Author Topic: 3-4 "weak" eagle material?  (Read 3439 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Vatransfer

  • Copper
  • Posts: 36
  • Total likes: 3
  • Coaching: High School
  • Defense: Undecided
  • Offense: Double Wing
  • Title: Other
Re: 3-4 "weak" eagle material?
« Reply #15 on: October 03, 2017, 08:47:24 PM »
Thank you, sorry for the vague questions. Still learning here.
I'll definitely study the 34 eagle/43 under. I'll also study the 52 but have a mindset of using 34 personal.

Offline Dusty Ol Fart

  • Platinum
  • Posts: 7556
  • Total likes: 899
  • Coaching: 12 & Under
  • Defense: 6-3
  • Offense: Spread Formation
  • Title: Retired
Re: 3-4 "weak" eagle material?
« Reply #16 on: October 03, 2017, 11:40:33 PM »
Thank you, sorry for the vague questions. Still learning here.
I'll definitely study the 34 eagle/43 under. I'll also study the 52 but have a mindset of using 34 personal.

Dont apologize keep asking. 

For many of us the Defensive Philosophy we choose to follow fits our personality.  There is not Right OR Wrong from that perspective.  Landry's Flex Defense is on Par with Ryan's 46.  Just 2 differing philosophies regarding how to play. 
Not MPP... ONE TASK!  Teach them!  :)

Offline Vatransfer

  • Copper
  • Posts: 36
  • Total likes: 3
  • Coaching: High School
  • Defense: Undecided
  • Offense: Double Wing
  • Title: Other
Re: 3-4 "weak" eagle material?
« Reply #17 on: October 04, 2017, 09:14:37 AM »
Dont apologize keep asking. 

For many of us the Defensive Philosophy we choose to follow fits our personality.  There is not Right OR Wrong from that perspective.  Landry's Flex Defense is on Par with Ryan's 46.  Just 2 differing philosophies regarding how to play.
I enjoy the simplistic line play and responsibilities of the 46. 3-0-3 Dont get reached, prevent step through, flow to the ball, create a pile with a double. De's get below he ball, watch for RB leakage, keep contain/force. What I do not like about the 46 is the Man to man in the secondary but i fully understand why it is needed. Jam then hard, allow your pass rush to work.

I watched and studied about 4 games of Katy (Best I cool on youtube) and what I liked is how the CB's are taught to never get beat deep play off the ball and react with a big hit to dislodge or tackle for a minimal gain and that everyone has one job. One job leads to better execution.

Offline blockandtackle

  • Bronze
  • Posts: 843
  • Total likes: 515
  • Coaching: High School
  • Defense: Other
  • Offense: Spread Formation
  • Title: Assistant
Re: 3-4 "weak" eagle material?
« Reply #18 on: October 04, 2017, 10:15:00 AM »
Thank you, sorry for the vague questions. Still learning here.
I'll definitely study the 34 eagle/43 under. I'll also study the 52 but have a mindset of using 34 personal.

IMO, the 3-4 is still really just a 5-2.

People see "5-2" and think "5 defensive linemen," but the way the classic 5-2 defenses thought about their DEs and the way modern defenses think about their DEs (with more 43 ideas in terms of technique) was very, very different and it leads to misunderstanding.

Some people will back their OLBs off the line in the 3-4 and play with 4 LBs across, but that's not something you even see that much of at the college or NFL level from 3-4 teams.  Then I see coaches come on here who are playing their 52 with DEs in 3 pt. stances rushing upfield and they don't understand why they can't defend the sweep!

The 5-2 was invented in the early 50s to stop the Wing-T.  It also worked pretty well against the Split T, Single Wing, and SBV offenses that were popular at the time.  It replaced the old 7 Diamond as the odd front of choice.

The Miami Dolphins took it a step further and invented the 3-4 in the early 70s by taking a 5-2 defense and moving outside linebackers to the DE spots.  What people overlook is that these were the "Pro 4-3" days, when "Outside Linebacker" was basically just a standup DE who would drop into coverage, play in space a little better, and rush the QB--a cat who'd be 6'4 255lbs or so in the modern NFL.  It wasn't as big a change as it looks on paper.  The NFL 3-4 teams still put players like that on the edge, while the NFL 4-3 teams evolved in the early-mid 90s to be more about speed and use smaller LBs (the Miami 4-3) to play in space and defend the pass.

They did this in the 70s to better match up with NFL offenses that were better at using their TEs and RBs in the passing game underneath, as well as get those OLBs underneath WRs in the curl/flat area.  The 5-2 teams had already been doing some of those things for years, but less of it, so their players weren't as good at it.  Over the years, the difference between a 5-2 and a 3-4 got even more blurred.  Some teams started 2 gapping the DE/DTs in 4 techs as well as the NG instead of playing them in 5 techs to hold down C gap--this is the Parcells/Fairbanks version of the 3-4.

Now you see 3-4 defenses being more multiple with fronts and showing 4-2 boxes at times because of all the spread sets you see in MS on up.  It's a flexible personnel grouping... but the base front is still the old 5-2 Okie front (9 tech DE/OLB, 5 or 4 tech DT/DE, 0 tech NG, and a pair of ILBs lined up over the Gs).

Offline Dusty Ol Fart

  • Platinum
  • Posts: 7556
  • Total likes: 899
  • Coaching: 12 & Under
  • Defense: 6-3
  • Offense: Spread Formation
  • Title: Retired
Re: 3-4 "weak" eagle material?
« Reply #19 on: October 04, 2017, 11:43:16 AM »
The thing is not to overextend your resources.  Lets face it, regardless of Youth or HS you will have to adjust for personnel.  You have your "Position Prototype" and then Reality!  I suggest getting your Base set first and foremost.  If not, anything you add on is bordering on chaos. 

Personal Example:

We did not do well in Base this season. Way too many kids improvising in spite of repeated warnings against and/or replacement.  They could talk and draw it but failed to execute consistently, come game time.  I've used this defense for a number of years and this group just did not take to it as previous groups have.  I could not go any further in depth as Base was a struggle.   
Not MPP... ONE TASK!  Teach them!  :)

Offline Test Account

  • Platinum
  • Posts: 8625
  • Total likes: 3
  • Admin Dead Account
  • Coaching: 6 & Under
  • Defense: Undecided
  • Offense: Undecided
  • Title: Other
Re: 3-4 "weak" eagle material?
« Reply #20 on: October 04, 2017, 11:55:31 AM »
if you can play blocks, understand how to play blocks, at least up front you can play in any alignment you like. If you have to change the fundamentals to change the front, you do not understand your defense.
Please don't PM or respond to this Member. It is an account for all of the posts from abandoned or banned Member Accounts.

Offline Dusty Ol Fart

  • Platinum
  • Posts: 7556
  • Total likes: 899
  • Coaching: 12 & Under
  • Defense: 6-3
  • Offense: Spread Formation
  • Title: Retired
Re: 3-4 "weak" eagle material?
« Reply #21 on: October 15, 2017, 11:37:21 PM »
if you can play blocks, understand how to play blocks, at least up front you can play in any alignment you like. If you have to change the fundamentals to change the front, you do not understand your defense.

Its not about what you know, its about what they retain.  If you continue to feed them material and they dont understand, or cant execute, the basics YOU invite Chaos!  Not a good thing imho. 
Not MPP... ONE TASK!  Teach them!  :)

Offline Test Account

  • Platinum
  • Posts: 8625
  • Total likes: 3
  • Admin Dead Account
  • Coaching: 6 & Under
  • Defense: Undecided
  • Offense: Undecided
  • Title: Other
Re: 3-4 "weak" eagle material?
« Reply #22 on: October 16, 2017, 08:39:08 PM »
Its not about what you know, its about what they retain.  If you continue to feed them material and they dont understand, or cant execute, the basics YOU invite Chaos!  Not a good thing imho.
You miss the point as usual. If you have fundamentals that are sound, you can teach the kids to line up however you like. Does not mean you should necessarily. Taking and defeating blocks is as fundamental as it gets. How everybody does it, is an entirely different topic. If the fundamentals are truly sound, adjustment should be piece of cake.
Please don't PM or respond to this Member. It is an account for all of the posts from abandoned or banned Member Accounts.

Offline Dusty Ol Fart

  • Platinum
  • Posts: 7556
  • Total likes: 899
  • Coaching: 12 & Under
  • Defense: 6-3
  • Offense: Spread Formation
  • Title: Retired
Re: 3-4 "weak" eagle material?
« Reply #23 on: October 17, 2017, 01:46:56 AM »
You miss the point as usual. If you have fundamentals that are sound, you can teach the kids to line up however you like. Does not mean you should necessarily. Taking and defeating blocks is as fundamental as it gets. How everybody does it, is an entirely different topic. If the fundamentals are truly sound, adjustment should be piece of cake.

You remind me of another.  Your team must be absolutely unstoppable! Yet you use the term IF twice? Assumption? Who missed the point?           
Not MPP... ONE TASK!  Teach them!  :)

Offline Test Account

  • Platinum
  • Posts: 8625
  • Total likes: 3
  • Admin Dead Account
  • Coaching: 6 & Under
  • Defense: Undecided
  • Offense: Undecided
  • Title: Other
Re: 3-4 "weak" eagle material?
« Reply #24 on: October 17, 2017, 08:14:53 AM »
You remind me of another.  Your team must be absolutely unstoppable! Yet you use the term IF twice? Assumption? Who missed the point?         
  Lot of things that go into that, like practice organization, coaches understanding, talent evaluation and the list just goes on. I may understand fundamental to one degree or another but I may not understand how it applies defensive football overall. If the defensive ideas make sense, alignment really shouldn't be an issue. No different than formations on offense.
Please don't PM or respond to this Member. It is an account for all of the posts from abandoned or banned Member Accounts.

Offline Test Account

  • Platinum
  • Posts: 8625
  • Total likes: 3
  • Admin Dead Account
  • Coaching: 6 & Under
  • Defense: Undecided
  • Offense: Undecided
  • Title: Other
Re: 3-4 "weak" eagle material?
« Reply #25 on: February 09, 2018, 12:18:16 PM »
How would you 2 gap if you are aligned in a 3tech?
you can play different alignments of a 3 technique.
Please don't PM or respond to this Member. It is an account for all of the posts from abandoned or banned Member Accounts.

Offline 33coach

  • Copper
  • Posts: 409
  • Total likes: 58
  • Coaching: High School
  • Defense: Other
  • Offense: Multiple
  • Title: Coordinator
Re: 3-4 "weak" eagle material?
« Reply #26 on: February 09, 2018, 12:23:32 PM »
i love the old reduction front, i played in one in HS as a 6/9 tech "anchor" linebacker... essentially a fancy word for a defensive end who squeezed :P

the weak eagle reduction is a simple concept.... go from 9-4-0-4-6 to 9-3-1-5-9

the great thing about it is the shaded players can play all the exact same way read the foot of the man you are shaded on, fight pressure with pressure, and for the love of god... DONT GET REACHED

your 9s play a hard contain technique - depending on your coverage of choice you can have one spill (which ever side the safeties roll to)

backers are in 30 techs, this helps not only with having someone in the B gap on the strong side (eliminating the bubble partially) but also stacking the weak side makes it harder to get a block on him. backers can be straight backfield readers - cross key 2 back... all the basic things. the key is when they fit, they need to fit TIGHT. any air must be gone.
STC & TEs coach - Mission Prep HS
Newly Converted member to the Church of Saint Tubby

Offline 33coach

  • Copper
  • Posts: 409
  • Total likes: 58
  • Coaching: High School
  • Defense: Other
  • Offense: Multiple
  • Title: Coordinator
Re: 3-4 "weak" eagle material?
« Reply #27 on: February 09, 2018, 12:26:46 PM »
you can play different alignments of a 3 technique.

for me, 2 gapping is never about alignment, its about the block read. for example:

from a 3 tech - the rules can be as simple as:
guard goes away - Squeeze
guard comes at you - Cross face

you are now a 2 gap defender.


just like pattern matching, dont cover something that isnt there... meaning a 2 gap player doesnt need to be in both gaps, just needs to be in the right one.
STC & TEs coach - Mission Prep HS
Newly Converted member to the Church of Saint Tubby

Offline Test Account

  • Platinum
  • Posts: 8625
  • Total likes: 3
  • Admin Dead Account
  • Coaching: 6 & Under
  • Defense: Undecided
  • Offense: Undecided
  • Title: Other
Re: 3-4 "weak" eagle material?
« Reply #28 on: February 09, 2018, 12:39:49 PM »
for me, 2 gapping is never about alignment, its about the block read. for example:

from a 3 tech - the rules can be as simple as:
guard goes away - Squeeze
guard comes at you - Cross face

you are now a 2 gap defender.


just like pattern matching, dont cover something that isnt there... meaning a 2 gap player doesnt need to be in both gaps, just needs to be in the right one.
it's a drive with extension and control of the blocker. If you play 3 tech. 2 gap, you your defenders crotch over outside foot of the guard. And ultimately it is about defeating blocks. It's high level of skill fo a d-linemen, that can be taught.
Please don't PM or respond to this Member. It is an account for all of the posts from abandoned or banned Member Accounts.

Offline ZACH

  • Administrator
  • Diamond
  • Posts: 10475
  • Total likes: 1009
  • Coaching: 12 & Under
  • Defense: 10-1
  • Offense: One Back
  • Title: Head Coach
Re: 3-4 "weak" eagle material?
« Reply #29 on: February 09, 2018, 03:02:20 PM »
Yall are some great coaches ... curious why you arent at higher levels of the game

2 gapping from an odd tech is something you never see anyone do or admit to attempting. Yall just made it sound so easy...

"Some athletes have division 1 dreams and jv work ethic" - random