We're Moving to a 3-4 D

[soonercastor]

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/blog/eye-on-college-football/21624514/report-oklahoma-coaches-planning-shift-to-a-34-defense


According to The Oklahoman, Sooner coaches are telling recruits the Oklahoma defense will likely shift to a 3–4 scheme this fall, a potentially radical shift for a staff that has made its living on the 4–3. If so, the decision makes sense on multiple levels, none of them more important than turning around a unit that ran out of gas in 2012.



This may have been discussed in a thread but I felt this needed its own thread.

[Mjcpr]

How many LB's do we need to sign to get up to 4 on the roster?

[BillyBall]

How many LB's do we need to sign to get up to 4 on the roster?

Well done...

[Ruf/Nek7]

How many LB's do we need to sign to get up to 4 on the roster?

We've got Aaron Franklin, Frank Shannon, Eric Striker, and Corey Nelson already on scholarship. I would also imagine that some of the defensive ends will "convert" to the OLB in the 3-4.

[FaninAma]

We've got Aaron Franklin, Frank Shannon, Eric Striker, and Corey Nelson already on scholarship. I would also imagine that some of the defensive ends will "convert" to the OLB in the 3-4.
That's the way I understand the scheme and DT's will play the down linemen(NG and 2 gap(?)) It actually should help OU recruit DTs because more of them will gt on the field at the same time.

[OkieThunderLion]

How many LB's do we need to sign to get up to 4 on the roster?
Probably looking at only 2 traditional linebackers. The outside guys are usually DE converts. Or safety/WLB hybrids (Nelson/Striker) for a nickel look.

[stoops the eternal pimp]

We already had them but the coaches didn't invite them to particpate on saturdays..only through the week in practices.

[BillyBall]

Huge change from our 4-0-7 formation...

[sluggo sooner]

We've got Aaron Franklin, Frank Shannon, Eric Striker, and Corey Nelson already on scholarship. I would also imagine that some of the defensive ends will "convert" to the OLB in the 3-4.


Is P.L Lindley still on the team? If so, what does anyone hear about his progress at LB?

[MojoRisen]

Lindley was playing DE last year - I think he was hurt as well.

[stoops the eternal pimp]

Almost every DE who has gone through OU converts to a OLB in a 3-4...So that won't be an issue in the future.

[FaninAma]

Huge change from our 4-0-7 formation...
Against West Virginia and Baylor I thought we ran a 4-0-0 scheme.

[boomersooner28]

Next year may be a LOOOOOOOONNNNNGGGGG year.

[8timechamps]

Next year may be a LOOOOOOOONNNNNGGGGG year.

That's my feeling now. I just can't imagine that the personnel is on the roster to run an effective 3-4. I think there are some guys that can play OLB in that scheme, but I don't think we have the guys to play ILB and NT effectively. I hope I'm wrong.

[StoopTroup]

I think it will be a great year if we are able to win the Big XII. I just hope The Monster doesn't lose their **** again like they have the last 12 years when Bob didn't bring Home another Crystal Ball.

[MojoRisen]

Favors, Franklin and Lindley were all OLB's initially out of HS.. If I recall

[8timechamps]

Favors, Franklin and Lindley were all OLB's initially out of HS.. If I recall

Yep, those are the guys I was thinking about when I said there are guys that can play OLB in a 3-4. Tapper is another guy that can play there.

[StoopTroup]

I like guys that have a passion for playing rather than the guys that expect to have their starting spot secured because of what they were promised when they were recruited.

Fexas has been doing this for decades and look at how things are working out.

[thecrimsoncrusader]

OU will be better on defense next season. Outside of Hurst and Jefferson, a lot of passive dead weight from the Venables era departed. Also, the Sooners lose a couple of cry-babies that caused problems on defense this past season much like Woods and Bartee did in the 1999 season because the new OU coaching staff didn't keep Rex Ryan as defensive coordinator. OU got a lot better on defense in the transition from the 1999 season to the 2000 season and a similar thing will happen here although not as significantly. And we're really going to be pissed that Phillips wasn't starting this past season.

[NorthernIowaSooner]

Huge change from our 4-0-7 formation...

When I saw the thread title I wondered to myself how many series it will take to switch to 3-0-8 defense. I didn't think we had four LB's.

[OkieThunderLion]

Yep, those are the guys I was thinking about when I said there are guys that can play OLB in a 3-4. Tapper is another guy that can play there.

I think Tapper is one of the few guys that could grow into the 3-4 DE position. I'd put him there.

[OkieThunderLion]

OU will be better on defense next season. Outside of Hurst and Jefferson, a lot of passive dead weight from the Venables era departed. Also, the Sooners lose a couple of cry-babies that caused problems on defense this past season much like Woods and Bartee did in the 1999 season because the new OU coaching staff didn't keep Rex Ryan as defensive coordinator. OU got a lot better on defense in the transition from the 1999 season to the 2000 season and a similar thing will happen here although not as significantly. And we're really going to be pissed that Phillips wasn't starting this past season.

OU got a lot worse defensively from '98 to '99. So I think your assessment may be one year off.

[thecrimsoncrusader]

OU got a lot worse defensively from '98 to '99. So I think your assessment may be one year off.

Let's try again, OU's defense got a lot better going from the 1999 season to the 2000 season. No, what I really meant to say is OU's defense got a lot better going from the 1999 season to the 2000 season. Finally, OU's defense got a lot better going from the 1999 season to the 2000 season.

[soonercastor]

OU will be better on defense next season.

That's not saying much. Surely we can't be any worse.

[hawaii 5-0]

If we can't collapse the pocket with 4 how in hell are we gonna do it with 3?

5-0

[East Coast Bias]

Are the coaches picking this idea up from another program that has been successful with the 3-4? Is the move because our talent is more in the defensive ends and this puts them more into a position to make plays?

[picasso]

I think they're doing this move to quiet some of the posters on the internets.

[stoops the eternal pimp]

Are the coaches picking this idea up from another program that has been successful with the 3-4? Is the move because our talent is more in the defensive ends and this puts them more into a position to make plays?

that program would be Alabama..

[sooneron]

The only way that our defense is markedly better next year is if opponents don't know how to scheme for the 3-4.

[thecrimsoncrusader]

That's not saying much. Surely we can't be any worse.

It's always possible to be worse, I just don't think that's going to happen. :) I am just glad the era of Brent Venables always losing in Lubbock ended this past season. That's a start in terms of improvement.

[Soonerjeepman]

We already had them but the coaches didn't invite them to particpate on saturdays..only through the week in practices.

ouch~ lol

[cleller]

Had we been running this when The Hammer was here, would that have finally been the thing that was able to better unleash him on opponents?

[OkieThunderLion]

Let's try again, OU's defense got a lot better going from the 1999 season to the 2000 season. No, what I really meant to say is OU's defense got a lot better going from the 1999 season to the 2000 season. Finally, OU's defense got a lot better going from the 1999 season to the 2000 season.
Exactly. In year two!

If they are switching schemes, I'm not expecting it to look great next year.

[OkieThunderLion]

Had we been running this when The Hammer was here, would that have finally been the thing that was able to better unleash him on opponents?

We did. It was used almost exclusively for the last 3 games of 2010 (OSU, NU, UConn). But Ronnell played 5-tech and Beal stood up as WOLB.

[jkjsooner]

OU will be better on defense next season. Outside of Hurst and Jefferson, a lot of passive dead weight from the Venables era departed. Also, the Sooners lose a couple of cry-babies that caused problems on defense this past season much like Woods and Bartee did in the 1999 season because the new OU coaching staff didn't keep Rex Ryan as defensive coordinator. OU got a lot better on defense in the transition from the 1999 season to the 2000 season and a similar thing will happen here although not as significantly. And we're really going to be pissed that Phillips wasn't starting this past season.

I was one of those who was wishing Stoops would keep Rex Ryan on the staff. He had done such a great job turning the defense around.

1999 didn't do too much to change my opinion but 2000 and 2001 sure did.


Which Woods was the cry baby? It had to have been Mike. I can't imagine you would ever see the field if you had a bad attitutude and played as poorly as Pee Wee.

[Jason White's Third Knee]

How many LB's do we need to sign to get up to 4 on the roster?

If I could do it from my phone, I would so spek you.

[SoonerorLater]

3-4 conjures up visions of that immovable nose tackle who ties up blockers. Does anybody have a guess who we have that can fill that role?

[Sooner in Tampa]

**** it...we have no discernible pass rush anyway

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

Let's try again, OU's defense got a lot better going from the 1999 season to the 2000 season. No, what I really meant to say is OU's defense got a lot better going from the 1999 season to the 2000 season. Finally, OU's defense got a lot better going from the 1999 season to the 2000 season.

You mean when we moved from a man to a zone? Zone is a much safer defense to play in college, but if you have the horses man has more ceiling.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

Favors, Franklin and Lindley were all OLB's initially out of HS.. If I recall

I think Favors and Lindley are the reason they are moving here. For all intents and purposes we were running a 3-4 this year with King playing in the middle.

[Ruf/Nek7]

I tried to draw up some defensive schemes but once i submitted, it looked like and array of cheerios floating aimlessly in a bowl of milk.

Anyway, the 3-4 will help us stop the interior run game from a spread offense and will keep us from experiencing another tavon austin track meet. My only concern is, the 3-4 will not help us beat the likes of texass and other pro style, power running offenses.

[goingoneight]

You almost need to be as versatile on defense as we are on offense. Like RufNek said, if we shut down Baylor, WVU and Texas A&M with this D, doesn't mean we don't get bowled over by an old-fashioned smash mouth offense. It reminds me of how OU struggled so much in 2010... they saw more variations of offense that year than I ever remember an OU defense playing.

Utah State = zone-read
FSU = pro-style
Air Force = option
Baylor and USU were similar and that's why OU player RG3 better later in the year.
OSU = Creepy Coach Holgerson "Air Raid" pistol formation offense
Nebraska = the Wild Husker Martinez Cluster****.
Mizzou had their own thing going, too.

[Ruf/Nek7]

You almost need to be as versatile on defense as we are on offense.

^^^THIS^^^^ But can college teams play multiple schemes? Especially two that are like being both democrat and republican. In football, i feel you are either 3-4 (with different variations) or 4-3 (with different variations).

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

^^^THIS^^^^ But can college teams play multiple schemes? Especially two that are like being both democrat and republican. In football, i feel you are either 3-4 (with different variations) or 4-3 (with different variations).

I think you play what you can recruit too. All of us have been saying that our DTs are seriously undersized. In a 3-4 that isn't as much of a problem. You just need one huge fireplug in the middle

[HolaKyle]

I wish I knew more about the technical details of football, but can someone help me clear up some confusion.

What are the benefits to a 3-4?

When thinking about it, what scares me is that we now have more players off the line of scrimmage. To me, this means that the contact between the blocker and the defender happens farther upfield, which is bad for the running game, right?

[Soonerwake]

I would imagine that you also need a couple of 240-250lb ILB's too.. Do we have a couple of those??

[Ruf/Nek7]

I wish I knew more about the technical details of football, but can someone help me clear up some confusion.

What are the benefits to a 3-4?

When thinking about it, what scares me is that we now have more players off the line of scrimmage. To me, this means that the contact between the blocker and the defender happens farther upfield, which is bad for the running game, right?

It all depends on what you are facing. When we play spread teams that like to run up the middle, it is far more effective than running a 4-1-6. I tried to put some Xs and Os to help paint the picture but it didnt quite carry over once i submitted my post. The best thing i can tell you is that it will allow us to cover receivers and still keep two men in the middle to fill gaps. IMO, the thing that matters most is if our d coordinator will run more zone as opposed to a dedicated man coverage scheme. With a 3-4, we will have to incorporate more zone coverages.

[Ruf/Nek7]

The best thing i can tell you is that it will allow us to cover receivers and still keep two men in the middle to fill gaps.

Let me be more specific, we will have 3 down linemen and 2 LBs in the middle to apply pressure and fill gaps.

[C&CDean]

Next year may be a LOOOOOOOONNNNNGGGGG year.

They've all been pretty mych loooooonnnnggggg years since 2000, no?

[C&CDean]

I would imagine that you also need a couple of 240-250lb ILB's too.. Do we have a couple of those??

Nah, my eligibility ran out in 1979.

[cleller]

They were talking on the Animal today about a JUCO (I think) kid we are talking with. He had been huge-400 lbs, but has lost 75 pounds so far. Was trying to pay attention, but was out working on something, so I didn't get many details.

[stoops the eternal pimp]

Really, there was variations of the 3-4 ran at different times under Brent..The concern about having players off the line of scrimmage isn't really an issue as long as you have guys up front that can take up blockers..

There is the New England runs it and the way Baltimore runs it...Baltimore uses the OLBs mostly as pass rushers(Terrell Suggs) while NE likes to have OLBs that can get back into coverage..

It is fitting that OU run the 3-4 since Bud Wilkinson started it.

[Mjcpr]

I bet we are hiring Rob Ryan.

[KantoSooner]

Too late this year, but I move that we go looking for, yes, my obsession: a gigantic angry Polynesian dude to be our nose tackle. I'm thinking about 6'9" and 375.
He doesn't have to run fast, he doesn't have to know much about football. Experience as a bouncer in a bad bar and anger management issues would be far more important.
Somebody like the early 1990's sumo wrestler from Hawaii, Konishki. (although he went over 600 at his max)

[OkieThunderLion]

I tried to draw up some defensive schemes but once i submitted, it looked like and array of cheerios floating aimlessly in a bowl of milk.

Anyway, the 3-4 will help us stop the interior run game from a spread offense and will keep us from experiencing another tavon austin track meet. My only concern is, the 3-4 will not help us beat the likes of texass and other pro style, power running offenses.
?

Over half the NFL runs a 3-4.

[OkieThunderLion]

I think you play what you can recruit too. All of us have been saying that our DTs are seriously undersized. In a 3-4 that isn't as much of a problem. You just need one huge fireplug in the middle

I think it's easier to recruit to the 4-3, smaller athletes.

I think you need 2 capable noses in the 3-4, and some long (6-4/6-5) 5-technique guys, who can go hand-to-hand combat with OTs.

[OkieThunderLion]

I bet we are hiring Rob Ryan.

Have they made nice since '99 Bedlam?

I remember him trying to intimidate Heupel, pre-game, and Jonathan Hayes stepping in!

[OkieThunderLion]

What are the benefits to a 3-4?


A true 3-4 defense is big, heavy, hard to move, and physical against the run.

It's effective against the pass by creating confusion with coverage and blitz packages.

[Soonerfan88]

I'm far from being even good at football schemes, but this post from Sooner4Ever on OUInsider makes me feel pretty good about the move.


Hey guys, I don't get all the hand wringing over the possible switch to the 3-4 scheme. Our "issues" personnel wise is the reason coaches run a 50 front.Bill Parcells was one of the first NFL coaches to return to the 50 front when he took over the Giants. At the time, the 4-3 based defense was prevelant in the NFL. I once heard Parcells talk about why he prefers this defense and according to him, it starts with available personnel.
He said (paraphrased), "to run a great 4-3 defense, you need a dominant defensive tackle and two very good to great defensive ends." The 4-3 means you need amazingly athletic big men. Parcells theory was, its easier to find freak athletes at the linebacker size (ie Lawrence Taylor, Charles Haley, Demarcus Ware) than at defensive tackle and defensive end size.
As i heard him describe it, in a 4-3, your defensive ends have to be big and strong enough to take on the power run coming at the them, fast enough to string out the wide runs to their side and pursue the runs away from them... oh, and be able to get an effective push from the edge as a pass rusher. Your dominant defensive tackle had to be able to force double teams to keep linemen off of your linebackers... and needed to be able to make plays against that double team. The other tackle had to be able to defeat a one on one block and get penetration against both the pass and the run.
In the 3-4 you're counting on your nose tackle to anchor the middle and plug things up. Kelly Gregg was a great 3-4 NT. If he is able to get some penetration and disrupt things (a la Jay Ratliff of the Dallas Cowboys), that's a bonus... but if not, you're happy if he commands a double team and can hold his ground.
Your "defensive ends" in the 3-4 ideally are larger, but a lack of size or being a tweener size-wise can be offset with quickness and an ability to get in a gap and penetrate. OU has a lot of these "tweener" types. In fact, Jackie Shipp seems to prefer the Tommie Harris/ Gerald McCoy size player. He took Stacy McGee who was, what 250 coming out of high school and wanted him to be a defensive tackle. In the 3-4, Stacy McGee is an ideal defensive end.
Matt Dimon... is he fast enough to be a 4-3 defensive end? Is he big enough to be a 4-3 defensive tackle? The answer to those two questions is possibly no. He may be good at either position in that scheme, but may be a liability at times. In a 3-4, he's a taylor made defensive end. Big, strong and plenty quick enough to get into a gap and penetrate.
Your undersized defensive tackles and oversized defensive ends in the 4-3 are perfect defensive ends in the 3-4. You just need to find a big ol' boy defensive tackle to play NG and anchor the middle of the defense. And because he has a defensive end one gap to either side of him and two linebackers running to the ball just behind him, he doesn't have to be as fast as a 4-3 d-tackle.
If we do in deed go to the 50 front, we just need to keep getting the Matt Dimons, Charles Tappers and Jordan Phillips to play that interior... throw in a couple big ol' Jordan Wades or Torea Petersons and we'll be fine up front.
As for the backers, we've never had problems finding and recruiting the size and type of athletes we need for the outside backer spots. Striker, Nelson, Ibiloye... those are the type of great athlete you want on the edge. Speed to blitz and disrupt the running game and pressure the QB, as well as drop back and cover an underneath zone or the flats.
Where we will need to improve our recruiting is at the middle backer spots. We will need to get backers with some more size for there. The good thing is, as Parcells said, it's easier to find great athletes that size that can run than 290 that can run. There are plenty of big backers that can run out there... we just have to start getting them and when we do, plug them into this scheme as MLBs instead of spinning them down to d-ends as we did in the 4-3, a la Favors and Lindley.
I'm personally very excited that we're possibly going to the 50 front. I think with the type of player we tend to recruit, it is the best possible scheme for the diverse offenses we face and the great athletes that we go against.

[OkieThunderLion]

I'm far from being even good at football schemes, but this post from Sooner4Ever on OUInsider makes me feel pretty good about the move.

I don't agree with him.

I think you need more (not less) good big men in the 3-4 than in the Stoops 4-3 (which often used undersized DEs).

Just throwing sizes out there for fun...

Ideal 3-4
NT (1) 6-2 320
DE (2) 6-4 285
OLB (2) 6-3 250
ILB (2) 6-2 240

Stoops 4-3 (based on averages of past players)
DE (2) 6-3 250
DT (2) 6-2 290
OLB (2) 6-1 235
MLB (1) 6-1 235

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

I think it's easier to recruit to the 4-3, smaller athletes.

I think you need 2 capable noses in the 3-4, and some long (6-4/6-5) 5-technique guys, who can go hand-to-hand combat with OTs.

It may be technically easier, but for the decade we've had 6-3/6-4 265-280 lb DEs in abundance. Our problem has been finding the 6-0/6-1 320 lb quick guys that you need need in the middle of a 4-3. In a nutshell, what this move does is allows BJW to continue to recruit his archetype DE (dan cody etc) while simplifying what we need out of Shipp (who can get you 1 great DT at a time). Secondarily, it allows us to get those "other" athletes that we end up with that typically don't have a position in a 4-3 (ie Favors, RJ Washington, etc) and have them be rush ends in a 3-4.

Oh and btw, you can seriously take this the other way and wonder why we aren't coming down on Shipp for constantly bombing in DT evaluation.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

I don't agree with him.

I think you need more (not less) good big men in the 3-4 than in the Stoops 4-3 (which often used undersized DEs).

Just throwing sizes out there for fun...

Ideal 3-4
NT (1) 6-2 320
DE (2) 6-4 285
OLB (2) 6-3 250
ILB (2) 6-2 240

Stoops 4-3 (based on averages of past players)
DE (2) 6-3 250
DT (2) 6-2 290
OLB (2) 6-1 235
MLB (1) 6-1 235

I think your ideal numbers are closer to NFL numbers than you really need in college except for 1 or 2 games a year. And 250 is kind of on the low end for our non-rush DEs (which is who would be in that spot since the Beal's of the world would remain on the edge). We can get away with Pro Tweeners in college and have a good D.

[LHSooner]

It really depends what kind of 3-4 they are considering. If it's a 2-gap, traditional 3-4, they really need the NT & 2 DEs to be space eaters & VERY strong - particularly the NT. In this traditional 3-4, like the Steelers run, the three defensive linemen are not lined up in between offensive lineman in a gap. Instead, they are lined up directly over the tackles and centers. They position themselves to control a total of 6 gaps. For that to work, each man must control 2 gaps. They do this by controlling the man. Their goal is to hold their ground, look past the blockers, read what is going on in the backfield and then react. These defensive linemen are selfless players. They do a lot of dirty work that allows the linebackers around them to play more freely.

If they want to run a hybrid or 1-gap 3-4, then that's really something different all-together. This is what the Cowboys ran under Rob Ryan. In the 1-gap, the DL are not lined head up, instead they are positioned in gaps. Their assignment on this play is to control 1 gap, the gap they are lined up in. They fire up-field instead of controlling, reading, then reacting.

The real premise behind the 3-4 front is deception & confusion. They try to confuse the OL & QB by disguising which linebacker or defensive back is blitzing and which is dropping into coverage. To do this effectively each LB must rush the passer AND drop into coverage. The best pass rusher often drops into coverage. The best coverage player often blitzes. The 3-4 Defense thrives on unpredictability. The 3-4 Defense can’t have obvious tendencies. It’s easy for an offense to set their protection if they know which player is rushing the passer.

IMO, this is why the Cowboys' 3-4 was mediocre at best & the Steelers' & Ravens' defenses are annually the top defenses in the NFL. The Cowboys were essentially running a modified 4-3 withe the weakside DE standing up. You know Demarcus Ware is going to rush the passer & can adjust your blocking schemes accordingly. Being more diversified, opposing offenses don't know for sure who is rushing/blitzing with the Steelers/Ravens. This allows them to be more creative with their blitz/zone blitz schemes.

My guess is they'll go with the 1-gap version as its concepts for the DL are most similar. Maybe they could beef up Phillips or Wade to be the NT; use some of the DEs on the roster to spin up to 5-techniques; & use the others that aren't big enough for the 5 technique as OLBs. The 4-3 under and over schemes we've used for years are both primarily one gap systems designed to attack the line of scrimmage. Each defensive lineman is placed in a gap and is responsible for that one gap. This allows the defensive lineman to play very aggressively by attacking the gap and reading their keys on the run. The defensive linemen do not have to read and then react like the defensive lineman in a 3-4 system. You could argue that the 4-3 under/over allow the defensive lineman to defend the run while on their way to pressuring the quarterback.

[OkieThunderLion]

If they want to run a hybrid or 1-gap 3-4, then that's really something different all-together. This is what the Cowboys ran under Rob Ryan. In the 1-gap, the DL are not lined head up, instead they are positioned in gaps. Their assignment on this play is to control 1 gap, the gap they are lined up in. They fire up-field instead of controlling, reading, then reacting.

Absolutely right. But I watched OU try and 2-gap this year, and now I hear 3-4 rumblings, so I'm assuming they will continue to.

[OkieThunderLion]

I think your ideal numbers are closer to NFL numbers than you really need in college except for 1 or 2 games a year. And 250 is kind of on the low end for our non-rush DEs (which is who would be in that spot since the Beal's of the world would remain on the edge). We can get away with Pro Tweeners in college and have a good D.
Yeah, probably.

Here are the official combine/pro day measurement for the guys who participated....

player Height Weight 40 com 40 pro
Dan Cody 6054 254 4.68/4.75
Jeremy Beal 6022 262 5.14
Frank Alexander 6034 270 4.76/4.80
Jimmy Wilkerson 6027 271 4.91
Auston English 6032 252 4.78/4.85
CJ Ah You 6036 274 4.7
Larry Birdine 6035 261 5.05 4.88
Jonathan Jackson 6024 235 4.57/4.65
Calvin Thibodeaux 6002 248 4.8
Ronnell Lewis 6021 253 4.68 4.65
Pryce Macon 6006 254 4.81
Alonzo Dotson 6035 250 4.96
Alan Davis 6021 259 4.95

Damn, I tried to past from my Excel and it won't line up.

[8timechamps]

I don't agree with him.

I think you need more (not less) good big men in the 3-4 than in the Stoops 4-3 (which often used undersized DEs).

Just throwing sizes out there for fun...

Ideal 3-4
NT (1) 6-2 320
DE (2) 6-4 285
OLB (2) 6-3 250
ILB (2) 6-2 240

Stoops 4-3 (based on averages of past players)
DE (2) 6-3 250
DT (2) 6-2 290
OLB (2) 6-1 235
MLB (1) 6-1 235

I'm with you, I think to have an effective 3-4 in the college game, you have to not only have a big, biscuit eating DT, you need to have them in numbers. Right now, OU doesn't even have one that fits that bill.

What worries me about a 3-4 is the point of attack is further off the ball, and can be susceptible to a good running game. That's something we already had issues with. The benefit for OU is that (like you said in an earlier post), Stoops hasn't had problems recruiting athletes to the program, so getting the personnel shouldn't be a stretch. Right now, there are far more LBs that can play in a 3-4 out there than DTs. Getting some of the bigger guys to come to OU is the struggle, as right now they all want to play in the SEC.

[Mjcpr]

I don't have a problem with it I guess....I assume they know the players we have and the players needed to run it. However, I'd like to know their reasons why they are making this change. I'm sure there are some. To my knowledge, neither Bob nor Mike have run anything other than a 4-3 and this isn't a copycat move as I don't know of any other schools running it with wild success, although I could easily be wrong on either point. The last college team I remember being mentioned with the 3-4 was the old Aggie Wrecking Crew.

I'm looking forward to it. If for no other reason, the coaches are finally making changes when they see changes need to be made. I don't think this is a staff that has been terribly proactive so maybe this is a step in the right direction. We'll see.

[I Am Right]

We have a tricked up offense, NOW we have a tricked up defense?

[OkieThunderLion]

We have a tricked up offense, NOW we have a tricked up defense?

How is it tricked up? It's the defense OU ran for a hundred years.

[Mjcpr]

I think we called it the 5-2.

[Ruf/Nek7]

?

Over half the NFL runs a 3-4.

Yeah, and this isn't the NFL.

[starclassic tama]

I'm with you, I think to have an effective 3-4 in the college game, you have to not only have a big, biscuit eating DT, you need to have them in numbers. Right now, OU doesn't even have one that fits that bill.
jordan phillips fits that bill. he is a lot taller than what you normally see out of a 3-4 nose though.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

Yeah, probably.

Here are the official combine/pro day measurement for the guys who participated....

player Height Weight 40 com 40 pro
Dan Cody 6054 254 4.68/4.75
Jeremy Beal 6022 262 5.14
Frank Alexander 6034 270 4.76/4.80
Jimmy Wilkerson 6027 271 4.91
Auston English 6032 252 4.78/4.85
CJ Ah You 6036 274 4.7
Larry Birdine 6035 261 5.05 4.88
Jonathan Jackson 6024 235 4.57/4.65
Calvin Thibodeaux 6002 248 4.8
Ronnell Lewis 6021 253 4.68 4.65
Pryce Macon 6006 254 4.81
Alonzo Dotson 6035 250 4.96
Alan Davis 6021 259 4.95

Damn, I tried to past from my Excel and it won't line up.

Cody lost a ton of weight (like 10 lbs or so they said) before his senior year because of the spinner. The guy was a classic nfl tweener that could get it done consistently at the college level.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

jordan phillips fits that bill. he is a lot taller than what you normally see out of a 3-4 nose though.

Yeah, honestly in college someone like that North Texas nose tackle from the early 2000s is ideal (Ball or something). Never getting drafted at 5'9 320 but the dude could clog the middle like no ones bidness.

[Ruf/Nek7]

It really won't be too difficult to beef up a guy or two to better fill that role. I can't wait for spring!

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

I don't have a problem with it I guess....I assume they know the players we have and the players needed to run it. However, I'd like to know their reasons why they are making this change. I'm sure there are some. To my knowledge, neither Bob nor Mike have run anything other than a 4-3 and this isn't a copycat move as I don't know of any other schools running it with wild success, although I could easily be wrong on either point. The last college team I remember being mentioned with the 3-4 was the old Aggie Wrecking Crew.

I'm looking forward to it. If for no other reason, the coaches are finally making changes when they see changes need to be made. I don't think this is a staff that has been terribly proactive so maybe this is a step in the right direction. We'll see.

There have been seasons where we've ran the 3-4 around 1/2 our plays ("spinner" was for all intents an purposes a 3-4). Of course, we did it to get our best pass rusher a more favorable matchup like Dan Cody on a running back. We were also able to get away with it because we were so deep at DE that removing your best player from the position had very little effect.

If you look at our team composition we are hurting for talent at linebacker in a 4-3. Under Stoops, MLB has been a constant problem. We have been constantly plugging that hole with jucos because we just aren't very good at projecting weight gain for that position. WLB hasn't been as big of an issue except for depth. We have been basically landing good ones every 3-4 years right as we lose one (Calmus -> Lehman -> Alexander -> Loftin -> Lewis). The one place we have had consistent success is SLB but we have often sacrificed it for a DB.

The 3-4 behaves differently, mainly in that you can get away with "tweeners" in the middle. A tweener in this case is someone who would have been too slow to play MLB in a 4-3 and too small to play DE. For whatever reason, we could land tweeners every year (and we do but as fullbacks). So instead of having to project a kid at 205 to be 245 we can grab the 215-220 kid knowing he is going to be 250-260 and we have 3 spots for him to play. Secondarily, if you get a kid like Favors (another tweener) who shows a knack for rushing the passer as a lighter player there IS a spot for that guy in a 3-4.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

And yes, to clarify: If we were running a 3-4 Milard *might* have been a MLB.

[Breadburner]

Kelly Gregg could Hog the middle.....

[OkieThunderLion]

WLB hasn't been as big of an issue except for depth. We have been basically landing good ones every 3-4 years right as we lose one (Calmus -> Lehman -> Alexander -> Loftin -> Lewis). The one place we have had consistent success is SLB but we have often sacrificed it for a DB.

Lofton played SAM in '06 and MIKE in '07 (RR was the WILL in '07).

[OkieThunderLion]

Yeah, and this isn't the NFL.

You wrote... "My only concern is, the 3-4 will not help us beat the likes of texass and other pro style, power running offenses.".

Just letting you know that isn't true. There are no magic bullets to defeat the 3-4. Same with a 4-3 for that matter.

[OkieThunderLion]

And yes, to clarify: If we were running a 3-4 Milard *might* have been a MLB.

I don't think OU would have landed him, if they planned to play him at LB. If I recall, his recruitment was about staying on O.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

That is why I said *might*. We probably would have recruited him for offense and then pointed out how much better he could do on the defensive side of the ball. Milard is a Tweener in a 4-3 but would be a devastating 3-4 MLB

[cleller]

It really depends what kind of 3-4 they are considering. If it's a 2-gap, traditional 3-4, they really need the NT & 2 DEs to be space eaters & VERY strong - particularly the NT. In this traditional 3-4, like the Steelers run, the three defensive linemen are not lined up in between offensive lineman in a gap. Instead, they are lined up directly over the tackles and centers. They position themselves to control a total of 6 gaps. For that to work, each man must control 2 gaps. They do this by controlling the man. Their goal is to hold their ground, look past the blockers, read what is going on in the backfield and then react. These defensive linemen are selfless players. They do a lot of dirty work that allows the linebackers around them to play more freely.

If they want to run a hybrid or 1-gap 3-4, then that's really something different all-together. This is what the Cowboys ran under Rob Ryan. In the 1-gap, the DL are not lined head up, instead they are positioned in gaps. Their assignment on this play is to control 1 gap, the gap they are lined up in. They fire up-field instead of controlling, reading, then reacting.

The real premise behind the 3-4 front is deception & confusion. They try to confuse the OL & QB by disguising which linebacker or defensive back is blitzing and which is dropping into coverage. To do this effectively each LB must rush the passer AND drop into coverage. The best pass rusher often drops into coverage. The best coverage player often blitzes. The 3-4 Defense thrives on unpredictability. The 3-4 Defense can’t have obvious tendencies. It’s easy for an offense to set their protection if they know which player is rushing the passer.

IMO, this is why the Cowboys' 3-4 was mediocre at best & the Steelers' & Ravens' defenses are annually the top defenses in the NFL. The Cowboys were essentially running a modified 4-3 withe the weakside DE standing up. You know Demarcus Ware is going to rush the passer & can adjust your blocking schemes accordingly. Being more diversified, opposing offenses don't know for sure who is rushing/blitzing with the Steelers/Ravens. This allows them to be more creative with their blitz/zone blitz schemes.

My guess is they'll go with the 1-gap version as its concepts for the DL are most similar. Maybe they could beef up Phillips or Wade to be the NT; use some of the DEs on the roster to spin up to 5-techniques; & use the others that aren't big enough for the 5 technique as OLBs. The 4-3 under and over schemes we've used for years are both primarily one gap systems designed to attack the line of scrimmage. Each defensive lineman is placed in a gap and is responsible for that one gap. This allows the defensive lineman to play very aggressively by attacking the gap and reading their keys on the run. The defensive linemen do not have to read and then react like the defensive lineman in a 3-4 system. You could argue that the 4-3 under/over allow the defensive lineman to defend the run while on their way to pressuring the quarterback.

Did you recently return from a trip to the Emerald City, to see The Wizard?

[LHSooner]

There have been seasons where we've ran the 3-4 around 1/2 our plays ("spinner" was for all intents an purposes a 3-4). Of course, we did it to get our best pass rusher a more favorable matchup like Dan Cody on a running back. We were also able to get away with it because we were so deep at DE that removing your best player from the position had very little effect.

If you look at our team composition we are hurting for talent at linebacker in a 4-3. Under Stoops, MLB has been a constant problem. We have been constantly plugging that hole with jucos because we just aren't very good at projecting weight gain for that position. WLB hasn't been as big of an issue except for depth. We have been basically landing good ones every 3-4 years right as we lose one (Calmus -> Lehman -> Alexander -> Loftin -> Lewis). The one place we have had consistent success is SLB but we have often sacrificed it for a DB.

The 3-4 behaves differently, mainly in that you can get away with "tweeners" in the middle. A tweener in this case is someone who would have been too slow to play MLB in a 4-3 and too small to play DE. For whatever reason, we could land tweeners every year (and we do but as fullbacks). So instead of having to project a kid at 205 to be 245 we can grab the 215-220 kid knowing he is going to be 250-260 and we have 3 spots for him to play. Secondarily, if you get a kid like Favors (another tweener) who shows a knack for rushing the passer as a lighter player there IS a spot for that guy in a 3-4.

Exactly. The 3-4 gives you more flexibility to get more "athletes" on the field. The only real requirement is the space clogger at NT - and that's not even required so much if you're going to run a 1-gap system. You can get away with the "tweeners" in the 3-4 more than you can in a 4-3. The only issue is the LBs have to be just as adept at dropping into coverage as they are stopping the run/rushing the passer - the DEs too if you're going to run a zone blitz scheme.

Assuming you get the 6-2 310+ guy for NT, and a couple of 280+ DEs, you can get away with smaller (and hopefully faster) LBs in the middle. My only concern with it is in our league, with the offenses we face, how much straight 3-4 can you realistically run. If you say you're "switching" to the 3-4, but you wind up running nickel & dime packages 70+ percent of the time, what's the point. Now, if they can come up with those same packages while maintaining the 3-man front, then we could be interesting on defense indeed...

[Salt City Sooner]

Yeah, honestly in college someone like that North Texas nose tackle from the early 2000s is ideal (Ball or something). Never getting drafted at 5'9 320 but the dude could clog the middle like no ones bidness.

Brandon "Booger" Kennedy. That guy was fun to watch.

[Tulsa_Fireman]

Assuming you get the 6-2 310+ guy for NT, and a couple of 280+ DEs, you can get away with smaller (and hopefully faster) LBs in the middle. My only concern with it is in our league, with the offenses we face, how much straight 3-4 can you realistically run. If you say you're "switching" to the 3-4, but you wind up running nickel & dime packages 70+ percent of the time, what's the point. Now, if they can come up with those same packages while maintaining the 3-man front, then we could be interesting on defense indeed...

We did it a few times last season and Venables would throw this wrinkle in on occasion as well. The only 3 down we've done though (that I've seen) is from Nickel and Dime, so it's not an unfamiliar concept at all. And the point is, at least to me, speed. Speed and variability in where you can bring your pressure, all of which can still be done in 3 down nickel and dime sets.

I'm excited for it. The few instances where we've either offset the 4 down for a 3 down look or run base 3 down, we've had success. Add a hammerswinging strong safety or nickel back in the mix and next thing you know, offenses have to account for pressure coming from God knows how many angles which in turn forces offenses into making adjustments based on what you're doing and how. NOT the other way around. A good ol' fashioned, pin your ears back and sic' em sort of defense. Which also plays into the hands of some quality CB talent and the press man we enjoyed this past season. It's the missing piece, the thing that all the "wait until next year" guys supporting Mike's changes have been waiting for.

A great example is what Dom Capers is doing in Green Bay. That's boner-inducing.

[LHSooner]

We did it a few times last season and Venables would throw this wrinkle in on occasion as well. The only 3 down we've done though (that I've seen) is from Nickel and Dime, so it's not an unfamiliar concept at all. And the point is, at least to me, speed. Speed and variability in where you can bring your pressure, all of which can still be done in 3 down nickel and dime sets.

I'm excited for it. The few instances where we've either offset the 4 down for a 3 down look or run base 3 down, we've had success. Add a hammerswinging strong safety or nickel back in the mix and next thing you know, offenses have to account for pressure coming from God knows how many angles which in turn forces offenses into making adjustments based on what you're doing and how. NOT the other way around. A good ol' fashioned, pin your ears back and sic' em sort of defense. Which also plays into the hands of some quality CB talent and the press man we enjoyed this past season. It's the missing piece, the thing that all the "wait until next year" guys supporting Mike's changes have been waiting for.

A great example is what Dom Capers is doing in Green Bay. That's boner-inducing.

agree with you 100%. However, for next season it worries me a great deal. We have exactly 0 experience at safety & just slightly greater than 0 at any of the DT positions. The experience we do have returning was not exactly awe inspiring. The LBs were so great last year, they got yanked all together in favor of 7 small guys. I like the switch for the long run, but next year could be um... a challenge.

[8timechamps]

jordan phillips fits that bill. he is a lot taller than what you normally see out of a 3-4 nose though.


He's probably the closest of the group. Still, and this is going to sound crazy, but he's a little on the lean side. I can't imagine it would take much for him to pick up 15-20 lbs, and be in that 330 range. He's tall, which makes that 315 he carries now seem a little lean.

[OkieThunderLion]

We did it a few times last season and Venables would throw this wrinkle in on occasion as well. The only 3 down we've done though (that I've seen) is from Nickel and Dime, so it's not an unfamiliar concept at all. And the point is, at least to me, speed. Speed and variability in where you can bring your pressure, all of which can still be done in 3 down nickel and dime sets.

I'm excited for it. The few instances where we've either offset the 4 down for a 3 down look or run base 3 down, we've had success. Add a hammerswinging strong safety or nickel back in the mix and next thing you know, offenses have to account for pressure coming from God knows how many angles which in turn forces offenses into making adjustments based on what you're doing and how. NOT the other way around. A good ol' fashioned, pin your ears back and sic' em sort of defense. Which also plays into the hands of some quality CB talent and the press man we enjoyed this past season. It's the missing piece, the thing that all the "wait until next year" guys supporting Mike's changes have been waiting for.

A great example is what Dom Capers is doing in Green Bay. That's boner-inducing.

Last 3 games on '10, they used a 3-4 with Beal at WOLB and Ibiloye at SOLB (Jefferson would sub for him, for nickel look). Undersized DL though because Ronnell was at DE and McGee at NT a lot of the time.

[8timechamps]

agree with you 100%. However, for next season it worries me a great deal. We have exactly 0 experience at safety & just slightly greater than 0 at any of the DT positions. The experience we do have returning was not exactly awe inspiring. The LBs were so great last year, they got yanked all together in favor of 7 small guys. I like the switch for the long run, but next year could be um... a challenge.

It's almost a guarantee that there will be a true freshman starting at one of the safety spots next year (Hatari Bryd). If he's as good as advertised, it will get interesting.

[I Am Right]

How is it tricked up? It's the defense OU ran for a hundred years.

I hope it works

[Monster Zero]

What about Rip?

[Tulsa_Fireman]

It's your son Rip on line toot.

[thecrimsoncrusader]

I was one of those who was wishing Stoops would keep Rex Ryan on the staff. He had done such a great job turning the defense around.

1999 didn't do too much to change my opinion but 2000 and 2001 sure did.


Which Woods was the cry baby? It had to have been Mike. I can't imagine you would ever see the field if you had a bad attitutude and played as poorly as Pee Wee.

Yes, Mike Woods.

[stoops the eternal pimp]

Yeah, probably.

Here are the official combine/pro day measurement for the guys who participated....

player Height Weight 40 com 40 pro
Dan Cody 6054 254 4.68/4.75
Jeremy Beal 6022 262 5.14
Frank Alexander 6034 270 4.76/4.80
Jimmy Wilkerson 6027 271 4.91
Auston English 6032 252 4.78/4.85
CJ Ah You 6036 274 4.7
Larry Birdine 6035 261 5.05 4.88
Jonathan Jackson 6024 235 4.57/4.65
Calvin Thibodeaux 6002 248 4.8
Ronnell Lewis 6021 253 4.68 4.65
Pryce Macon 6006 254 4.81
Alonzo Dotson 6035 250 4.96
Alan Davis 6021 259 4.95

Damn, I tried to past from my Excel and it won't line up.

Not a major point but a point none the less..Some of these guys put on weight after the season was over for the combine...I think for what weight they played at for OU, you could subtract 10-15 lbs...

I remember talking to Jonathan Jackson before the combine and he was telling me he would get up to around 230 in the offseason and play at about 220 during the season.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

Not a major point but a point none the less..Some of these guys put on weight after the season was over for the combine...I think for what weight they played at for OU, you could subtract 10-15 lbs...

I remember talking to Jonathan Jackson before the combine and he was telling me he would get up to around 230 in the offseason and play at about 220 during the season.

JJ is kind of a case and point for why those numbers for college are more ideal. He was a really good leverage guy which would have allowed them to flop him into several positions.

[dennis580]

Next year may be a LOOOOOOOONNNNNGGGGG year.

I don't have that feeling at all. Because I feel Bell will be a unstoppable force that can basically single handily carry us to a really great season, and maybe even a national championship. I think Bell has that type of potential. Never have I been as excited about a QB taking the helm as I am about Bell. We have never had a player like Bell.

[8timechamps]

I don't have that feeling at all. Because I feel Bell will be a unstoppable force that can basically single handily carry us to a really great season, and maybe even a national championship. I think Bell has that type of potential. Never have I been as excited about a QB taking the helm as I am about Bell. We have never had a player like Bell.

My optimism has faded. Not because of the offense, because we really have a lot of pieces coming back (and I can't see either Bell or Knight being "bad"). It's the defense. So much inexperience, and this isn't the conference best suited for on-the-job training.

[sooneron]

I don't have that feeling at all. Because I feel Bell will be a unstoppable force that can basically single handily carry us to a really great season, and maybe even a national championship. I think Bell has that type of potential. Never have I been as excited about a QB taking the helm as I am about Bell. We have never had a player like Bell.

Dude, if he's the next Teblow and he leads us to a title, I will buy you the Kobe Rib-eye at Benvenutti's a year from now with a bottle of wine (happily). Blake is a football player, but his smarts are .... well, we'll see...

[cherokeebrewer]

Blake is a football player, but his smarts are .... well, we'll see...

Why would you say that? You have info on Blake's 'smarts' or lack of? I'm not as optimistic as dennis580, but Blake has not yet been given the opportunity to show what he's really got...

[stoops the eternal pimp]

I still think Bell is a virtual unknown as a quarterback..As a fullback, he is a beast..

[sooneron]

^This. I'm not saying he's a mental midget, but it takes a ****load of smarts to be a qb these days. I haven't seen great decision making thus far. I hope he turns out gang busters for us.

[jkjsooner]

^This. I'm not saying he's a mental midget, but it takes a ****load of smarts to be a qb these days. I haven't seen great decision making thus far. I hope he turns out gang busters for us.

You haven't seen great decision making because he hasn't been put in a position to make those decisions. I'm not sure why you seem to be expecting the worst.

Bell did have a bad interception on one of his few pass attempts but that is common for guys who get few reps.

[cleller]

I think if Bell gets the chance to run the game, he'll do well. The guy has the warrior/winner mentality.

[sooneron]

You haven't seen great decision making because he hasn't been put in a position to make those decisions. I'm not sure why you seem to be expecting the worst.

Bell did have a bad interception on one of his few pass attempts but that is common for guys who get few reps.

You're kidding right? He hasn't been in a position to make decisions? Half of our goal line plays are basically a zone read running play. I'm not expecting the worst. I'm not expecting an upgrade in productivity. And he got quite a few reps. In practice AND in games. He would not have been out there if the staff felt like he was well prepared to be out there.

[PalmBeachSooner]

3-4 conjures up visions of that immovable nose tackle who ties up blockers. Does anybody have a guess who we have that can fill that role?

Jordan Phillips is going to swallow Lindley to become the immovable object you speak of.