Is the 3-4 defense dead?

[Oviedo]

It has been suggested by several posters, yours truly included, over the years that the Steelers should consider moving to a 4-3 defense. Many are quick to attack the suggestion as lunacy but "something is rotten in Denmark." Primary reason given for a change is that it would allow young talent to contribute earlier versus serving one or two "red shirt" seasons learning the system. Don't kid yourself. The two losses this season can't be pinned on the favorite whipping boy, Bruce Arians, these are defensive losses plain and simple.

As pointed out before it has appeared that teams have figured out the 3-4 and how to attack it. Short, quick passes which negates the pass rush from the OLBs. IMO this is a result of the fact that teams are now seeing the 3-4 almost every week and it is tougher to surprise offenses and QBs know what to do.

Harrison and Woodley have been ghosts in the pass rush this season while we have a good penetrating young defensive lineman like Ziggy Hood who isn't on the field as he learns the scheme. The change won't happen this season but lets not think there may not be real reason to consider a change.

[stlrz d]

No, but I hope the soft zone behind it is. :HeadBanger

[SteelBucks]

Why is it after every loss most want to jump ship and switch to a 4-3? The 3-4 didn't lose this game.....a dropped TD, missed FG, pick 6, soft coverage, no pressure on the QB, and poor coaching lost this game.

I don't mean to pick on you Oviedo but the 3-4 scheme works just fine when executed properly.

I hate Monday's after a loss. SERENITY NOW!

[RussBII]

It has been suggested by several posters, yours truly included, over the years that the Steelers should consider moving to a 4-3 defense. Many are quick to attack the suggestion as lunacy but "something is rotten in Denmark." Primary reason given for a change is that it would allow young talent to contribute earlier versus serving one or two "red shirt" seasons learning the system. Don't kid yourself. The two losses this season can't be pinned on the favorite whipping boy, Bruce Arians, these are defensive losses plain and simple.

As pointed out before it has appeared that teams have figured out the 3-4 and how to attack it. Short, quick passes which negates the pass rush from the OLBs. IMO this is a result of the fact that teams are now seeing the 3-4 almost every week and it is tougher to surprise offenses and QBs know what to do.

Harrison and Woodley have been ghosts in the pass rush this season while we have a good penetrating young defensive lineman like Ziggy Hood who isn't on the field as he learns the scheme. The change won't happen this season but lets not think there may not be real reason to consider a change.

I'm not going to blame BA exclusively, but when you start settling for field goals, you leave the door open. The defense has allowed 16.7 points per game, that's good for 7th in the league. Could the defense have stepped up and prevented that last drive? Sure, but scoring an TDs from the RZ, opposed to FGs or even missed FGs would've put them away early.

[Oviedo]

Why is it after every loss most want to jump ship and switch to a 4-3? The 3-4 didn't lose this game.....a dropped TD, missed FG, pick 6, soft coverage, no pressure on the QB, and poor coaching lost this game.

I don't mean to pick on you Oviedo but the 3-4 scheme works just fine when executed properly.

I hate Monday's after a loss. SERENITY NOW!

I never feel picked on. And you well know I am not part of the "chicken little fraternity." IMO we will finish no worse than 11-5 and we will make the play offs.

Just provoking some thought and discussion. The NFL is cyclical. The 3-4 defense may have reached its highpoint because so many teams are competing for the same types of players this both diminishes the players pool and raises the cost of players who fit the scheme. At some point you reach a point of max returns where a good team has to recognize you consider jumping to another innovative solution ahead of the other teams. Basically developing the new "killer app."

[SteelBucks]

Why is it after every loss most want to jump ship and switch to a 4-3? The 3-4 didn't lose this game.....a dropped TD, missed FG, pick 6, soft coverage, no pressure on the QB, and poor coaching lost this game.

I don't mean to pick on you Oviedo but the 3-4 scheme works just fine when executed properly.

I hate Monday's after a loss. SERENITY NOW!

I never feel picked on. And you well know I am not part of the "chicken little fraternity." IMO we will finish no worse than 11-5 and we will make the play offs.

Just provoking some thought and discussion. The NFL is cyclical. The 3-4 defense may have reached its highpoint because so many teams are competing for the same types of players this both diminishes the players pool and raises the cost of players who fit the scheme. At some point you reach a point of max returns where a good team has to recognize you consider jumping to another innovative solution ahead of the other teams. Basically developing the new "killer app."

I agree that quick passes work against this defense but I still believe that the 3-4 zone blitz is still the most disruptive scheme in the league. The key is getting pressure on the QB.....and right now the Steelers are not doing it. Sacks are way down so far. I think Harrison only has one and Woodley has the goose egg.

Of course the 10 yard cushion our DB's are giving WR's isn't helping. :wink:

[NorthCoast]

It has been suggested by several posters, yours truly included, over the years that the Steelers should consider moving to a 4-3 defense. Many are quick to attack the suggestion as lunacy but "something is rotten in Denmark." Primary reason given for a change is that it would allow young talent to contribute earlier versus serving one or two "red shirt" seasons learning the system. Don't kid yourself. The two losses this season can't be pinned on the favorite whipping boy, Bruce Arians, these are defensive losses plain and simple.

As pointed out before it has appeared that teams have figured out the 3-4 and how to attack it. Short, quick passes which negates the pass rush from the OLBs. IMO this is a result of the fact that teams are now seeing the 3-4 almost every week and it is tougher to surprise offenses and QBs know what to do.

Harrison and Woodley have been ghosts in the pass rush this season while we have a good penetrating young defensive lineman like Ziggy Hood who isn't on the field as he learns the scheme. The change won't happen this season but lets not think there may not be real reason to consider a change.

I think it is completely unreasonable to ask a defense to hold an NFL offense to under 20 pts in this era. You might be able to do it against bad Os but average or decent ones WILL score points. The rules completely favor the Offense. What has changed is our run game is non-existent. Did you know we have slipped from 23rd at the end of last season to 27th this season!!! We used to drool when we had to play teams that were as one-dimensional as we are. It's a huge advantage for the opponent. Even Indy was able to average 4 yds a rush with their pass-happy offense. The play action worked marvelously. It can't work for us because we have no chain-movers and the run plays are so simple and easy to recognize.

[steelblood]

I'm not opposed to switching to a 4-3.

However, the losses were not merely defensive losses "plain and simple". In both contests the defense gave up less than twenty points. If your defense does this in the NFL, it is doing it's job. Statistically, the defense has not played that badly. Right now, we are unable to stop the quick pass or spread attack. We are also without our best defensive back. His replacement(s) are very slow-footed vets who can't hold a candle to his athleticism. Tyrone Carter was directly responsible for a TD against Chicago and took a terrible angle on Benson's long TD run yesterday. Furthermore, both games were lost because we missed opportunities (missed FGs, dropped TD pass, unable to convert on short yardage at the goal line). Certainly, the defense was partly to blame in these losses, but if you apply that logic you could say that the defense was too blame in most of our losses last year as well.

[phillyesq]

To me, the problem isn't the 3-4 itself. The problem is the way that it was being executed in the 4th quarter. It seemed that every play, Kiesel and Smith rushed from the inside, and Woodley and Harrison from the outside. No confusion, no overloads, nothing fancy. And it didn't work. It seems to me that at the end of the game, the D got too conservative.

[Steeler Mafia]

The 3-4 defense we had was at the top of the league last year, now it is dead?

Did I miss something? Somebody better tell Green Bay. They just made the switch to the 3-4.

[grotonsteel]

I don't think 3-4 Defense is dead but i believe a hybrid 3-4/4-3 defense or a 4-3 defense might be better for Steelers.

With Casey playing his last season i think Steelers might switch to 4-3. Steelers won't have a dominant NT next year and I am not sure if Hoke can play entire season and Ziggy IMO is not a NT in 3-4 D.

Also it looks like Steelers might end up winning 5-6 games with the crappy Defense maybe its about time we change the scheme. We will be drafting maybe in 10-15 range so get some DBs and D-linemean early in the draft. Maybe draft player like Ndamukong Suh or Dunlap.

Broncos 3-4 D has looked better than Steelers.

[ramblinjim]

I'm probably not going to get this thought out very well. But our D was tops in the league last year, with most of the same personnel we have on the field today, except for Troy. Our D did not suddenly start to suck. We held Tennessee to 10 points (of course that game is looking less and less spectacular as the weeks go by) Chicago to 17 and Cincinatti who has some offense to 16 points. I dont' think any D can be asked to hold NFL opponets to less than 20 points per game every game.

I watched the second half of the game last night and it seemed like evryone on the team was just going through the motions. On the 4th and 10 play at the 15 yard line, James Farrior looked downright slow to get to the receiver. All I know is that I hope this hangover is over.

[Shoe]

The point is that are personnel is/has been shifting away from 3-4 to 4-3 personnel for a few years--the aging of Hampton, the drafting of Timmons/Woodley, being most paramount.

I think the biggest thing right now is Hampton is spent, as far as being a dominant NOSE TACKLE--besides big-play OLB's, we all have been told how much a DOMINANT Nose is in the 3-4. Hampton is no longer that (still serviceable; just not dominant).

So while you might disagree given our two latest losses (passive scheme), I think that is the issue. It's been plainly obvious to me, that Tomlin is shifting the focus to 4-3 personnel (which BTW, I don't mind at all.)

[grotonsteel]

The point is that are personnel is/has been shifting away from 3-4 to 4-3 personnel for a few years--the aging of Hampton, the drafting of Timmons/Woodley, being most paramount.

I think the biggest thing right now is Hampton is spent, as far as being a dominant NOSE TACKLE--besides big-play OLB's, we all have been told how much a DOMINANT Nose is in the 3-4. Hampton is no longer that (still serviceable; just not dominant).

So while you might disagree given our two latest losses (passive scheme), I think that is the issue. It's been plainly obvious to me, that Tomlin is shifting the focus to 4-3 personnel (which BTW, I don't mind at all.)


:Agree :Clap

[SteelCrazy]

I think some people on here have lost their minds! Blaming the defense for the yesterday's loss may be a fair assessment, but throwing out a defensive scheme that has brought a few championships to the trophy case is just plain stupid. For heaven's sake, we were the top DEFENSE last year! Arguably one of the best defenses ever.....and you guys want to scrap it. With Troy out, we are not as good. When he comes back, we will be on top again.

Chill out before you over think more and hurt yourself. Yesterday's loss goes to Arians and his soft play calling more so than a defense that gave up 16 points to a very good offense.

[RuthlessBurgher]

I don't think 3-4 Defense is dead but i believe a hybrid 3-4/4-3 defense or a 4-3 defense might be better for Steelers.

With Casey playing his last season i think Steelers might switch to 4-3. Steelers won't have a dominant NT next year and I am not sure if Hoke can play entire season and Ziggy IMO is not a NT in 3-4 D.

Also it looks like Steelers might end up winning 5-6 games with the crappy Defense maybe its about time we change the scheme. We will be drafting maybe in 10-15 range so get some DBs and D-linemean early in the draft. Maybe draft player like Ndamukong Suh or Dunlap.

Broncos 3-4 D has looked better than Steelers.

Two losses, and all of the sudden we are drafting in the low teens??? Jesus Tap Dancing Christ!!!

[SteelBucks]

I don't think 3-4 Defense is dead but i believe a hybrid 3-4/4-3 defense or a 4-3 defense might be better for Steelers.

With Casey playing his last season i think Steelers might switch to 4-3. Steelers won't have a dominant NT next year and I am not sure if Hoke can play entire season and Ziggy IMO is not a NT in 3-4 D.

Also it looks like Steelers might end up winning 5-6 games with the crappy Defense maybe its about time we change the scheme. We will be drafting maybe in 10-15 range so get some DBs and D-linemean early in the draft. Maybe draft player like Ndamukong Suh or Dunlap.

Broncos 3-4 D has looked better than Steelers.

Two losses, and all of the sudden we are drafting in the low teens??? Jesus Tap Dancing Christ!!!

http://www.letsgopens.com/scripts/phpBB3/images/smilies/scare.gif

[flippy]

It has been suggested by several posters, yours truly included, over the years that the Steelers should consider moving to a 4-3 defense. Many are quick to attack the suggestion as lunacy but "something is rotten in Denmark." Primary reason given for a change is that it would allow young talent to contribute earlier versus serving one or two "red shirt" seasons learning the system. Don't kid yourself. The two losses this season can't be pinned on the favorite whipping boy, Bruce Arians, these are defensive losses plain and simple.

As pointed out before it has appeared that teams have figured out the 3-4 and how to attack it. Short, quick passes which negates the pass rush from the OLBs. IMO this is a result of the fact that teams are now seeing the 3-4 almost every week and it is tougher to surprise offenses and QBs know what to do.

Harrison and Woodley have been ghosts in the pass rush this season while we have a good penetrating young defensive lineman like Ziggy Hood who isn't on the field as he learns the scheme. The change won't happen this season but lets not think there may not be real reason to consider a change.

Using this logic, it should have been dead long ago. There's always been the same way to attack the 3-4 defense. But can you consistently move the ball down the field in short passing chunks for 4 quarters?

I do agree we need to generate more pressure.

And we need Troy back to cover up everyone's mistakes. And to take some focus off of some other players.

[papillon]

It has been suggested by several posters, yours truly included, over the years that the Steelers should consider moving to a 4-3 defense. Many are quick to attack the suggestion as lunacy but "something is rotten in Denmark." Primary reason given for a change is that it would allow young talent to contribute earlier versus serving one or two "red shirt" seasons learning the system. Don't kid yourself. The two losses this season can't be pinned on the favorite whipping boy, Bruce Arians, these are defensive losses plain and simple.

As pointed out before it has appeared that teams have figured out the 3-4 and how to attack it. Short, quick passes which negates the pass rush from the OLBs. IMO this is a result of the fact that teams are now seeing the 3-4 almost every week and it is tougher to surprise offenses and QBs know what to do.

Harrison and Woodley have been ghosts in the pass rush this season while we have a good penetrating young defensive lineman like Ziggy Hood who isn't on the field as he learns the scheme. The change won't happen this season but lets not think there may not be real reason to consider a change.

I think it is completely unreasonable to ask a defense to hold an NFL offense to under 20 pts in this era. You might be able to do it against bad Os but average or decent ones WILL score points. The rules completely favor the Offense. What has changed is our run game is non-existent. Did you know we have slipped from 23rd at the end of last season to 27th this season!!! We used to drool when we had to play teams that were as one-dimensional as we are. It's a huge advantage for the opponent. Even Indy was able to average 4 yds a rush with their pass-happy offense. The play action worked marvelously. It can't work for us because we have no chain-movers and the run plays are so simple and easy to recognize.

The points per game is only a reference point to analyzing the defense. If the points were being scored evenly in all quarters, I'd be a happy camper. The Steelers have given up 27 points in the 4th quarter and 33 total in the second half, while giving up only 17 in the first half.

It's a disturbing trend that I hope comes to an end this weekend.

Pappy

[Starlifter]

dinking and dunking has always been effective against the 3-4. the idea is it can't be consistently effective drive after drive. the old bend but don't break principal of waiting for a mistake or making a big play. unfortunately in the last 2 weeks the opponents didn't make mistakes and we didn't make plays (re: 4th and 10) when we had to.

you can change the scheme, but ultimately it requires players to be better than the opponent - on at least one big play a drive.

[Slapstick]

The Steelers defense works well, but it is entirely dependent upon the performance of the offense...

The offense either need to control the clock or score a lot of points...

Because the last two teams were tied or only one score down, they only had to mustyer one drive where they needed to dink and dunk down the field without making a mistake....

If the offense could actually score (or at least not give up pick 6 TDs), the defense could really tee off on the opponent, because dinking and dunking is not conducive to playing catchup...

[grotonsteel]

I don't think 3-4 Defense is dead but i believe a hybrid 3-4/4-3 defense or a 4-3 defense might be better for Steelers.

With Casey playing his last season i think Steelers might switch to 4-3. Steelers won't have a dominant NT next year and I am not sure if Hoke can play entire season and Ziggy IMO is not a NT in 3-4 D.

Also it looks like Steelers might end up winning 5-6 games with the crappy Defense maybe its about time we change the scheme. We will be drafting maybe in 10-15 range so get some DBs and D-linemean early in the draft. Maybe draft player like Ndamukong Suh or Dunlap.

Broncos 3-4 D has looked better than Steelers.

Two losses, and all of the sudden we are drafting in the low teens??? Jesus Tap Dancing Christ!!!

Well if Steelers keep playing prevent D i don't see Steelers going to playoff. If Steelers start 1-3 or 2-5 i would like Steelers to tank the season. There is always next season.

Steelers will always content for SB as long as Steelers have healthy Big Ben.

[Chadman]

The point is that are personnel is/has been shifting away from 3-4 to 4-3 personnel for a few years--the aging of Hampton, the drafting of Timmons/Woodley, being most paramount.

I think the biggest thing right now is Hampton is spent, as far as being a dominant NOSE TACKLE--besides big-play OLB's, we all have been told how much a DOMINANT Nose is in the 3-4. Hampton is no longer that (still serviceable; just not dominant).

So while you might disagree given our two latest losses (passive scheme), I think that is the issue. It's been plainly obvious to me, that Tomlin is shifting the focus to 4-3 personnel (which BTW, I don't mind at all.)


This is a quality post.

Big O is copping some flak here, but Chadman thinks that maybe, just maybe, he was getting on the same point that Shoe is on.

The 3-4 D is not 'dead'. It'll live on, and do well, for teams that have the right personnel for the job.

But that right there is the issue for the Steelers. Hampton is aging & unsigned for next season. Hoke is older, and smaller than he needs to be. Smith is older still. Kirschke is nearly a grandfather. How much trouble did the Steelers have replacing Steed after he left? Kimo was a good player, but unable to hold up at NT. Pure, dominant NT's in a 3-4 are hard to come by. If Tomlin had selected Ron Brace at #32 instead of Ziggy, Chadman would agree that the 3-4 is the defence of the future. But he didn't. He drafted the upfield penetrator in Hood, a guy that many thought would fit Tomlin's mentor, Tony Dungy's, scheme in Indy. You remember that link? Dungy & Tomlin? The Tampa-2? That runs on a 4-3? With quick, upfield pass rushers?

Aaron Smith could partner Ziggy in the middle, Woodley could move to DE (his college position) & concentrate on rushing the passer. You already have the makings of a decent 4-3 DL there. And with Farrior, Harrison & Timmons, you have 3 pretty decent 4-3 LB's.

That being said, if the Steelers can come up with a pure, quality NT this off season, then they may as well stick with a 3-4.

[meninblack]

I didn't see the whole game (Golf weekend at Southern Pines) but what I saw was disgacefull schemes. The defense NEVER blitzed once and they had press coverage one time on the two winning drives.

Bruce Arians should be fired immediately. His running game is passive and easily beaten by any defensive co-ordinator with half a brain. It seems that the running plays are drawn up on the assumption that no-one will penetrate, therefore, no need for a fullback. This is idiocy! If I were a defensive co-ordinator facing the Steelers Offense, you tell your linemen to penetrate and send one blitzer at the single back. If the back doesn't get the ball, kill Ben. Simple and obviously effective against us.

Defenses against us still have six back, the running game is blown up or Ben gets killed. So easy a cave man could do it.

[feltdizz]

I didn't see the whole game (Golf weekend at Southern Pines) but what I saw was disgacefull schemes. The defense NEVER blitzed once and they had press coverage one time on the two winning drives.

Bruce Arians should be fired immediately. His running game is passive and easily beaten by any defensive co-ordinator with half a brain. It seems that the running plays are drawn up on the assumption that no-one will penetrate, therefore, no need for a fullback. This is idiocy! If I were a defensive co-ordinator facing the Steelers Offense, you tell your linemen to penetrate and send one blitzer at the single back. If the back doesn't get the ball, kill Ben. Simple and obviously effective against us.

Defenses against us still have six back, the running game is blown up or Ben gets killed. So easy a cave man could do it.

ummm we gave up one sack on sunday.... ran effectively for most of the game and had a pick 6.

blaming BA is weak

[meninblack]

You enjoy this offense Felt? Have fun. I can't watch fourth and goal roll out passes and carry back running plays. I guess you like 13 points a game. Arians must go.

If we must have Arians, set him loose. Pass on every freaking down, at least we'd have a chance. His running plays are pathetic.

"We don't have a fullback, we have a tailback and a tightend that play fullback. My offense will never have a fullback." - Bruce Arians - arrogant moron.

[Oviedo]

The point is that are personnel is/has been shifting away from 3-4 to 4-3 personnel for a few years--the aging of Hampton, the drafting of Timmons/Woodley, being most paramount.

I think the biggest thing right now is Hampton is spent, as far as being a dominant NOSE TACKLE--besides big-play OLB's, we all have been told how much a DOMINANT Nose is in the 3-4. Hampton is no longer that (still serviceable; just not dominant).

So while you might disagree given our two latest losses (passive scheme), I think that is the issue. It's been plainly obvious to me, that Tomlin is shifting the focus to 4-3 personnel (which BTW, I don't mind at all.)



This is a quality post.

Big O is copping some flak here, but Chadman thinks that maybe, just maybe, he was getting on the same point that Shoe is on.

The 3-4 D is not 'dead'. It'll live on, and do well, for teams that have the right personnel for the job.

But that right there is the issue for the Steelers. Hampton is aging & unsigned for next season. Hoke is older, and smaller than he needs to be. Smith is older still. Kirschke is nearly a grandfather. How much trouble did the Steelers have replacing Steed after he left? Kimo was a good player, but unable to hold up at NT. Pure, dominant NT's in a 3-4 are hard to come by. If Tomlin had selected Ron Brace at #32 instead of Ziggy, Chadman would agree that the 3-4 is the defence of the future. But he didn't. He drafted the upfield penetrator in Hood, a guy that many thought would fit Tomlin's mentor, Tony Dungy's, scheme in Indy. You remember that link? Dungy & Tomlin? The Tampa-2? That runs on a 4-3? With quick, upfield pass rushers?

Aaron Smith could partner Ziggy in the middle, Woodley could move to DE (his college position) & concentrate on rushing the passer. You already have the makings of a decent 4-3 DL there. And with Farrior, Harrison & Timmons, you have 3 pretty decent 4-3 LB's.

That being said, if the Steelers can come up with a pure, quality NT this off season, then they may as well stick with a 3-4.

Appreciate you remember previous posts. My point has always been that the players we have drafted AND extended do not preclude us from going to a 4-3. As a matter of fact it may may it easier. My point has always been that replacing Hampton with a player of his caliber (3 years ago not now) will be extremely difficult if not impossible with the number of teams looking for dominant NTs. Trying to replace him with a smaller player like Hoke (much older) or even Hood does not bode well over the long term.

When Hampton leaves we have a very good starting 4-3 defensive line in place and signed for several years with Woodley-Smith-Hood-Kiesel.

Look at the LBs. Except for Woodley, we have not found that dominant pass rushing DE to convert to OLB in 3 drafts now. However we did draft a classic 4-3 OLB in Timmons. We extended Harrison who could continue to play OLB in the 4-3 and eventually move inside when Farrior hangs it up. The reality is it will be easier to get a college LB to come in to take over an OLB spot than work on continual DE conversion jobs which take 2+ years to pan out in most cases.

Our defensive backfield can switch to a Cover 2 anytime with the personnel they have because they play a lot of it now.

I have no idea if the Steelers will ever switch but I do recognize that sometimes change can improve the product on the field and in this case make it easier to restock the talent for that defense. That is why I refuse to dismiss the possibility out of hand much like some won't let go of the Bettis era power running attack that we have clearly moved beyond. Emotional attachments to abstract notions like "the Steelers way" or "Steelers football" won't make this team better.

[phillyesq]

The point is that are personnel is/has been shifting away from 3-4 to 4-3 personnel for a few years--the aging of Hampton, the drafting of Timmons/Woodley, being most paramount.

I think the biggest thing right now is Hampton is spent, as far as being a dominant NOSE TACKLE--besides big-play OLB's, we all have been told how much a DOMINANT Nose is in the 3-4. Hampton is no longer that (still serviceable; just not dominant).

So while you might disagree given our two latest losses (passive scheme), I think that is the issue. It's been plainly obvious to me, that Tomlin is shifting the focus to 4-3 personnel (which BTW, I don't mind at all.)



This is a quality post.

Big O is copping some flak here, but Chadman thinks that maybe, just maybe, he was getting on the same point that Shoe is on.

The 3-4 D is not 'dead'. It'll live on, and do well, for teams that have the right personnel for the job.

But that right there is the issue for the Steelers. Hampton is aging & unsigned for next season. Hoke is older, and smaller than he needs to be. Smith is older still. Kirschke is nearly a grandfather. How much trouble did the Steelers have replacing Steed after he left? Kimo was a good player, but unable to hold up at NT. Pure, dominant NT's in a 3-4 are hard to come by. If Tomlin had selected Ron Brace at #32 instead of Ziggy, Chadman would agree that the 3-4 is the defence of the future. But he didn't. He drafted the upfield penetrator in Hood, a guy that many thought would fit Tomlin's mentor, Tony Dungy's, scheme in Indy. You remember that link? Dungy & Tomlin? The Tampa-2? That runs on a 4-3? With quick, upfield pass rushers?

Aaron Smith could partner Ziggy in the middle, Woodley could move to DE (his college position) & concentrate on rushing the passer. You already have the makings of a decent 4-3 DL there. And with Farrior, Harrison & Timmons, you have 3 pretty decent 4-3 LB's.

That being said, if the Steelers can come up with a pure, quality NT this off season, then they may as well stick with a 3-4.

Appreciate you remember previous posts. My point has always been that the players we have drafted AND extended do not preclude us from going to a 4-3. As a matter of fact it may may it easier. My point has always been that replacing Hampton with a player of his caliber (3 years ago not now) will be extremely difficult if not impossible with the number of teams looking for dominant NTs. Trying to replace him with a smaller player like Hoke (much older) or even Hood does not bode well over the long term.

When Hampton leaves we have a very good starting 4-3 defensive line in place and signed for several years with Woodley-Smith-Hood-Kiesel.

Look at the LBs. Except for Woodley, we have not found that dominant pass rushing DE to convert to OLB in 3 drafts now. However we did draft a classic 4-3 OLB in Timmons. We extended Harrison who could continue to play OLB in the 4-3 and eventually move inside when Farrior hangs it up. The reality is it will be easier to get a college LB to come in to take over an OLB spot than work on continual DE conversion jobs which take 2+ years to pan out in most cases.

Our defensive backfield can switch to a Cover 2 anytime with the personnel they have because they play a lot of it now.

I have no idea if the Steelers will ever switch but I do recognize that sometimes change can improve the product on the field and in this case make it easier to restock the talent for that defense. That is why I refuse to dismiss the possibility out of hand much like some won't let go of the Bettis era power running attack that we have clearly moved beyond. Emotional attachments to abstract notions like "the Steelers way" or "Steelers football" won't make this team better.

Chadman did an excellent job of pointing out the age on the defensive line. And that is exactly why a switch to a 4-3 right now would be a terrible mistake. Ok, start Woodley - Ziggy - Smith - Kiesel, with Hoke as a backup. You still need a lot more lineman. Especially with the age of everybody on that line, frequent substitutions will be necessary. You need to build a lot more depth.

The other big downside of moving to the 4-3 is that backup linebackers are replaced by backup lineman -- that hurts the special teams.

[Oviedo]

The point is that are personnel is/has been shifting away from 3-4 to 4-3 personnel for a few years--the aging of Hampton, the drafting of Timmons/Woodley, being most paramount.

I think the biggest thing right now is Hampton is spent, as far as being a dominant NOSE TACKLE--besides big-play OLB's, we all have been told how much a DOMINANT Nose is in the 3-4. Hampton is no longer that (still serviceable; just not dominant).

So while you might disagree given our two latest losses (passive scheme), I think that is the issue. It's been plainly obvious to me, that Tomlin is shifting the focus to 4-3 personnel (which BTW, I don't mind at all.)

This is a quality post.

Big O is copping some flak here, but Chadman thinks that maybe, just maybe, he was getting on the same point that Shoe is on.

The 3-4 D is not 'dead'. It'll live on, and do well, for teams that have the right personnel for the job.

But that right there is the issue for the Steelers. Hampton is aging & unsigned for next season. Hoke is older, and smaller than he needs to be. Smith is older still. Kirschke is nearly a grandfather. How much trouble did the Steelers have replacing Steed after he left? Kimo was a good player, but unable to hold up at NT. Pure, dominant NT's in a 3-4 are hard to come by. If Tomlin had selected Ron Brace at #32 instead of Ziggy, Chadman would agree that the 3-4 is the defence of the future. But he didn't. He drafted the upfield penetrator in Hood, a guy that many thought would fit Tomlin's mentor, Tony Dungy's, scheme in Indy. You remember that link? Dungy & Tomlin? The Tampa-2? That runs on a 4-3? With quick, upfield pass rushers?

Aaron Smith could partner Ziggy in the middle, Woodley could move to DE (his college position) & concentrate on rushing the passer. You already have the makings of a decent 4-3 DL there. And with Farrior, Harrison & Timmons, you have 3 pretty decent 4-3 LB's.

That being said, if the Steelers can come up with a pure, quality NT this off season, then they may as well stick with a 3-4.

Appreciate you remember previous posts. My point has always been that the players we have drafted AND extended do not preclude us from going to a 4-3. As a matter of fact it may may it easier. My point has always been that replacing Hampton with a player of his caliber (3 years ago not now) will be extremely difficult if not impossible with the number of teams looking for dominant NTs. Trying to replace him with a smaller player like Hoke (much older) or even Hood does not bode well over the long term.

When Hampton leaves we have a very good starting 4-3 defensive line in place and signed for several years with Woodley-Smith-Hood-Kiesel.

Look at the LBs. Except for Woodley, we have not found that dominant pass rushing DE to convert to OLB in 3 drafts now. However we did draft a classic 4-3 OLB in Timmons. We extended Harrison who could continue to play OLB in the 4-3 and eventually move inside when Farrior hangs it up. The reality is it will be easier to get a college LB to come in to take over an OLB spot than work on continual DE conversion jobs which take 2+ years to pan out in most cases.

Our defensive backfield can switch to a Cover 2 anytime with the personnel they have because they play a lot of it now.

I have no idea if the Steelers will ever switch but I do recognize that sometimes change can improve the product on the field and in this case make it easier to restock the talent for that defense. That is why I refuse to dismiss the possibility out of hand much like some won't let go of the Bettis era power running attack that we have clearly moved beyond. Emotional attachments to abstract notions like "the Steelers way" or "Steelers football" won't make this team better.

Chadman did an excellent job of pointing out the age on the defensive line. And that is exactly why a switch to a 4-3 right now would be a terrible mistake. Ok, start Woodley - Ziggy - Smith - Kiesel, with Hoke as a backup. You still need a lot more lineman. Especially with the age of everybody on that line, frequent substitutions will be necessary. You need to build a lot more depth.

The other big downside of moving to the 4-3 is that backup linebackers are replaced by backup lineman -- that hurts the special teams.

You need 8 on game day active. Right now you already have Smith, Hampton, Kiesel, Hoke, Eason, Kirschke and Hood. had we played the 4-3 you would have kept Harris for sure as opposed losing him to Carolina. You already have McCelendon on the PS.

You are correct that you carry fewer LBs but that doesn't necessarily hurt special teams because you would typically have more athletic, lighter defensive ends versus bulking up DEs to 300lbs to play 3-4 DE. That means more DEs in the range of 265 pounds who can run. Not much different than 3-4 OLBs.

I agree that the passive scheme is a problem but it is being victimized because of a lack of a pass rush. You can play a passive zone when your pass rush is putting the QB on his back or forcing him into mistakes but we haven't done that at all the first three games. Fix the pass rush and the passive zone will work. No pass rush and it won't.

[JTP53609]

i think that the middle of our defense is showing thier age at times, farrior looked bad on sunday, well i guess farrior was the only one who looked old....i love farrior, dont get me wrong