4-3 Defense

[kash96ravenstotalfan]

Read on article recently on the Baltimore Sun that quoted Ray as saying that the 4-3 was a MLB dream defense. Apparently Ray and the other D players are happy that they switched to the 4-3. Let's see how this plays out. We did win a SB with the 4-3

[Chi_Town_Raven]

[quote name='CorvusCorax' date='24 August 2009 - 06:54 PM' timestamp='1251154491' post='223157']
I'm still understanding formations and such. Is there a good website to learn and understand all the formations?
[/quote]
Not really, because it all depends on the system. Kind of like drawing your name with pee, you just learn it. No way to look it up and understand.

[MKdave]

[quote name='kash96ravenstotalfan' date='25 August 2009 - 12:15 AM' timestamp='1251155706' post='223165']
Read on article recently on the Baltimore Sun that quoted Ray as saying that the 4-3 was a MLB dream defense. Apparently Ray and the other D players are happy that they switched to the 4-3.
[/quote]
If it's the same article that I read, then Trevor Pryce denied the switch. And a 4-3 is a MLB 'dream defense' because it highlights them. They stand alone in the middle, so the run game goes to them, and alot of the short passing stuff will go to them aswell.
I think the DBs would be less happy; a 3-4 is based on confusing the QB, making him make rash, poor decisions resulting in picks for the DBs. Then again, it can leave the corners on islands sometimes also.
A 4-3, the QB knows who's coming, and if he sees the DE beat the tackle, he'll just throw it away or if totally necessary, take the sack. There's not the panic and confusion because he knows what's going on the whole time.

[Bltravens]

my biggest thing is if it comes to being a 4-3 team what about our team speed at linebacker? If man we have a slow linebacking unit, as ray isnt as fast as he used to be and johnson is very slow. Ravens won in 2000 with a 4-3 because the size and speed of all 3 linebackers was ridiculous, sharper,bouleware, and lewis were all 245+. Bouleware was the sacker, lewis was the tackle machine, and sharper played in the shadows abit but was just as big, strong and close to as athletic as the other 2. Now in our version how does Johnson look compared to those 3? How about a 9 year older Lewis? A rookie LB? Whos gonna be the rush linebacker? Im not saying it wont work, because the linebackers we had that year were insane, but reading some posts i dont like hearing "well we won in 2000 with a 4-3 so why not switch back" . We dont have the same calibre of corners that was had in 2000, not even close, and our linebackers are less athletic. I like the idea of not getting so crazy exotic with dropping DTs in man coverage and blitzing safeties on pass downs...staying base is good at times...but we were a 3-4 last year and all it takes for us to be a 4-3 like Pryce said is Suggs putting his hand in the dirt, so why take away our versatility?

This is just my opinion.

[MKdave]

[quote name='Bltravens' date='25 August 2009 - 12:35 AM' timestamp='1251156910' post='223173']
my biggest thing is if it comes to being a 4-3 team what about our team speed at linebacker? If man we have a slow linebacking unit, as ray isnt as fast as he used to be and johnson is very slow. Ravens won in 2000 with a 4-3 because the size and speed of all 3 linebackers was ridiculous, sharper,bouleware, and lewis were all 245+. Bouleware was the sacker, lewis was the tackle machine, and sharper played in the shadows abit but was just as big, strong and close to as athletic as the other 2. Now in our version how does Johnson look compared to those 3? How about a 9 year older Lewis? A rookie LB? Whos gonna be the rush linebacker? Im not saying it wont work, because the linebackers we had that year were insane, but reading some posts i dont like hearing "well we won in 2000 with a 4-3 so why not switch back" . We dont have the same calibre of corners that was had in 2000, not even close, and our linebackers are less athletic. I like the idea of not getting so crazy exotic with dropping DTs in man coverage and blitzing safeties on pass downs...staying base is good at times...but we were a 3-4 last year and all it takes for us to be a 4-3 like Pryce said is Suggs putting his hand in the dirt, so why take away our versatility?

This is just my opinion.
[/quote]
That's sort of a point I made in another thread. Specifically about Johnson. Barnes is an unbelievable athlete, as good as our 2000 guys, probably better. I wonder if he'd be more appropriate as a 4-3 OLB, with Johnson moving onto the DLine.
Lewis I think will be ok because he's slimmed down and it's more about speed than size for 4-3 LBs, and I hear he's flying around in camp. Gooden is also a pretty good fit with the 4-3 on paper, and while it's not the LB core that it was in 2000, it's not bad. I think the bigger drop off is, as you pointed out, the corners. We have great depth this year, and Fabian was really good last year and Foxy got paid big time in the offseason but they're not as good as what we had in 2000 at the top.

[52Kia Kaha92]

I like this move for real life, but it sucks for madden lol

Anyway i think the d looks like this the first 2 downs

Suggs - Ngata - Gregg - Pryce
Gooden - Lewis - Johnson
Foxworth - Reed - Landry - Washington

Then on third down or 2nd and long etc this

Foxworth - Reed - Landry - Washington
Gooden - Lewis - Barnes
Suggs - Ngata - Pryce - McClain

That way we have a very good pass rush with Ngata and Pryce inside and McClain and Suggs outside, i imagine that McClain and Barnes could swap very easily

With the amount of lineman we have i like thos move a lot. However with this move i dont think JJ stays on this team past next year, he is great in a 3-4 but as a 4-3 OLB i think hell struggle due to speed issues, although he has a great motor and heart so we will see wont we. Good test tonight up against a very good jets offensive line (if Mangold plays ofcourse lol)

[mhead66]

I don't think a switch to the 4-3 would behoove the Ravens.

The key to Defense is pass rush. The Ravens will stop the rush, regardless of alignment - 4-3 or 3-4. The front 7 talent vs. the Rush will show through, regardless of formation.

The pass rush is more important. Over their careers, Ngata has 5 sacks in three years (1.7 avg.) and Gregg has 15 in his six (healthy) seasons - a 2.5 average.

That's around 4 sacks/season, average, for the DTs. I know that's primarily been in a 3-4, in which the NT isn't asked to penetrate to the QB. However, the DTs - outside of the NYGs - aren't the primary source of pass rush, in even the best Defenses.

However, for the sake of the pass rush, I think the 3-4 allows the D to put more pass rushing talent on the field at one given time. Suggs and Barnes/JJ, alternating rushes from OLB, with Ray and Gooden screaming in from the middle, would provide more pressure. Utilizing Suggs' and Barnes' speed, together with the surprise factor and the fact that upright OLBs get more initial burst than a DE with his hand in the dirt...

With Suggs, Pryce, Ngata and Gregg as down linemen, teams could double Suggs with a TE... and a 5th player, one of the OLBs in the 4-3, would be needed to get pressure.

[JEEPercreepermd]

[quote name='CorvusCorax' date='24 August 2009 - 06:54 PM' timestamp='1251154491' post='223157']
I'm still understanding formations and such. Is there a good website to learn and understand all the formations?
[/quote]
As defensive formations pertain to this discussion, I'll explain what we have been talking about.

3-4 defense- Consists of 3 down lineman (Ngata,Gregg,and Pryce) and 4 linebackers (Suggs,Gooden,Lewis,Johnson) This is the formation that the Ravens have used for the last few seasons. It's good because you can utilize the speed of the 4 linebackers on the field to use exotic blitzes that will confuse the Quarterback because he can't tell who is going to blitz. A weakness of this defense is that it relies on smaller linebackers to block larger Offensive Lineman because there are only 3 defensive lineman. The Ravens version of the 3-4 was kind of similar to a 4-3 defense because the Ravens used Suggs as a defensive end on a lot of plays.

4-3 defense is 4 defensive lineman and 3 linebackers. This system depends on the front 4 Defensive lineman to provide a lot of the pressure on the Quarterback while the linebackers match up against TE's RB's or FB's. This system benefits the Ravens because Ray Lewis will now have to deal with less blocks from larger Offensive lineman and be able to run freely across the field to track down ball carriers. The Ravens have probably the most talented rotation of Defensive lineman in the NFL so they will be able to keep everyone fresh. As I keep saying, Suggs lined up ad Defensive End most of the time last season so really what we had was pretty much a 4-3 anyway.

Hopefully that was atleast SOME help to you, there are still other formations that NFL teams use such as the Tampa 2 defense, 46 defense,among others but the two most used sets are the 3-4 and 4-3

[Bltravens]

[quote name='MKdave' date='24 August 2009 - 05:41 PM' timestamp='1251157300' post='223178']
That's sort of a point I made in another thread. Specifically about Johnson. Barnes is an unbelievable athlete, as good as our 2000 guys, probably better. I wonder if he'd be more appropriate as a 4-3 OLB, with Johnson moving onto the DLine.
Lewis I think will be ok because he's slimmed down and it's more about speed than size for 4-3 LBs, and I hear he's flying around in camp. Gooden is also a pretty good fit with the 4-3 on paper, and while it's not the LB core that it was in 2000, it's not bad. I think the bigger drop off is, as you pointed out, the corners. We have great depth this year, and Fabian was really good last year and Foxy got paid big time in the offseason but they're not as good as what we had in 2000 at the top.
[/quote]

I like the idea of barnes moving in, he'd obviously be the rush backer and it takes johnson's speed issues out of the equation. Johnson in a 4-3 linebacker has mismatch written all over him in every possible scenario. Doing some 4-3 base is worth taking a look at in preseason, but dont be surprised if it doesnt work out so hot.

[flynismo]

[quote name='beetus' date='24 August 2009 - 11:15 AM' timestamp='1251126953' post='222999']
Moving back to a 4-3 is fine with me, but the Raven's D is so chaotic and unpredictable that its hard to define what our base is. We are very deep and both D-line and Linebacker, so I can see us being like the Eagles or Giants with the constant rotation and bringing in fresh guys to keep the offense confused.
[/quote]

That sums it up pretty well.
I think our personnel is great for the 4-3...Ngata and Gregg crushing the interior, Suggs and Pryce bringing it on the outside...that is sick! As a bonus all four of those guys are great against the run.

In addition to that, it covers up potential weak spots at the LB position (Gooden, Kruger, Barnes are unproven, and JJ is merely average) while giving Ray Ray a ton of protection.

But really, it doesn't matter much what our "official" base is; we will still be throwing out a lot of 3-4 and 46 formations.

[kash96ravenstotalfan]

[quote name='MKdave' date='24 August 2009 - 07:21 PM' timestamp='1251156109' post='223168']
If it's the same article that I read, then Trevor Pryce denied the switch. And a 4-3 is a MLB 'dream defense' because it highlights them. They stand alone in the middle, so the run game goes to them, and alot of the short passing stuff will go to them aswell.
I think the DBs would be less happy; a 3-4 is based on confusing the QB, making him make rash, poor decisions resulting in picks for the DBs. Then again, it can leave the corners on islands sometimes also.
A 4-3, the QB knows who's coming, and if he sees the DE beat the tackle, he'll just throw it away or if totally necessary, take the sack. There's not the panic and confusion because he knows what's going on the whole time.
[/quote]
I respect your reply, but I prefer to side with Ray Lewis on this 4-3

[ZIBBY28]

organized chaos is what the 3-4 creates... why change that? the ravens have played a hybrid 3-4 the past few years and done all kinds of things including setting up with 4 down lineman.. however you want to classify it, i dont think it changes what they want to do IMO

[CorvusCorax]

[quote name='JEEPercreepermd' date='24 August 2009 - 07:57 PM' timestamp='1251158274' post='223187']
As defensive formations pertain to this discussion, I'll explain what we have been talking about.

3-4 defense- Consists of 3 down lineman (Ngata,Gregg,and Pryce) and 4 linebackers (Suggs,Gooden,Lewis,Johnson) This is the formation that the Ravens have used for the last few seasons. It's good because you can utilize the speed of the 4 linebackers on the field to use exotic blitzes that will confuse the Quarterback because he can't tell who is going to blitz. A weakness of this defense is that it relies on smaller linebackers to block larger Offensive Lineman because there are only 3 defensive lineman. The Ravens version of the 3-4 was kind of similar to a 4-3 defense because the Ravens used Suggs as a defensive end on a lot of plays.

4-3 defense is 4 defensive lineman and 3 linebackers. This system depends on the front 4 Defensive lineman to provide a lot of the pressure on the Quarterback while the linebackers match up against TE's RB's or FB's. This system benefits the Ravens because Ray Lewis will now have to deal with less blocks from larger Offensive lineman and be able to run freely across the field to track down ball carriers. The Ravens have probably the most talented rotation of Defensive lineman in the NFL so they will be able to keep everyone fresh. As I keep saying, Suggs lined up ad Defensive End most of the time last season so really what we had was pretty much a 4-3 anyway.

Hopefully that was atleast SOME help to you, there are still other formations that NFL teams use such as the Tampa 2 defense, 46 defense,among others but the two most used sets are the 3-4 and 4-3
[/quote]


Thanks a lot. That helped me understand defensive formations a little bit better.

[Ed_Reed_Pick_Six]

I like the exotic 3-4 blitz packages, but if 4-3 can be played well too then I'm all for it. As long as it's continually mixed up...

[bossman419]

I really don't think a major change in defensive philosophy is coming any time soon. Other than his famous prevent defense in the 4th quarter, Rex's scheme didn't have many holes. Why fix what aint broke. Correct me if I'm wrong but if we switched to a 4-3 defense, Sizzle would be used more like an end. We all know Sizzle is best in the Hybrid LB/DE role. In my opinion, the 3-4 plays to our LB's strengths, rushing the QB, shooting the gaps, and defending the pass.


We prob just have to wait till the regular season starts but I bet we are gonna see a whole lot of looks from both the 3-4 and 4-3 playbooks.

[Ed_Reed_Pick_Six]

[quote name='bossman419' date='25 August 2009 - 05:45 PM' timestamp='1251175525' post='224014']
I really don't think a major change in defensive philosophy is coming any time soon. Other than his famous prevent defense in the 4th quarter, Rex's scheme didn't have many holes. Why fix what aint broke. Correct me if I'm wrong but if we switched to a 4-3 defense, Sizzle would be used more like an end. We all know Sizzle is best in the Hybrid LB/DE role. In my opinion, the 3-4 plays to our LB's strengths, rushing the QB, shooting the gaps, and defending the pass.


We prob just have to wait till the regular season starts but [b]I bet we are gonna see a whole lot of looks from both the 3-4 and 4-3 playbooks.[/b]
[/quote]
That's what I assumed upon reading this thread. The strength of this defense is mixing up the looks and bringing pressure - as long as this is maintained!