Southerntakeover
Hall of Famer
Re: the 3-4 and deception, the below might of some assistance. A 40+ year defensive coach at the college level:
"The offense breaks the huddle, and the defense responds to the offense’s formation. The 3-4, especially one filled with deception like Aranda’s scheme, is predicated on forcing the offense to respond to you. Aranda refers to this as “dictating the terms” of the matchup.
“They won’t know where we’re coming from, and they won’t see us when we come,” LSU defensive end Lewis Neal said.
Jenkins said deception is the biggest advantage to the 3-4.
“I think the thing that I always liked about the 3-4 was the ability to disguise the fourth rusher. That’s one of the really, really big advantages to the 3-4,” he said. “You can always identify your four rushers in a 4-3, but it’s really difficult to identify the fourth rusher if you lined up in a (three-lineman) concept.”"
http://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/sports/lsu/article_2fb8825c-5529-11e6-b34e-ef7a2626d82f.html
It's of course a misnomer to speak of the 3-4 as if all schemes are equal, and the words 'based on' are perhaps too strong. There are other reasons you might run a 3-4, i.e. more athleticism on the field. There are different schemes that operate in different ways, however it's plain that in pretty much any 3-4 scheme,when you take a pass rusher off the defensive line you'll attempt to disguise where the fourth pass rusher is coming from. i.e. deception.
It's not just the 3-4 of course. You could strongly argue that the game itself is strongly based around deception. You develop game plans and schemes to convince the opposition that you're doing one thing, so you can beat them with another. It might be that you run to set up the play action, or it might be that when you're struggling to block the pass rush you start calling screens.
Somewhat ironically Chip's defensive scheme was an attempt at deception. Think of his requirements at the safety position: interchangeable coverage safeties, so you couldnt work out the coverage of the defence based upon line up (in contrast to defences where you have a clear box safety).
Amusingly enough for this conversation deception, or a lack thereof, on offense is also one of the reasons that Chip failed in Philly. An utter lack of deception. Players from opposing teams walking away after games telling the media that they succeeded because they knew exactly what plays we were going to run, because we'd run them before.
"The offense breaks the huddle, and the defense responds to the offense’s formation. The 3-4, especially one filled with deception like Aranda’s scheme, is predicated on forcing the offense to respond to you. Aranda refers to this as “dictating the terms” of the matchup.
“They won’t know where we’re coming from, and they won’t see us when we come,” LSU defensive end Lewis Neal said.
Jenkins said deception is the biggest advantage to the 3-4.
“I think the thing that I always liked about the 3-4 was the ability to disguise the fourth rusher. That’s one of the really, really big advantages to the 3-4,” he said. “You can always identify your four rushers in a 4-3, but it’s really difficult to identify the fourth rusher if you lined up in a (three-lineman) concept.”"
http://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/sports/lsu/article_2fb8825c-5529-11e6-b34e-ef7a2626d82f.html
It's of course a misnomer to speak of the 3-4 as if all schemes are equal, and the words 'based on' are perhaps too strong. There are other reasons you might run a 3-4, i.e. more athleticism on the field. There are different schemes that operate in different ways, however it's plain that in pretty much any 3-4 scheme,when you take a pass rusher off the defensive line you'll attempt to disguise where the fourth pass rusher is coming from. i.e. deception.
It's not just the 3-4 of course. You could strongly argue that the game itself is strongly based around deception. You develop game plans and schemes to convince the opposition that you're doing one thing, so you can beat them with another. It might be that you run to set up the play action, or it might be that when you're struggling to block the pass rush you start calling screens.
Somewhat ironically Chip's defensive scheme was an attempt at deception. Think of his requirements at the safety position: interchangeable coverage safeties, so you couldnt work out the coverage of the defence based upon line up (in contrast to defences where you have a clear box safety).
Amusingly enough for this conversation deception, or a lack thereof, on offense is also one of the reasons that Chip failed in Philly. An utter lack of deception. Players from opposing teams walking away after games telling the media that they succeeded because they knew exactly what plays we were going to run, because we'd run them before.
