space between 2 of those O-Lineman (as is a 1-gapper), BUT occupying 2 O-Lineman themselves (or better, the 1 space between 2 O-lineman, AND an extra space on either one of 1 side of those 2 O-lineman)=Called 2-gapping.
Now, The BIG point to take away from this is the following: BY 2-Gapping, These 3 D-Lineman are ideally freeing up those 4 LBs, SO they can make a far more open play on the ball. The idea is that, WITH the most number of O-Lineman being occupied, The LBs can read and thus react to what the play actually IS as it's developing at the sap of the ball. The GOOD thing here, Is that those 4 LBs, as they are set further back from the LOS, CAN make a more, longer, And thus-easier DIAGNOSIS as to what and how the Offense's actual play-call Is developing...BUT see, THIS is ALSO a somewhat bad thing too: As those 4 LBs ARE set further back from the LOS, It will and does-Take just a fraction of a second longer for the LBs to get to the ball/play (as opposed to having a 1-gapping D-Line that actually IS trying to make a play on the ball, raher than NE's 2-gapping D-Line who's job description is far less-making a play on the ball, but ffar More-Eating up the O-lineman in order to free up the LBs).
So, WHAT does this ALL mean?
Well, Some good things about having and using The 3-4 Are:
That having and acquiring even moderately skilled & sized 3-4 DEs and 3-4 NTs (let alone great ones even), Is NOT the easiest thing. It's a bit easier getting 3-4 LBs (but even THIS hasn't been easy for NE and other 3-4 teams lately).
Also, Ya got that added reaction time of those ideally "freer" LBs, In order to diagnose the play as it's beginning. And HERE, I'll add that by having an extra LB in a 3-4 as compared to a 4-3, Suddenly Now, In the new Pass-Happy NFL, A 3-4 Team that has 4, rather than 3 LBs, Has an extra man (If they so want)- To drop back into coverage on an actual Pass-Play.
Next, Ya got wider, and again-freer OLBs, and thus- IF ya got a decent one (or two), Those 3-4 OLBs are hopefully able to turn a play going towards the outside of the field, NOW inwards instead. Thus= Ideally, Better containment possibilities.
Next, As we all now-The 3-4 is a better than the 4-3 in terms of versatility... Here, 1 thing NE WILL do, IS scissor the D-Line 1 way and then, Scissor the LBs the OPPOSITE way (thus, now for instance, Ya got a perfect opportunity to have that furthermost scissored OLB, an open situation to EITHER: move right up on the D-Line and play as the furthermost Defensive End, OR for him simply NOT to, and thus-remain as an OLB still). Simple Point of this? Give the Offense an added "wrinkle" to NOT know what the Defense is gonna do.
~So, After my usual 27 Page post, THIS is where Springs and Baldinger WERE correct about NE's version of the 3-4 Defense BEING Outdated... It comes in the form of, WHAT is/are the drawbacks of playing The Fairbanks-Bulloughs classic 3-4 Defense.
Disadvantage 1: As those 3 D-linean are 2-gapping AND as there is an actual 1-less D-Lineman (compared to a 4-3 Defense), It DOES give the QB for a much greater part=MORE time and less overall pressure in the pocket on a passing play. NEEDED: Big, yet athletic LBs...AND (in terms of Springs)=Imho, Just a bit Better Cornerbacks than a 4-3 Defense needs, As those 3-4 Defense CBs, just might be on an 1-person island covering the oppossing WR, 1 second longer.
Disadvantage 2: Recall like I said earlier, How those LBs ARE set a couple steps further back from the LOS, AND how those LBs ARE the true "playmakers" of Belichick's 3-4 Defense? Remember the "negative" part of this? It's that how As a PLUS-The LBs are freer to diagnose the actual play, YET as a MINUS- It WILL take them 1 fraction of a second LONGER to make a play on the ball-carrier...
And for THAT Reason, You ARE gonna here (and we ALWAYS DO here)-That The Classic Burroughs-Fairbanks 3-4 Defense, IS a Containment Defense. It IS gonna take them 1 fraction of a second longer to make the play (than having that extra man on the D-Line as in a 4-3 Defense).
Q: What's The Most CRITICAL RESULT of this?
A: Well, think specifically in terms of a basic running play up the middle...1 less D-lineman AND those 3 D-lineman FAR more concerned with playing the multiple O-Line and FAR less concerned, With making an actual play on the ball-carrier. Now, Ya got to add in how the actual play-makers (those 4 LBs) ARE set further back, The obvious & simple net result=FAR better chance for (here: a simple up the middle run)-That Offense here, Getting a 1 or two extra yards per run (spec. run up the middle)... Now, when you take into consideration how that oppossing QB (again-for the greater part)-HAS more time and less pocket pressure, The End Result is the following:
LONGER & FURTHER extended Overall Drives For The Offensive Team...
WHY PLAY THE CLASSIC 3-4 DEFENSE then?
A: Because you're gambling that You eventually WILL stop the Offense. They'll get just a couple of more yards here and there...BUT, eventually they WILL get frustrated, tired, Or simply fail to coinvert, OR make a mistake (Int, Fumble, etc).
WHY THE CLASSIC 3-4 DEFENSE WILL FAIL then?
A: Because you fielded your squad full of people none better than Shawn Springs. You NEED to actually CAPITALIZE (i.e. jump and take advantage of)- When the oppossing offense, DOES get tired, frustrated, fails to convert, And/OR FULLY capitalize when that offense makes any sort of mistake..
THIS is the entire idea behind WHY New England's version of the 3-4 Defense, Is called and dubbed: A "Bend but Don't Break" Defense.
~Hey, that only took 1 1/2 hours, yahhh (sorta wish this HAD been about bashing Kim Basinger to begin with)!