Is the "spread" the new 3-4? - Page 4

**AustinChief** · 02-18-2009, 02:43 PM

I personally like the 3-4 for ONE very important reason... once you have found your NT the rest of your defense is much easier to find talent for than a 4-3 is.

With so many colleges running the spread and althetes like Tebow, McCoy and Bradford becoming the norm... will the NFL adjust to a hybrid (running a PURE spread wouldn't work) offense that relies heavily on the spread?

It seems to me that it carries the same advantage that the 3-4 does... easier to find talent for it.

Again, I am talking more of a pistol/wildcat/spread-flex with enough traditional under-center formations to keep it interesting.

Let's try to think of what's NEXT here and not just jump into the "never worked in the past" mode... the people that think like that are always a step behind the curve.

**the Talking Can** · 02-18-2009, 06:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AustinChief

I agree entirely with this EXCEPT that I think you are missing the comparison I was making... the 3-4 has been around for years as well... but I think that over time people realized it was easier to get the "talent" for a 3-4 and so it has become extremely popular... I am wondering if the entire league moves to spread heavy offenses for the same reason.

AT NO POINT am I advocating a spread option (hell I am not advocating anything...) but I am not sure that a spread team like the Pats couldn't also employ some of the "gimmicky" pistol and wildcat or spread-flex formations at some point as well.

people deploy a 3-4 primarily because it is proven to work, it isn't a gimmick, and people win titles with it....the fact that it is easier to replace components is a secondary benefit..

if teams were to adopt a spread offense based primarily off the fact that the pieces are easier to find and replace (because of trends in college say), then we're talking about something different...in that scenario actual success as measured in titles is a secondary benefit/concern...

so the two examples are not analogous....

and if you have a great QB you can run damn near any offense...the spread makes limited QBs look better than they are...but the truth will remain that it almost always requires a great QB to win a title....

which is why it is imperative we find a QB, and not at all imperative that we worry about the spread or its future...or thigpen....

'Hamas' Jenkins · 02-18-2009, 09:00 PM

Team Defense Rankings of the teams that Oklahoma Played last year:

Chattanooga: N/A
Cincinnati: 26
TCU: 2
Texas A&M: 114
Texas: 20
Oklahoma State: 68
Texas Tech: 66
Kansas State: 109
Kansas 86
Baylor 85
Washington 116
Nebraska: 82
Missouri: 73
Florida: 5

Other Big XII defense's left out:

Iowa State: 110
Colorado: 83

SEC Defensive Rankings:

Florida: 5
Alabama: 6
Georgia: 62
LSU: 63
Tennessee: 11
Mississippi: 14
Auburn: 15
Miss. St.: 56
Vandy: 25
South Carolina: 28
Kentucky: 39

So, yeah, I think it's safe to say the SEC has superior defenses to the Big XII. I stand by my statement that the one time Oklahoma played a real D, they got squashed, but I do recognize the mighty power that is the Horned Frogs of TCU.

Mecca · 02-18-2009, 09:04 PM

If anyone thinks the spread doesn't make your QB get hit more then you disagree with every NFL person there is. You're putting your QB back there and having lineman block one on one..and the way some NFL teams defend the spread is to kick the shit out of your QB.

The Ravens blitz that look every single time.

'Hamas' Jenkins · 02-18-2009, 09:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AustinChief

I agree entirely with this EXCEPT that I think you are missing the comparison I was making... the 3-4 has been around for years as well... but I think that over time people realized it was easier to get the "talent" for a 3-4 and so it has become extremely popular... I am wondering if the entire league moves to spread heavy offenses for the same reason.

AT NO POINT am I advocating a spread option (hell I am not advocating anything...) but I am not sure that a spread team like the Pats couldn't also employ some of the "gimmicky" pistol and wildcat or spread-flex formations at some point as well.

It has nothing to do with being able to get talent for a 3-4 defense. Hell, it's harder to find talent for a 3-4. There are dozens of prospects in this draft who are prototypical size for a 4-3 under-tackle or a 3 technique, but only a handful who can play the nose. Combine that with the fact that 3-4 OLBs aren't just undersized DEs, but also need to have fluid enough hips to occasionally cover the flats and the passing lanes, and it's significantly harder to find talent for it.

The only reason why people are switching to a 3-4 is because the Pats and Steelers have won 5 of the last 8 Super Bowls using it, and the fact that they use a 3-4 is not why they won. They won because they have excellent player personnel (Pitt) or good player personnel (NE) who hit on a once in a lifetime QB jackpot.

Mecca · 02-18-2009, 09:05 PM

The 3-4 requires ridiculously specialized front 7 personnel...this idea that any small DE can play OLB to me is pretty stupid.

'Hamas' Jenkins · 02-18-2009, 09:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mecca

The 3-4 requires ridiculously specialized front 7 personnel...this idea that any small DE can play OLB to me is pretty stupid.

Nope. All you need is a NT (grow on trees), two 290 pound ends who are strong as shit, 6'5", and are stout against the run, two 250-260 lb. MLBs, and two OLBs who not only possess an arsenal of pass rushing moves, but who are able to defend tight ends and running backs in coverage.

**AustinChief** · 02-18-2009, 09:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

So, yeah, I think it's safe to say the SEC has superior defenses to the Big XII. I stand by my statement that the one time Oklahoma played a real D, they got squashed, but I do recognize the mighty power that is the Horned Frogs of TCU.

That IS safe to say, and also something I already conceded. Again, please refrain from trying to REDFINE my arguments.

I asked you to show that there were no other "real" defenses... but I guess #2 and #20 aren't good enough to be real in your world.

And don't talk trash on TCU, I doubt you even watched a single game of theirs this year. They had a "real" defense this year, regardless of whatever made up support you want to use against them.

It pains me to defend OU's offense due to my blind hatred of them, but your pig headedness on the subject is beyond comprehension.

I am done arguing this with you as you have yet to once show anything remotely resembling an open mind on the subject.

Oh and lastly on your 3-4 related post, it is easier to get talent for a 3-4 EXCEPT for NT... a point I already made and you failed to see or just decided to ignore and try to frame an argument against me as if I hadn't.

keg in kc · 02-18-2009, 09:50 PM

It's really only easier to get 3-4 talent because teams are predominantly running 4-3 right now. There's not a whole lot of competition. As the 3-4 spreads, it becomes more difficult, and then, voila, it's easier to get 4-3 players.

**AustinChief** · 02-18-2009, 09:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mecca

If anyone thinks the spread doesn't make your QB get hit more then you disagree with every NFL person there is. You're putting your QB back there and having lineman block one on one..and the way some NFL teams defend the spread is to kick the shit out of your QB.

The Ravens blitz that look every single time.

Wow, and we have our second poster who lacks fundamental reading comprehension skills or maybe only reads what Hamas SAYS I said, as oppossed to MY ACTUAL POSTS. I never once said they get hit less.. I said that I don't believe his ASSUMPTION that they get injured MORE is correct and I want data to show it. The fact is if you KNOW a hit is coming, you are less likely to be injured. (can we agree on that because if not I doubt I can show facts but I can get anecdotal data for you)

If you can show where more QB injuries in the NFL have occured while in a spread formation than any other... I will happily agree that I am wrong. Until then, quit putting words in my mouth.

ChiefsCountry · 02-18-2009, 09:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AustinChief

Oh and lastly on your 3-4 related post, it is easier to get talent for a 3-4 EXCEPT for NT... a point I already made and you failed to see or just decided to ignore and try to frame an argument against me as if I hadn't.

No its not. If it was the majority of the league wouldnt be in a 4-3 or college football.

Mecca · 02-18-2009, 09:51 PM

If you want your QB to get hit as much as possible more power to you, I think that's awful strategy but hey.

**AustinChief** · 02-18-2009, 09:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by keg in kc

It's really only easier to get 3-4 talent because teams are predominantly running 4-3 right now. There's not a whole lot of competition. As the 3-4 spreads, it becomes more difficult, and then, voila, it's easier to get 4-3 players.

Never thought about it that way... that may well be true... of course I never really went into the WHY part of it... not germane to my initial posit.

**AustinChief** · 02-18-2009, 09:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mecca

If you want your QB to get hit as much as possible more power to you, I think that's awful strategy but hey.

Again, NOT ON TOPIC.. I was just debunking a blanket statement that your QB is more likely to be injured out of a spread formation. To me, the statement is ridiculous with out something to back it up.

**AustinChief** · 02-18-2009, 09:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChiefsCountry

No its not. If it was the majority of the league wouldnt be in a 4-3 or college football.

HUH? Let me see if I understand your post.

If it was (easier to find talent for a 3-4)... the majority of the league and college football would be using the 3-4?

Sorry KEG, but now I will steal your argument... as KEG pointed out .. maybe BECAUSE the majority of the league doesn't use it is WHY it is easier to find the talent... and college defense is a whole different ballgame.

Mecca · 02-18-2009, 09:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AustinChief

Again, NOT ON TOPIC.. I was just debunking a blanket statement that your QB is more likely to be injured out of a spread formation. To me, the statement is ridiculous with out something to back it up.

You mean like saying that your QB will be fine aslong as he knows he's gonna get hit?

02-18-2009, 02:43 PM
AustinChief Administrator Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Austin Casino cash: $2369112	Is the "spread" the new 3-4? I personally like the 3-4 for ONE very important reason... once you have found your NT the rest of your defense is much easier to find talent for than a 4-3 is. With so many colleges running the spread and althetes like Tebow, McCoy and Bradford becoming the norm... will the NFL adjust to a hybrid (running a PURE spread wouldn't work) offense that relies heavily on the spread? It seems to me that it carries the same advantage that the 3-4 does... easier to find talent for it. Again, I am talking more of a pistol/wildcat/spread-flex with enough traditional under-center formations to keep it interesting. Let's try to think of what's NEXT here and not just jump into the "never worked in the past" mode... the people that think like that are always a step behind the curve.
Posts: 19,583

02-18-2009, 09:00 PM	#47
'Hamas' Jenkins Now you've pissed me off! Join Date: Jan 2006 Casino cash: $7959572	Team Defense Rankings of the teams that Oklahoma Played last year: Chattanooga: N/A Cincinnati: 26 TCU: 2 Texas A&M: 114 Texas: 20 Oklahoma State: 68 Texas Tech: 66 Kansas State: 109 Kansas 86 Baylor 85 Washington 116 Nebraska: 82 Missouri: 73 Florida: 5 Other Big XII defense's left out: Iowa State: 110 Colorado: 83 SEC Defensive Rankings: Florida: 5 Alabama: 6 Georgia: 62 LSU: 63 Tennessee: 11 Mississippi: 14 Auburn: 15 Miss. St.: 56 Vandy: 25 South Carolina: 28 Kentucky: 39 So, yeah, I think it's safe to say the SEC has superior defenses to the Big XII. I stand by my statement that the one time Oklahoma played a real D, they got squashed, but I do recognize the mighty power that is the Horned Frogs of TCU. __________________ "When the Know-Nothings get control, it will read 'all men are created equal, except negroes, and foreigners, and Catholics.' When it comes to this I should prefer emigrating to some country where they make no pretense of loving liberty – to Russia, for instance, where despotism can be taken pure, and without the base alloy of hypocrisy.”--Abraham Lincoln
Posts: 74,848

02-18-2009, 09:04 PM	#48
Mecca Hockey Town Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Kansas City, Missouri Casino cash: $2317050	If anyone thinks the spread doesn't make your QB get hit more then you disagree with every NFL person there is. You're putting your QB back there and having lineman block one on one..and the way some NFL teams defend the spread is to kick the shit out of your QB. The Ravens blitz that look every single time.
Posts: 111,118

02-18-2009, 09:05 PM	#50
Mecca Hockey Town Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Kansas City, Missouri Casino cash: $2317050	The 3-4 requires ridiculously specialized front 7 personnel...this idea that any small DE can play OLB to me is pretty stupid.
Posts: 111,118

02-18-2009, 09:50 PM	#53
keg in kc oxymoron Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: OP/KC/Whatever Casino cash: $9556299	It's really only easier to get 3-4 talent because teams are predominantly running 4-3 right now. There's not a whole lot of competition. As the 3-4 spreads, it becomes more difficult, and then, voila, it's easier to get 4-3 players.
Posts: 58,682

02-18-2009, 09:51 PM	#56
Mecca Hockey Town Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Kansas City, Missouri Casino cash: $2317050	If you want your QB to get hit as much as possible more power to you, I think that's awful strategy but hey.
Posts: 111,118