3-4 Defense

[mthoopsfan]

The Griz horrible D against the run gave up 41 yards today.

 

[MissoulaMarinerFan]

This topic has been discussed Ad Nauseating on here before.

The bottom line is this........ the 3-3-5 is a gimmick defense to attempt to stop spread teams. None of the elite teams in either FBS or FCS run the 3-3-5 as their base defense (and save the TCU example, they have never been a top 10 team, and 2022 was an outlier). It was first employed by second-tier FBS teams who could not recruit enough stud D-linemen to put pressure on the opposing QB to disrupt the passing game. So, instead, the answer to trying to stop the passing game was to employ 5 defensive backs.

Yes, all great teams employ elements of the 3-3-5 in certain situations, with their nickle and dime packages. But, we use it as our base defense, and attempt to create both confusion, as well as a pass rush, with several blitz packages. The problem in this is two-fold. First, if we guess correctly, it indeed can disrupt a play, but if we are not able to guess correctly, it results in big plays. We gave up more big plays last season than in any season I can remember.

The second problem, and most important one, is that the 3-3-5 exposes us to great running teams, of which 90% of the top FCS teams fall into that category. So, when we have to play against one of them, you have seen the results............ 400+ rushing yards and many big gains on long runs. The Bobcat coaches are licking their chops facing our 3-3-5 defense.

If we ever expect to RTD and play with the big boys in the FCS, we will shelve that defense, and go to a 4-3 or 3-4 base defense.

It’s really wild how moving one player on the field would’ve made us stop the running teams last year. Have you told the coaches about this incredible revelation? You’re like Pierce Brosnan in Dante’s Peak warning the townsfolk about the volcano.

RIP, Wallace, Idaho. #neverforget #dantespeak #tearsforwallace

 

[brewskis]

Their base scheme is vastly more 3-3-5 because they don't have dedicated linebackers. I'm not going to dive too much into semantics here, but the 3-4 would no more solve the MSU problem than the 3-3. Moreover, adding an additional DL wouldn't solve a problem that was off-tackle. People obviously are unnerved and are convinced that the 3-3 was the problem against MSU last year and looking for easy prescriptions. Montana was gashed last year in Bozeman because of a lot of factors that include some smart gameplanning and play calling by MSU. The front and backer alignment played a much smaller role in why the D got boatraced than people want to think.

If I have time and the desire to finish it, I have some thoughts about what may or may not happen defensively. Really don't think we'll have a clear sense today against Butler. If Montana runs out a version of the 2 deep they have right now, they are going to be in a good position to have a decent year defensively. Basically just take a deep breath, UM is in a good place with its personnel and who is the DC.

I sure hope so.

 

[thirdandlong]

I thought the Griz base was 3-5-3, not 3-3-5.

Janacaro is very good off the edge. I wonder if we will see more of him there.

Especially with a couple on the d-line out with injury, where would the big bodies come from this year? I suppose there could be some o-lineman subbing there. I wonder if the big transfer d-end could fill in on the d-line. I don't know his skills. I just know he's huge and I've heard the coaches say good things about him.

You don’t know what you’re talking about. That’s obvious.

Yep, you got it. He's a self-flagellating blowhard. I enjoyed watching the game today from Suite 127, the suite he was kicked-out of. Now he resides in the cake-eaters sky box, where he can share his glory days with other fossils.

 

[thirdandlong]

Their base scheme is vastly more 3-3-5 because they don't have dedicated linebackers. I'm not going to dive too much into semantics here, but the 3-4 would no more solve the MSU problem than the 3-3. Moreover, adding an additional DL wouldn't solve a problem that was off-tackle. People obviously are unnerved and are convinced that the 3-3 was the problem against MSU last year and looking for easy prescriptions. Montana was gashed last year in Bozeman because of a lot of factors that include some smart gameplanning and play calling by MSU. The front and backer alignment played a much smaller role in why the D got boatraced than people want to think.

If I have time and the desire to finish it, I have some thoughts about what may or may not happen defensively. Really don't think we'll have a clear sense today against Butler. If Montana runs out a version of the 2 deep they have right now, they are going to be in a good position to have a decent year defensively. Basically just take a deep breath, UM is in a good place with its personnel and who is the DC.

No, they are not in a good place defensively. They looked very vulnerable today. Anyone who thinks our defense this year will be as good as last year's, is smoking green stuff. You don't replace three all-conference players that easily. This isn't plug-n-play like some of you seem to think.

 

[thirdandlong]

The Griz horrible D against the run gave up 41 yards today.

yawn

 

[AZGrizFan]

Their base scheme is vastly more 3-3-5 because they don't have dedicated linebackers. I'm not going to dive too much into semantics here, but the 3-4 would no more solve the MSU problem than the 3-3. Moreover, adding an additional DL wouldn't solve a problem that was off-tackle. People obviously are unnerved and are convinced that the 3-3 was the problem against MSU last year and looking for easy prescriptions. Montana was gashed last year in Bozeman because of a lot of factors that include some smart gameplanning and play calling by MSU. The front and backer alignment played a much smaller role in why the D got boatraced than people want to think.

If I have time and the desire to finish it, I have some thoughts about what may or may not happen defensively. Really don't think we'll have a clear sense today against Butler. If Montana runs out a version of the 2 deep they have right now, they are going to be in a good position to have a decent year defensively. Basically just take a deep breath, UM is in a good place with its personnel and who is the DC.

No, they are not in a good place defensively. They looked very vulnerable today. Anyone who thinks our defense this year will be as good as last year's, is smoking green stuff. You don't replace three all-conference players that easily. This isn't plug-n-play like some of you seem to think.

First you bitch about never creating all conference players, then you bitch about having to replace them. They can’t play forever, bro. EVERY good team replaces all conference players EVERY year. You act like the Griz are the only team with this challenge.

 

[behappp]

What scheme did we have 2 years ago when we beat the scats 29-10? Mebbe we should use that one again.

 

[mthoopsfan]

Their base scheme is vastly more 3-3-5 because they don't have dedicated linebackers. I'm not going to dive too much into semantics here, but the 3-4 would no more solve the MSU problem than the 3-3. Moreover, adding an additional DL wouldn't solve a problem that was off-tackle. People obviously are unnerved and are convinced that the 3-3 was the problem against MSU last year and looking for easy prescriptions. Montana was gashed last year in Bozeman because of a lot of factors that include some smart gameplanning and play calling by MSU. The front and backer alignment played a much smaller role in why the D got boatraced than people want to think.

If I have time and the desire to finish it, I have some thoughts about what may or may not happen defensively. Really don't think we'll have a clear sense today against Butler. If Montana runs out a version of the 2 deep they have right now, they are going to be in a good position to have a decent year defensively. Basically just take a deep breath, UM is in a good place with its personnel and who is the DC.

No, they are not in a good place defensively. They looked very vulnerable today. Anyone who thinks our defense this year will be as good as last year's, is smoking green stuff. You don't replace three all-conference players that easily. This isn't plug-n-play like some of you seem to think.

The D looked good. Gave up only 41 yards on ground. Onky 15 first downs. 441-304 TO. Gave up only a few 3d down conversions. Tackled pretty well. Should have had a few more pass breakups.

 

[thirdandlong]

No, they are not in a good place defensively. They looked very vulnerable today. Anyone who thinks our defense this year will be as good as last year's, is smoking green stuff. You don't replace three all-conference players that easily. This isn't plug-n-play like some of you seem to think.

First you bitch about never creating all conference players, then you bitch about having to replace them. They can’t play forever, bro. EVERY good team replaces all conference players EVERY year. You act like the Griz are the only team with this challenge.

Keep drinking the Kool-Aid in thinking that our 2023 is a good defense. I looked out on the field at the start of the game, and saw nothing but players who either didn't play much last season, or were not huge contributors if they did play. Other than Gubner, I saw no all-conference players in our starting 11. Hill may make the second team all-conference. Maybe Nate too. There were no Robbys or O-Connells out there.

Watch the season unfold, and I will be correct again about this defense. Some of us can make prospective observations........ most make them retrospectively. Which camp are you in?

 

[CDAGRIZ]

First you bitch about never creating all conference players, then you bitch about having to replace them. They can’t play forever, bro. EVERY good team replaces all conference players EVERY year. You act like the Griz are the only team with this challenge.

Keep drinking the Kool-Aid in thinking that our 2023 is a good defense. I looked out on the field at the start of the game, and saw nothing but players who either didn't play much last season, or were not huge contributors if they did play. Other than Gubner, I saw no all-conference players in our starting 11. Hill may make the second team all-conference. Maybe Nate too. There were no Robbys or O-Connells out there.

Watch the season unfold, and I will be correct again about this defense. Some of us can make prospective observations........ most make them retrospectively. Which camp are you in?

I make prospective observations. I prospectively observe that you will not make a single positive observation about the Griz Football team this season.

 

[AZGrizFan]

First you bitch about never creating all conference players, then you bitch about having to replace them. They can’t play forever, bro. EVERY good team replaces all conference players EVERY year. You act like the Griz are the only team with this challenge.

Keep drinking the Kool-Aid in thinking that our 2023 is a good defense. I looked out on the field at the start of the game, and saw nothing but players who either didn't play much last season, or were not huge contributors if they did play. Other than Gubner, I saw no all-conference players in our starting 11. Hill may make the second team all-conference. Maybe Nate too. There were no Robbys or O-Connells out there.

Watch the season unfold, and I will be correct again about this defense. Some of us can make prospective observations........ most make them retrospectively. Which camp are you in?

Way to miss the point entirely. You can’t be forced to REPLACE all Americans unless you first CREATE all Americans. And literally EVERY team has that same issue every year because this isn’t the NFL and they can’t play forever. We’re literally 4 quarters into the season and you’re already predicting “no Robby’s or O’Connell’s out there”? You really ARE Nostradumbass.