Harbaugh's 3-4 or Shanahan's Wide 9

I am partial to the 3-4, probably because I played in a 3-4 and the early 49ers use of 3-4.

Historically there is more you can do with a 3-4 and you can use a greater amount of player size variance , but to be honest that edge has shrank.

Talented but undersized DTs could work as ends in the 3-4, Slower safety sized DBs could man the middle linebackers spot in the 3-4. Undersized DEs could be outside linebackers. If you found defensive playmakers that just did not have good NFL size...there was ways you could play them. Almost any great 4-3 player could be a great player in the 3-4 too.

There was a time when that was not the common thinking, the 3-4 was a way to get 3 full-sized DTs on the field to slow down the run, but the 3-4 morphed in an anti-WCO defense with a lot of underneath zone. During that transition.

The basic problems exist for both defenses. You need legit pass rushers, and the "bonus" for the 3-4 was always there is a bigger pool of linebacker sized pass rushers then there is DE sized pass rushers. That has mostly evaporated with teams using smaller (in ratio to the average size) ends anyway. The counter to that was getting Linebackers that could also hold the edge and cover. There simply is not a ton a great players that can hold the edge, pass rush, and cover. Both defenses really become good/great with a 2 gap, but there have been a ton of great 4-3s with one gap DTs that are easier to find.

If you could not get a great DT, or a good pass rusher, the 3-4 had issues you just don't have with a 4-3. Hence the birth of the "46"....but that is a post for another day.

To be frank, the 49ers could pull off some really exotic stuff...like the 46. With Greenlaw, Huff and Warner you have a rare combo of players. The sideline to sideline tackle machine, the instinctive player you can trust to free lance and the LB that can go forward against the run or backwards into coverage against any offense. You could make a sound argument that Warner is one of the better cover "safeties" in the league. Yeah he does not line up as one, but he plays deep middle of the field coverage line one.

Originally posted by boast:
imagine if Bosa had a Justin Smith next to him.

Too bad they started calling that defensive holding

Originally posted by Wubbie:
I feel like, Harbaugh's 49er defense, with perfect health was a stronger defense overall. That linebacker corps was ridiculous.

However, I also feel like Fangio wore out Justin Smith and Aldon Smith, to the point that they were out of gas by the time the playoff came. He rarely rotated his starters out.

Meanwhile, Shanahan's defense regularly rotates the defensive line. As the season goes on, and especially in the playoffs, our defenses have been pretty fresh in getting after the QB.

Definitely agree with this!!!

Originally posted by Dshearn:
I am partial to the 3-4, probably because I played in a 3-4 and the early 49ers use of 3-4.

Historically there is more you can do with a 3-4 and you can use a greater amount of player size variance , but to be honest that edge has shrank.

Talented but undersized DTs could work as ends in the 3-4, Slower safety sized DBs could man the middle linebackers spot in the 3-4. Undersized DEs could be outside linebackers. If you found defensive playmakers that just did not have good NFL size...there was ways you could play them. Almost any great 4-3 player could be a great player in the 3-4 too.

There was a time when that was not the common thinking, the 3-4 was a way to get 3 full-sized DTs on the field to slow down the run, but the 3-4 morphed in an anti-WCO defense with a lot of underneath zone. During that transition.

The basic problems exist for both defenses. You need legit pass rushers, and the "bonus" for the 3-4 was always there is a bigger pool of linebacker sized pass rushers then there is DE sized pass rushers. That has mostly evaporated with teams using smaller (in ratio to the average size) ends anyway. The counter to that was getting Linebackers that could also hold the edge and cover. There simply is not a ton a great players that can hold the edge, pass rush, and cover. Both defenses really become good/great with a 2 gap, but there have been a ton of great 4-3s with one gap DTs that are easier to find.

If you could not get a great DT, or a good pass rusher, the 3-4 had issues you just don't have with a 4-3. Hence the birth of the "46"....but that is a post for another day.

To be frank, the 49ers could pull off some really exotic stuff...like the 46. With Greenlaw, Huff and Warner you have a rare combo of players. The sideline to sideline tackle machine, the instinctive player you can trust to free lance and the LB that can go forward against the run or backwards into coverage against any offense. You could make a sound argument that Warner is one of the better cover "safeties" in the league. Yeah he does not line up as one, but he plays deep middle of the field coverage line one.

Good thoughts. The bolded is one thing that makes the 3-4 harder to find the horses to play it well. Yet, this is happening as more and more teams are switching over to 3-4 right now. I posted why I thought the wide9 is better earlier in this thread, but what I really mean is 4-3 being better than 3-4. Mainly due to having to learn and do more as a 3-4 defense. OLBs have to pass rush and learn zone drops. If the 49ers made this switch (just saying), how much time is Nick Bosa dedicating to learning how to back pedal, watching more film of the opponents' pass game concepts so he can diagnose routes? 3-4 DTs two gap (1.5 gap) then pass rush on pass rush downs. It's simply more to teach as a coach and more to master as a player. All this for maybe 30% of snaps since many offenses play with 3WRs so often.

I wish Joey Bosa was healthy this season because LAC got Khalil Mack and Joey, and that could have been special to see. Two OLBS that have been in 3-4s most of their NFL career.

Originally posted by thl408:
Nice thread. I think if you have good coaches that can get creative and teach, the 3-4 has more potential (creative blitzes, possibly more athleticism since there are more LBs on the field). But in a day and age where a lot of player turnover occurs every year, a simplified scheme like the wide9 is better.

With so many offenses playing 11 personnel (3 WRs) nearly 70% of the time, a defense is having more snaps in nickel than in their base 3-4. With the wide9 always being a four man front whether it's base or nickel, it simplifies teaching. Saleh referred to this when he adopted the wide9. Instead of switching back and forth from 4-3 under, which is a five man front similar to the 3-4, to a four man front in nickel, he adopted the wide9 so that the defense was always in a four man front.

Then there's the question of player availability. If the majority of the league is playing a certain style, it means the majority of the league is looking for the same skillsets. Ideally, a team prefers to be different so that they aren't trying to acquire the same players. I think a good 3-4 OLB is one of the hardest things to find.

Great post. 3-4 can be deadly but it requires specialist guys at all the front seven spots. Veteran guys, generally. 4-3 is easier to get guys for, and wide 9 is simpler, so you can let guys play fast. Each has their pluses and minuses. But I think it's probably cheaper to do a 4-3. Wide 9 does take some great linebackers to work, however. But you don't need as many specialist, veteran guys as a typical 3-4.

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by glorydayz:

Originally posted by the_dynasty:
More like Fangios 3-4 vs Saleh/Ryans/Kocurek 4-3?

Comparing an alignment with a base d sounds a bit weird.

THIS

I understand the question I think. It's asking which defensive front is better - a 3-4 with 1.5 gap principles using two off the ball LBs, or wide9 with one gap technique and three off the ball LBs.

Wouldn't that depend on the roster?

Philosophy wise its whatever the D/C prefers.

Originally posted by boast:
imagine if Bosa had a Justin Smith next to him.

They call DL for holding a lot more now than when Cowboy played. In fact he is one of the reasons why it is being called more frequently.

Originally posted by glorydayz:

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by glorydayz:

Originally posted by the_dynasty:
More like Fangios 3-4 vs Saleh/Ryans/Kocurek 4-3?

Comparing an alignment with a base d sounds a bit weird.

THIS

I understand the question I think. It's asking which defensive front is better - a 3-4 with 1.5 gap principles using two off the ball LBs, or wide9 with one gap technique and three off the ball LBs.

Wouldn't that depend on the roster?

Philosophy wise its whatever the D/C prefers.

It's a question about which scheme is better with player talent being equal. At least that's the question I was answering.

Originally posted by Wubbie:
I feel like, Harbaugh's 49er defense, with perfect health was a stronger defense overall. That linebacker corps was ridiculous.

However, I also feel like Fangio wore out Justin Smith and Aldon Smith, to the point that they were out of gas by the time the playoff came. He rarely rotated his starters out.

Meanwhile, Shanahan's defense regularly rotates the defensive line. As the season goes on, and especially in the playoffs, our defenses have been pretty fresh in getting after the QB.

Our linebackers, Fred and Dre are DBs basically playing linebackers. They are fast and they can cover. I'd leap to the next level and go 4-1-6, dime defense as a base defense against most of the pass happy teams out there. Or 4-2-5.

Fangio is a 3-4 guy, and that's one reason I'd rather get a 4-3 guy. At least he thinks the wide 9, with 4 down linemen, is his preference vs Fangio having to change his ways from 3 down linemen to 4 with the Wide 9.

Having someone 6'3 260 that was strong and as athletic as Ahmed Brooks definitely helped that defense out against the run.

Hope we can spy like this on Sunday.

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by Wubbie:
I feel like, Harbaugh's 49er defense, with perfect health was a stronger defense overall. That linebacker corps was ridiculous.

However, I also feel like Fangio wore out Justin Smith and Aldon Smith, to the point that they were out of gas by the time the playoff came. He rarely rotated his starters out.

Meanwhile, Shanahan's defense regularly rotates the defensive line. As the season goes on, and especially in the playoffs, our defenses have been pretty fresh in getting after the QB.

Our linebackers, Fred and Dre are DBs basically playing linebackers. They are fast and they can cover. I'd leap to the next level and go 4-1-6, dime defense as a base defense against most of the pass happy teams out there. Or 4-2-5.

Fangio is a 3-4 guy, and that's one reason I'd rather get a 4-3 guy. At least he thinks the wide 9, with 4 down linemen, is his preference vs Fangio having to change his ways from 3 down linemen to 4 with the Wide 9.

I remember (possibly incorrectly) Fangio actually using a lot of 4-2-5 (Aldon-Justin-McDonald-Brooks all down, Willis+Bowman, and Carlos Rogers nickel), more than he probably anticipated using

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:

Originally posted by thl408:
Nice thread. I think if you have good coaches that can get creative and teach, the 3-4 has more potential (creative blitzes, possibly more athleticism since there are more LBs on the field). But in a day and age where a lot of player turnover occurs every year, a simplified scheme like the wide9 is better.

With so many offenses playing 11 personnel (3 WRs) nearly 70% of the time, a defense is having more snaps in nickel than in their base 3-4. With the wide9 always being a four man front whether it's base or nickel, it simplifies teaching. Saleh referred to this when he adopted the wide9. Instead of switching back and forth from 4-3 under, which is a five man front similar to the 3-4, to a four man front in nickel, he adopted the wide9 so that the defense was always in a four man front.

Then there's the question of player availability. If the majority of the league is playing a certain style, it means the majority of the league is looking for the same skillsets. Ideally, a team prefers to be different so that they aren't trying to acquire the same players. I think a good 3-4 OLB is one of the hardest things to find.

Great post. 3-4 can be deadly but it requires specialist guys at all the front seven spots. Veteran guys, generally. 4-3 is easier to get guys for, and wide 9 is simpler, so you can let guys play fast. Each has their pluses and minuses. But I think it's probably cheaper to do a 4-3. Wide 9 does take some great linebackers to work, however. But you don't need as many specialist, veteran guys as a typical 3-4.

EExactly what I was thinking as well

This defensive system is very salary cap friendly

Originally posted by grapesofrathman:

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by Wubbie:
I feel like, Harbaugh's 49er defense, with perfect health was a stronger defense overall. That linebacker corps was ridiculous.

However, I also feel like Fangio wore out Justin Smith and Aldon Smith, to the point that they were out of gas by the time the playoff came. He rarely rotated his starters out.

Meanwhile, Shanahan's defense regularly rotates the defensive line. As the season goes on, and especially in the playoffs, our defenses have been pretty fresh in getting after the QB.

Our linebackers, Fred and Dre are DBs basically playing linebackers. They are fast and they can cover. I'd leap to the next level and go 4-1-6, dime defense as a base defense against most of the pass happy teams out there. Or 4-2-5.

Fangio is a 3-4 guy, and that's one reason I'd rather get a 4-3 guy. At least he thinks the wide 9, with 4 down linemen, is his preference vs Fangio having to change his ways from 3 down linemen to 4 with the Wide 9.

I remember (possibly incorrectly) Fangio actually using a lot of 4-2-5 (Aldon-Justin-McDonald-Brooks all down, Willis+Bowman, and Carlos Rogers nickel), more than he probably anticipated using

I don't think Fangios nickel defenses are up to snuff with the modern fast break defenses. I don't think Fangio philosophy is pass oriented enough. The steeler superbowl defense of old were a great all around defense - they had four coverages and that was enough to win 4 Superbowls with their talent. I think Kyles philosophy is to put talent on defense and scheme on offense. I think he's that confident in his offensive playcalling and design abilities. Where he gets in trouble is deep in the playoffs where talented defense defeat his playcalling and schemes.

I think the nickel (4-2-5 and its variants) are the future of NFL defenses considering the CTE issues and the NFL rules committee trying to reduce concussions and blind side hits.

One reason I mention the steelers is the George Perlas defenses was the precursor to the one gap Kiffen/Kocurek defensive line defenses, Pete Carroll married that defense to the back end *no-name* Dolphin Arnsparger/Seifert coverage variant zone defenses. Now due to the rules changes, Instead of Charles and Fred dropping into coverage or rushing the passer, its the strong safety (John Lynch types) doing that.

I think Fangio's schemes are a bit out dated because of that. I'd rather have a simpler defensive line scheme and the complexity will be on the back end coverages to confuse QBs, since defenses can't knock the ball out of the recievers hands nowadays with hard hits. You will need a coverage specialist (I think) to operate any sort of 4-2-5 (or 4-1-6) defense. That's what I'm looking for in our next DC.

Originally posted by SlowDownBoy:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:

Originally posted by thl408:
Nice thread. I think if you have good coaches that can get creative and teach, the 3-4 has more potential (creative blitzes, possibly more athleticism since there are more LBs on the field). But in a day and age where a lot of player turnover occurs every year, a simplified scheme like the wide9 is better.

With so many offenses playing 11 personnel (3 WRs) nearly 70% of the time, a defense is having more snaps in nickel than in their base 3-4. With the wide9 always being a four man front whether it's base or nickel, it simplifies teaching. Saleh referred to this when he adopted the wide9. Instead of switching back and forth from 4-3 under, which is a five man front similar to the 3-4, to a four man front in nickel, he adopted the wide9 so that the defense was always in a four man front.

Then there's the question of player availability. If the majority of the league is playing a certain style, it means the majority of the league is looking for the same skillsets. Ideally, a team prefers to be different so that they aren't trying to acquire the same players. I think a good 3-4 OLB is one of the hardest things to find.

Great post. 3-4 can be deadly but it requires specialist guys at all the front seven spots. Veteran guys, generally. 4-3 is easier to get guys for, and wide 9 is simpler, so you can let guys play fast. Each has their pluses and minuses. But I think it's probably cheaper to do a 4-3. Wide 9 does take some great linebackers to work, however. But you don't need as many specialist, veteran guys as a typical 3-4.

EExactly what I was thinking as well

This defensive system is very salary cap friendly

The cap is definitely a consideration when assembling a defense. I can see the 4-3 being a bit cheaper than the 3-4. As of right now, the 49er defense overall is undersized but plays fast. I think its the same with the 49er DLine. Its a bit undersized and hence more prone to fatigue and injury. That's why rotating the DLine is so important.

I'm looking for a DC that can coach and scheme the coverages better and not rely so much on the blitz, but good enough to scheme various types of zone blitzes if needed. I'm looking for a DC that can take DBs and elevates them the way Kocurek elevates DLinemen. Hopefully he can innovate on the coverage side and develop new techniques for the safety positon to combat all the pass happy offenses in the NFL today.

Originally posted by Giedi:

I think Fangio's schemes are a bit out dated because of that.

Dang, someone forgot to tell all these NFL teams because Fangio's cover 6/quarters/2 shell/gap and a half defense is quite literally the hottest defensive thing in the NFL at the moment.