🏈 Will Saban's 3-4 work against the spread (merged topics)

[musso]

who i was engaging on the boards months ago when discussing the 3-4 and its utility in today's college game. in that thread i expressed some doubt regarding the effectiveness of Saban's 3-4 in today's college game which has now become dominated by the spread offense. the argument i made was that it seemed counterproductive to me to employ a larger and heavier defensive front seven (as Saban's 3-4 does) while regularly lining up five defenders at or near the LOS (as Saban's 3-4 does) when more offenses are requiring defenders to spread out, cover more ground after each snap, tackle in space, and react to frequent misdirection.

well consider what Mark Richt and Randy Shannon recently said in an ESPN article mentioned in another current thread:

Richt: Some of the things that defensive coaches are talking about and thinking about are just trying to change personnel a little bit. Making sure your front four can run. A lot of people have had that philosophy for years. If you've gonna play in a league where everybody's going to pound the ball down after down, you better have some big strong interior defensive linemen and your middle linebacker better be a big, thick joker that can take on a fullback and knock him back.

But if all of a sudden those guys get spread out and there are some really quick cats running around there, you want to have some defenders running around, too. I think people will even get to run more light defensive personnel, their quicker, faster guys that can keep up with that.

Once you put these great athletes out in space -- most coaches will say space is the enemy of a defender because it's tough to wrap up a guy where there so much space to deal with -- you better have a bunch of quick guys who can pursue and close in on those offensive players. I think that's part of what some of the defensive coaches are going towards, just recruiting the type of personnel that can run with those guys.

Shannon: Like Coach Richt said, you got to get speed guys that can run. Like every coach on this (dais), we want guys 6-foot-3, 6-4 that can run 4.3, 4.4.

furthermore, i just read an article in the Athlon Southeastern College Football Preview magazine in which several coaches are interviewed about how to stop the increasingly popular spread attack, most notably the USF defensive coordinator who has successfully shut down WVU's spread offense two years in a row. echoed in that article is the utility of smaller, lighter, and consequently quicker and more agile defenders.

again, as i mentioned in that older thread, a 4-3 that uses 280-290-pound DTs, 250-260-pound DEs, 215-230-pound LBs, 200-215-pound safeties, 180-200 pound CBs seems more physically suited to defend the modern offenses of today. think back to how similar in size our defense was during Kines's consecutive #2-rated defenses in '04 and '05. we weren't very big, but we pursued the ball carriers as well as any defense i've ever seen both in terms of speed and angles.

thoughts???

 

[c5vetman]

I sorta agree with you, but I hope you're not right!

 

[Guest]

Something to remember is that the 3-4 is Saban's BASE defense. When teams start lining up in spreads, an LB goes out and another DB comes in. A good portion of the time when this happens, the other OLB moves up to the line. Thus the defense then becomes a 4-2 or the Nickle package.

People liked to brag on how Kines handled spread offenses. The Nickle package is the main thing he used to do this.

 

[TerryP]

Something to remember is that the 3-4 is Saban's BASE defense. When teams start lining up in spreads, an LB goes out and another DB comes in. A good portion of the time when this happens, the other OLB moves up to the line. Thus the defense then becomes a 4-2 or the Nickle package.

People liked to brag on how Kines handled spread offenses. The Nickle package is the main thing he used to do this.

Adding one thing to that is the fact played in a nickel package roughly 60% of the time last year.

If you look over the depth chart at Georgia and then do the same with our guys you won't find a lot of differences in size even though it is two different base sets.

Then, look over the type of player Saban is bringing in and you'll find those same size and the speed Shannon discusses.

I still like what Coach Stallings said about defending the spread. "Pressure the QB and get him off his rhythm. Since Kines was brought up as example, think about that Cotton Bowl versus Tx. Tech. Nickel package and a lot of pressure on the QB. He never found his timing.

When Georgia took Hawai'i out of the game last bowl season they spent a lot of time in the nickel package as well. And, I'd dare say that the Tx. Tech offense was just as proficient, if not more, than the Hawaii offense last season.

 

[TerryP]

FWIW, if some want to go back to the original discussion, here's the link to the thread musso is talking about.

 

[musso]

People liked to brag on how Kines handled spread offenses. The Nickle package is the main thing he used to do this.

but like i said, the size of our front seven in '04 and '05 was smaller than what our front seven will look like when Saban gets his players in there. so perhaps the scheme is secondary to the physical make up of the players. if so, this would explain why Shannon, Richt, and many other coaches are looking for lighter, quicker defenders.

 

[TerryP]

Jeremy Clark came in at right at 300 pounds. Dominic Lee was around the 280-285 mark and Rudy Griffine was a little heavier than Lee.

Our DE's (Gilberry and Harris) were in the 250-260 range. Saunders maybe 5-10 lbs lighter...around 245.

Now, with the exception of Cody who has a report goal of 360 we are looking at Washington and Chapman at 285 and 300 respectfully.

Our DE's are looking at Deadrick coming in at 285 and Greenwood around 267. But, you also have to take into account Gilberry was around 6'2" and Greenwood and Deadrick are both 6'4-5". Basically, the larger frame which carries the weight just as well as the others did in '05. Mark Anderson was just about the same (H and W) as Greenwood.

There is a little difference in the LB's. Not much again. Roach was around the 240 mark versus our best LB'er in '07 playing at 250-55. But, again, Ro is a good 2-3" taller than Roach. Our LB's now range from that high mark of 250-255 down to the 220's.

The '05 group was smaller in terms of height, but not weight.

One HUGE difference between these two teams. Now, they are in far better shape than they were then in terms of endurance, speed and strength.

 

[musso]

thanks terry for finding that thread. i was going to look for it but was too lazy.

If you look over the depth chart at Georgia and then do the same with our guys you won't find a lot of differences in size even though it is two different base sets.

Then, look over the type of player Saban is bringing in and you'll find those same size and the speed Shannon discusses.

2007 Starters' weights

UGA

DE: 261, 235
DT: 298, 290
LB: 218, 232, 220

07 UGA depth chart

Miami

DE: 255, 254
DT: 331, 287
LB: 222, 230, 240

07 UM depth chart

actually Terry, i see a clear difference in the weights of UGA/Miami front seven and that of Saban's ideal front seven.

 

[TerryP]

thanks terry for finding that thread. i was going to look for it but was too lazy.

If you look over the depth chart at Georgia and then do the same with our guys you won't find a lot of differences in size even though it is two different base sets.

Then, look over the type of player Saban is bringing in and you'll find those same size and the speed Shannon discusses.

2007 Starters' weights

UGA

DE: 261, 235
DT: 298, 290
LB: 218, 232, 220

07 UGA depth chart

Miami

DE: 255, 254
DT: 331, 287
LB: 222, 230, 240

07 UM depth chart

actually Terry, i see a clear difference in the weights of UGA/Miami front seven and that of Saban's ideal front seven.

Your earlier point about the guys from '05 being smaller players is what I was responding to specifically.

In this case, if we look at the DT's from '08, we have Cody at 360 (if he comes in like his goal is,) Square at 270, Murphy (don't see him making it) at 325, Dareus at 277.

In the DE's we have weights ranging from 240 to 260.

Very little difference from either Georgia or Miami.

Now, we do see a heavier JACK linebacker than you see on any of the teams you mention and rightfully so since they are in essence a DE. Our LB'ers range from 220-250.

FWIW, I forgot McCullough earlier who comes in right around 300.

I don't see the difference except for one position, JACK.

 

[TerryP]

To add one more thought...

When it comes to LB'ers and coverage, sure speed comes into play. But, it's as much about that speed as it is the coverage and pursuit angles.

And, one other thing. Undestand, the way our coverage calls are made aren't from our LB'ers, they come from our secondary. Which side we are playing heavy/strong on with the front seven comes from our MLB. That's just a basic read.

I've got a rough draft on how the defenses are called (on the field) it seems like I need to work a little harder on...

 

[musso]

Then, look over the type of player Saban is bringing in and you'll find those same size and the speed Shannon discusses.

Bama's possible incoming LBs

Bolton 6-4 220
Harris 6-2 220
Hightower 6-3 248
Square 6-3 268
Upshaw 6-2 240

Miami's possible incoming LBs

Buchanan 6-1 195
Gavin 6-4 240 (likely to be a DE in a 4-3)
Robinson 6-1 210
Brown 6-1 225
Kane 6-2 215
Marti 6-1 205
Harper 6-4 220
Spence 6-1 200
Futch 6-3 215

NOTE: Shannon signed four safety prospects who are listed just a hair lighter than most of these LB recruits. Shannon's LB recruits all report in with a 40-time of 4.4, 4.5, and 4.6 with the exception of one.

therefore i think it's clear that Shannon wants his LBs and DEs to be leaner and quicker than Saban. this strategy, as the coaching panel confirms, puts them in a better position to cover and tackle in space.

you still don't agree Terry?

 

[TerryP]

Square is a DT, not a LB, so we can leave that one out.

When you look at those two groups you also have to leave out Hightower and Upshaw who are both projected as the JACK. Again, that's a DE in essence.

Harris is considered to be the guy for the OLB. He's coming in at 220. Ideal size.

When I look over the rosters of those two teams and then make comparisons to who we have and who we have coming in the differences are just a few pounds here and there. We have some lighter, some heavier.

Even with a few pounds different, their camp results in terms of speed are virtually identical. Authur Brown being the lone exception but we were after him as well.

No, I guess I still don't agree. :wink: I have no fear, none, of teams running spread offenses whether it is with a 4-3 or a 3-4. And, I think that the nickel packages we'll fun most of the time facing these guys will work well.

Again, just because a guy weighs 10 pounds less AND is 3-4" shorter than a guy who weighs 10 pounds more they are losing speed. Especially when you consider those extra pounds are muscle most of the time.

 

[Guest]

I think we will be fine. We have some athletes in the program and coming in. Defense is chemistry too not just size and speed. Also just because one person solves a problem one way doesn't mean there are not other solutions.

 

[shiloh]

Personally, I think the problem is trying to nail guys down on paper. What was the guy for the Patriots (Wernick, I think?) and look at him in the same way - totally unimpressive guy, but a giant on the field, and really I don't think this is an anomaly. Most guys simply cannot be judged in this manner, although it may be a good starting point.

The other thing is that the 3-4 becomes so many other things in CNS's style of executing it.

 

[musso]

ok terry, i hope you're right. let's just say that you know who i'll be coming to if we can't stop clemson's offense in a couple of months. :wink:

in all fairness, i suppose we'll have to wait until Saban gets his type of players on the field. however, as i look at the Saban recruits so far, it is clear that he's going in the opposite direction of today's trend. 300-plus pound DL and 250 pound LBs are not what Richt, Shannon, and the other coaches have in mind when defending the spread.

 

[TerryP]

ok terry, i hope you're right. let's just say that you know who i'll be coming to if we can't stop clemson's offense in a couple of months. :wink:

While Clemson will run a variation of the spread, their offense is more aptly described as "dink and dunk." Quite frankly, in terms of how they use their RB's, it's a lot like what McElwain is putting into our offensive scheme.

This game is going to be a tough one for Bama. I don't know how much you know about Clemson, but their offense is formidable. They finished first or second in the ACC last year in rushing offense, scoring offense and passing offense.

 

[musso]

Jeremy Clark came in at right at 300 pounds. Dominic Lee was around the 280-285 mark and Rudy Griffine was a little heavier than Lee.

terry, i seriously doubt clark EVER played at 300 lbs. here'swhat he came in at. lee was probably the closest to 300 lbs. he was a hoss with a wide frame but seldom played due to chronic injuries. griffin was barely 6' tall and therefore couldn't have been heavier than lee. granted, the closest i've ever been to these players is in the stands of Bryant-Denny, but being a personal trainer and having trained div 1-a and professional athletes i'm very proficient at judging one's height and weight.

Our DE's (Gilberry and Harris) were in the 250-260 range. Saunders maybe 5-10 lbs lighter...around 245.

Now, with the exception of Cody who has a report goal of 360 we are looking at Washington and Chapman at 285 and 300 respectfully.

Our DE's are looking at Deadrick coming in at 285 and Greenwood around 267. But, you also have to take into account Gilberry was around 6'2" and Greenwood and Deadrick are both 6'4-5". Basically, the larger frame which carries the weight just as well as the others did in '05. Mark Anderson was just about the same (H and W) as Greenwood.

There is a little difference in the LB's. Not much again. Roach was around the 240 mark versus our best LB'er in '07 playing at 250-55. But, again, Ro is a good 2-3" taller than Roach. Our LB's now range from that high mark of 250-255 down to the 220's.

The '05 group was smaller in terms of height, but not weight.

One HUGE difference between these two teams. Now, they are in far better shape than they were then in terms of endurance, speed and strength.

a couple of things to keep in mind. some of Saban's current players that you are using as examples were not his recruits. looking at the prototypical players of a 3-4, Saban's players at LSU, and Saban's recruits so far at Bama provides a clearer difference in the sizes of "his" players and Shula's players, particularly in the front seven since that is the area of the defense that is most pertinent to this discussion. secondly, over the course of a game and especially a season, 10 or 15 pounds here and there do make a difference, particularly when facing spread offenses. furthermore, you don't have to be an athletic trainer to understand that heavier and taller bodies fatigue quicker than shorter and lighter bodies. simply put, the greater the mass the greater the energy needed to move the mass.

oh and one more thing, the '05 LB corps WAS lighter. yes, roach was a stud. however ryans played at only 215-220 while and garth/simpson was probably only 215 wet.

regardless, i think individual comparisons are less significant than the overall size of the defense. a front seven that averages only 10 pounds less per man is actually 70 pounds lighter as a group. and with all things being equal, endurance increases exponentially when a player loses weight.

 

[musso]

This game is going to be a tough one for Bama. I don't know how much you know about Clemson, but their offense is formidable. They finished first or second in the ACC last year in rushing offense, scoring offense and passing offense.

yeah, i'm familiar with the potency of their offense and am scared of the matchups of their backfield and our front seven. this will probably be the best backfield we've faced since Ark last season (mcfadden, jones, hillis), and we all know how tired our defense got against the Hogs' running attack.

 

[TerryP]

This game is going to be a tough one for Bama. I don't know how much you know about Clemson, but their offense is formidable. They finished first or second in the ACC last year in rushing offense, scoring offense and passing offense.

yeah, i'm familiar with the potency of their offense and am scared of the matchups of their backfield and our front seven. this will probably be the best backfield we've faced since Ark last season (mcfadden, jones, hillis), and we all know how tired our defense got against the Hogs' running attack.

...thoughts on this...

I agree that the Arkansas trio was a tough one to control. However, I don't see Clemson running the ball over 50 times in the game like Arkansas did. (53 rushes for a tad over 300 yards.)

I don't see Spiller or Davis getting over 30 rushes like D-Mac did either. Spiller has been averaging around 20 touches a game including receptions and returns (punting and kicking.)

Spiller and Davis are a lot a like in terms of style, ability, etc. McFadden, Jones and Hollis. Jones wasn't as talented between the tackles as D-Mac. I don't see Spiller or Davis in that light as well.

We'll clog the middle and it'll be a foot race on the outside is how I see this. Meaning, it'll be up to our OLB's and CB's along with the safeties. I suspect Johnson will have a huge game in terms of tackles.

That said, Arkansas only threw the ball 12 times in our game. You know Clemson will have twice that many, if not more.

All that said, by the time LSU rolls around there is a good chance we'll be looking at their RB corps and thinking it's as good as Clemson, if not better. LSU has a power back in their arsenal and doesn't have the OL question marks Clemson does.

 

[eshad]

Key to the Clemson game, keep our offense rolling so we keep thier two backs off the field! Controlling the time of possession will be critical.