DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum The 3-4 or a 4-3 Defense?

Switching from a 3-4 to a 4-3

I don’t think it would be that bad of an idea for the Browns to switch to a 4-3 defense from the 3-4. First off, it can’t get any worse than it already is, and if something isn’t working, it needs to be fixed. That’s just basic business. I heard the announcers today say Rogers prefers the 4-3 defense, so why not only please our beast, but make him play at his best.

Obviously this team lacks the talent at the linebacker position there is no denying that. And with the recent way we’ve drafted linebackers (Wimbley, Veikune, etc.) it would make sense to switch to a 4-3. We would have visual evidence of how these college kids play in the 4-3 as all the colleges basically use a 4-3. There would be less guessing involved in whether a given player would make a good 3-4 OLB or end. We would know exactly where to put them.

Let’s look at what we have now. Rogers and Rubin would make great tackles in a 4-3. Corey Williams played in a 4-3 his whole career, I think he’d play well and Robaire would be the same. Linebackers. DQ (when healthy) would benefit from the 4-3 as he wouldn’t encounter blocks by linemen and could make more tackles. Same goes for Hall, he doesn’t have the size for the 3-4 OLB, but in a 4-3 his quickness might do us well. Wimbley can be replaced as I don’t think he fits anywhere on our defense.

I know most of you prefer the 3-4 to the 4-3 for some reasons. Why, I don’t know. But having a bunch of 4-3 players in a 3-4 scheme makes no sense to me. In no way am I hating on the 3-4, but running a solid defense through a 4-3 seems easier to do.

Thoughts?

It cracks me up that people are so damn fixed on staying in the 3-4. We just don't have the personal or talent to run it! Weren't we a top 10 defense a few years ago when we ran the 4-3? Only the Steelers and Patriots have won the superbowl this decade running the 3-4 and look at the talent on those teams.

I basically agree 100%. I'm tired of this NFL obsession of the 3-4. The college point is exactly why. These players coming out of college are not from 3-4 schemes. They have to adjust to both the NFL AND a 3-4. When not even playing LB in college a DE isn't used to dropping back, or being off the line. Why draft on a potential guess alone?

Mangini will never switch from the 3-4. He was asked this when he was hired, and shot down the idea in a heartbeat.

Well I am not in the 3-4 boat at all. Never have been.
But I am also not brave enough to go at it with most of the more football savy people on this board as to why I prefer a 4-3.
Hated that this team ( loosely) ever switched.
I know it is all the rage. Which is bad for a team with so many 3-4 holes.
Now competition for those once in a decade linebackers in the draft will be hard to come by.
If we switched back at least in some form to a 4-3
There will be plenty of stud DL to go around.
More "pass rushing specialists".
I want to see sacks!!!
Get us a strong safety that can play the position.
Ala Eric Turner. R.I.P.
Man that guy could lay down the lumber!!!

I'll try to get past my preference for the 3-4 in this post, but I do feel it is the better scheme.

Rogers would be better in a 4-3. Rubin would be worse. Williams would be the same, Robaire and Coleman would both be worse. D'Qwell would be better. Wimbley and Hall would both be worse. Barton and Bowens would be worse. Veikune would be worse. Maiva would be worse. The scheme would be worse.

Whatever works, I say switch to it.

1-6,....so what is it about our 3-4 that does work ? That we stopped Buffalo ?

You're welcome,...

Won't really matter if he gets the boot after this year

Also Deep Williams would be better IMO since the 4-3 is more natural for him. Rubin wouldn't have to do much besides being another big body to help stop the run. I agree that Wimbley, Robaire and Coleman would be worse but they're not doing much in the 3-4 anyways. Veikune played in the 4-3 in college and hasn't seen the field in the 3-4 so I don't understand your reasoning on that. Most importantly our best players on defense would be significantly better. (DQ and Shaun) It minimises our weakness (lbs) and maximises our only strength (d-line)

Rogers far better
Williams far better
DQ far better

Those are our best three players in the Front 7.

I could cut the others you just discussed and sleep like a baby. Find a couple FAs to fill in and a couple draft picks and we'd be a middle of the road front 7 in a 43 which would be lightyears from where we are today.

I've been saying this for more than a year. People are starting to listen.

I disagree with your entire assessment.

You also think Veikune could beat Bobby Fisher in chess.

David Veikune could beat me in HighQ.

I dont think it would be hard for this teams defense to do in one offseason. The 3-4 needs LBs and this teams only decent LB is Jackson. He is on IR and an UFA after the season. They will probabley use the Transion tag on him.

One of the best player in the next draft is d-lineman Suh, I want him or DB Berry. If They Picked Suh, move Wimbley to DE for a year (like trying Lang at LB during the first switch), lost a couple back end LBs that most are specail teams player anyways, then a foundation is started for the 4-3. The Browns did have a more exciting defense in the 4-3 when Brown and Jamir Miller was healthy. And with Ekuban and K.Lang.

I have always preferred the 4-3 over the 3-4. I would rather have 2 big guys in the middle of the d-line and challenge the offense to move them if they want to run the ball.

Not sure we have the players to make the 4-3 work. Rogers and Williams would make a good start at DT , but we would need DE help. Regardless, we don't have the personnel to run 3-4.