Started By
Message
Three years in..... Are you happy with the change to the 3-4?......
Posted on 1/12/13 at 11:31 am
Posted on 1/12/13 at 11:31 am
This isn't a thread about CTG specifically. I'm just curious if people are satisfied with the switch to the 3-4 defensive alignment.......
It has definitely presented some unique challenges....and the results are very far from perfect.
So............Is the 3-4 the right fit for a college program like UGA?
It has definitely presented some unique challenges....and the results are very far from perfect.
So............Is the 3-4 the right fit for a college program like UGA?
6
Posted on 1/12/13 at 11:34 am to Jefferson Dawg
Yes, more stud HS linebackers than DE's now a days.
Posted on 1/12/13 at 11:36 am to Jefferson Dawg
I like it so far. I like getting more athletes on the field at LB since it's easier to find than big athletic DL. I also like the ability to give multiple looks out of it like bringing Jarvis up and giving a 4-3. That said it seems harder to stop the run out of it if you don't have a nose that will take over the game.
Posted on 1/12/13 at 11:45 am to Porter Osborne Jr
quote:
...it seems harder to stop the run out of it...
Yes, seems harder to stop the run out of it. And it seems like it requires more intelligence and discipline from the player.
Before the 3-4, I don't ever remember seeing so many players look as confused and lost as they often do now.
Posted on 1/12/13 at 11:58 am to Jefferson Dawg
No sure yet. We certainly haven't been good against the run with Grantham's 3-4 defense but then we were even worse with the 4-3 and Martinez. I think finding the right NG with depth is going to be an ongoing issue. If your NG gets handled by the opposing Center, then that frees up 2 OL on each side of the Center top blow out against single DE's opening up the running game. Yea, you've got an extra LB to supposedly fill the gaps but in our case too often that's after the RB has already gotten 3 yards and with momentum another yard or 2. Against running teams like Bama, LSU and Florida, I think we are better off with 4 down athletic linemen in the 300 lb range instead of having 3 fat asses in the 330-350 lb range. Of course against a team like Boise that throws a lot of underneath routes, clearly having an extra athletic LB is a big advantage. Maybe our problem has not been playing smart as a unit and too many slow LB's like Washington and not enough athletic LB's like Ogletree and Jarvis. One thing that really stands out about Bama and LSU is their super talented LB's.
Posted on 1/12/13 at 12:14 pm to davesdawgs
We were NEVER this bad stopping the run with CWM...we finished 78th in rushing defense. No excuse in the world with talent we had. 3-4 doesn't bother me (Stanford runs it to perfection and is great @ stopping the run) We just need a DC who knows WTF he's doing.
Posted on 1/12/13 at 12:16 pm to Jefferson Dawg
I was sold until the Alabama game, followed by the Nebraska game, ie rushing yards. Throw South Carolina in there too. The only 3 teams we played with a good running game all gashed our defense.
3-4 is popular in NFL because it's a passing league.
Realizing that 3 big linemen is not as good as 4 big linemen. And when you are bringing in another linebacker for that 4th rusher, all you are really doing is playing a 4-3 with an undersized DE.
I like the 3-4 as one scheme in a multiple of schemes, maybe play a 3-4 in some situations, but as a base defense in the SEC with many running threats on your schedule, I'm not sold.
Bama runs a 3-4, still trying to figure out what it is they are doing different to make it work for them.. I see them in a 4-3 alot, maybe they've just got a bigger OLB and looks like a 4-3. I don't really know. I'm just an internet schmuck.
3-4 is popular in NFL because it's a passing league.
Realizing that 3 big linemen is not as good as 4 big linemen. And when you are bringing in another linebacker for that 4th rusher, all you are really doing is playing a 4-3 with an undersized DE.
I like the 3-4 as one scheme in a multiple of schemes, maybe play a 3-4 in some situations, but as a base defense in the SEC with many running threats on your schedule, I'm not sold.
Bama runs a 3-4, still trying to figure out what it is they are doing different to make it work for them.. I see them in a 4-3 alot, maybe they've just got a bigger OLB and looks like a 4-3. I don't really know. I'm just an internet schmuck.
Posted on 1/12/13 at 12:18 pm to Jefferson Dawg
quote:
Before the 3-4, I don't ever remember seeing so many players look as confused and lost as they often do now.
Another good point. I've never seen the defense look so confused, and so sloppy getting on and off. I don't know if that's a 3-4 problem or a Grantham problem.
Posted on 1/12/13 at 12:18 pm to RD Dawg
quote:
We were NEVER this bad stopping the run with CWM...we finished 78th in rushing defense. No excuse in the world with talent we had. 3-4 doesn't bother me (Stanford runs it to perfection and is great @ stopping the run) We just need a DC who knows WTF he's doing.
or, recruiting players competent enough to play the scheme .
Posted on 1/12/13 at 12:27 pm to Jefferson Dawg
I am a fan of the 3-4. I think what what happened was that we kind of got away from our base 3-4 and started running more of our Nickel package, with only 2 down linemen. I noticed this a lot at the end of the Bama game, and the first half of the Nebraska game. I think next year if we have more depth on the line, we will be fine.
Posted on 1/12/13 at 1:12 pm to Jefferson Dawg
Hypo-Conversation between Richt and Grantham-
Richt: So, how are we going to improve the run defense with the 3-4 next year?
Grantham: Well, we had a hard time this year because we didn't have a dominating nose tackle, it was too easy for the offense to block him.
Richt: I agree Todd, but John Jenkins and Kwame Geathers are about as good as you are going to get at that position at this level. Every once in a while a real freak will come through, but that is the exception rather than the rule. Secondly, both Kwame and John are going go be in the NFL next year.
Grantham: I understand that Mark. We need a little more work with the linebackers to get them better at reading the run vs pass, and how to be in position a little bit better than they have been.
Richt: Again Todd, I agree. The problem is that you only get 15 hours a week with these guys, that's the NCAA rule. We could hire you 9 more "off field" assistants like Saban and risk major NCAA sanctions, so you can have more instruction with the players, but we aren't going to do that. There is too much risk involved for this program.
Grantham: I know, I know. We need to get smarter players that actually "get it" with less instruction, better recruiting.
Richt: That would be ideal, but we are bringing in the best talent in the country. To screen them all for IQ during the recruiting process is going to run them away [smirks].
Grantham: We don't really need to do any of all this, I just need another year with the guys and you'll see a serious improvement.
Richt: I have no doubt about it, Todd, the problem is that you are going to lose players every year, you might only get 1 or 2 years at best with your best players before they move on to the NFL. You aren't going to get 3 or 4 years to coach up these kids.
Grantham: Well, I guess we'll have to go to a 4-3.
Richt: So, how are we going to improve the run defense with the 3-4 next year?
Grantham: Well, we had a hard time this year because we didn't have a dominating nose tackle, it was too easy for the offense to block him.
Richt: I agree Todd, but John Jenkins and Kwame Geathers are about as good as you are going to get at that position at this level. Every once in a while a real freak will come through, but that is the exception rather than the rule. Secondly, both Kwame and John are going go be in the NFL next year.
Grantham: I understand that Mark. We need a little more work with the linebackers to get them better at reading the run vs pass, and how to be in position a little bit better than they have been.
Richt: Again Todd, I agree. The problem is that you only get 15 hours a week with these guys, that's the NCAA rule. We could hire you 9 more "off field" assistants like Saban and risk major NCAA sanctions, so you can have more instruction with the players, but we aren't going to do that. There is too much risk involved for this program.
Grantham: I know, I know. We need to get smarter players that actually "get it" with less instruction, better recruiting.
Richt: That would be ideal, but we are bringing in the best talent in the country. To screen them all for IQ during the recruiting process is going to run them away [smirks].
Grantham: We don't really need to do any of all this, I just need another year with the guys and you'll see a serious improvement.
Richt: I have no doubt about it, Todd, the problem is that you are going to lose players every year, you might only get 1 or 2 years at best with your best players before they move on to the NFL. You aren't going to get 3 or 4 years to coach up these kids.
Grantham: Well, I guess we'll have to go to a 4-3.
Posted on 1/12/13 at 1:16 pm to deeprig9
It looked dam good last year(2011) 
This post was edited on 1/12/13 at 1:17 pm
Posted on 1/12/13 at 1:25 pm to DawgRff
quote:
It looked dam good last year(2011)
2011
Gave up 253 rushing yards to South Carolina. Lattimore only accounted for 176 of those.
129 rush yards to Boise State.
207 rush yards to LSU.
200 rush yards to Vanderbilt.
243 rush yards to Georgia Tech.
Not as bad as this year, but definitely not stellar. I gave him a pass because it was his first year.
Those numbers are supposed to get better, not worse.
Posted on 1/13/13 at 1:29 am to deeprig9
quote:
I gave him a pass because it was his first year.
Did you give him a pass in 2010 also? Seeing that was the year he was hired.
Posted on 1/13/13 at 1:59 am to deeprig9
quote:
Bama runs a 3-4, still trying to figure out what it is they are doing different to make it work for them.
Try coach and program coach has built. Mentally and physically they are at a different level than most programs.
The question really is about Grantham, like it or not, rather than scheme.
There have been a lot of great 4 3s and 3 4s. You can do it either way. The good ones (coaches) today are using so many hybrid schemes that it almost becomes moot.
Posted on 1/13/13 at 2:51 am to Whopper Dawg
Whatever dude...point is, we were 5 yards from being in their place.
Bama also had the advantage of being able to sign almost an unlimited number of guys and cut them if necessary AND has 9 extra asst coaches called consultants...2 things that will never happen @ UGA as long as Gomer Pyle is our AD.
Bama also had the advantage of being able to sign almost an unlimited number of guys and cut them if necessary AND has 9 extra asst coaches called consultants...2 things that will never happen @ UGA as long as Gomer Pyle is our AD.
Posted on 1/13/13 at 2:02 pm to RD Dawg
If you run it the right way like Alabama then its a good defense.
Posted on 1/13/13 at 5:01 pm to Batdawg
UGA has some small personnel issues (we had a walkon play against Boise last season. ILB play stunk this season among Ogletree, Herrera, Gilliard, and Robinson).
The biggest issue is the scheme, though. We're split way too wide up on the line of scrimmage. If we're going to play with those wide splits, we need to be run blitzing the gaps just to cut down on space for the tailback. When we don't run blitz, we need the safeties crashing hard to give us the numbers to make the play. And if we face a team that has a good QB who can get the ball downfield (Bray, McCarron, Martinez) then we are setting ourselves up for big play failures.
Throw in our challenges with mobile QBs the past couple of seasons (outside pass rush getting too far upfield), and you have an entirely different set of issues to deal with as a DC.
The biggest issue is the scheme, though. We're split way too wide up on the line of scrimmage. If we're going to play with those wide splits, we need to be run blitzing the gaps just to cut down on space for the tailback. When we don't run blitz, we need the safeties crashing hard to give us the numbers to make the play. And if we face a team that has a good QB who can get the ball downfield (Bray, McCarron, Martinez) then we are setting ourselves up for big play failures.
Throw in our challenges with mobile QBs the past couple of seasons (outside pass rush getting too far upfield), and you have an entirely different set of issues to deal with as a DC.
Page 1 of 1
Latest Georgia News
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News