Defensive changes?

[Jarid in Cedar]

I post this on the old board at the end of last season:

The trouble we have in the Pac-12 as a 4-3 team is recruiting defensive ends. The ones we can get are, either big enough to stop the run, but not fast enough to really rush the passer, or fast enough to rush the passer but not big enough to hold the edge on the run. Then in s4-3, you need to have two of them that can do both. Typically, we have one prototypical end and one that is either too slow our too small. Last year, Joe Kruger was adequate at both, but Nate was too small, and we got abused by teams running of tackle to his side.

Now as far as the 3-4, we can now insert 3 poly lineman(instead of 2) who have good enough size to stuff the run and the ability to contain 2 lineman at the point of attack. Which will allow a faster olb, like Reilly or Nate to rush the passer unchecked. Also allow the linebackers to run clear to the rushing lanes against the spread. It also protects us from a lack of speed at the edge by stretching the field more laterally, giving the safeties more time to fill.

Kyle Whittingham today:

"The 4-3 defense is becoming a dinosaur. It's extinct."

Curious to see where this may lead. I could see us playing the 4-3 against Stanford, USC, and BYU. The other games we are probably better with a 3-4.

What are your thoughts?

[Utah]

I post this on the old board at the end of last season:



Kyle Whittingham today:



Curious to see where this may lead. I could see us playing the 4-3 against Stanford, USC, and BYU. The other games we are probably better with a 3-4.

What are your thoughts?

Im not sure a 3-4 is the way to go, especially with how terrible our LB'ers are. I'd rather us follow TCU and go with a 5-2 front, or some other form depending on the team we play. USC, Stanford get a 4-3. Spread teams get a 5-2 or a 4-2 or 4-1 depending on their talent at receiver. Our D line is too good to take them off the field. Our LB'ers are too awful to keep them on the field. That's why Blechen moving to LB'er doesn't make him a LB'er.

[Sullyute]

I think that we should just bring back the circus defense! Seriously speaking I like the idea of three our big Polynesian brothers clogging the middle, but I am worried about the line backers too. But playing three run stoppers allows us to get the best players on the field as our defensive ends are not as good as we have had in the past. KW wants more speed on the field so maybe this is the best way to get that.

[Jarid in Cedar]

Im not sure a 3-4 is the way to go, especially with how terrible our LB'ers are. I'd rather us follow TCU and go with a 5-2 front, or some other form depending on the team we play. USC, Stanford get a 4-3. Spread teams get a 5-2 or a 4-2 or 4-1 depending on their talent at receiver. Our D line is too good to take them off the field. Our LB'ers are too awful to keep them on the field. That's why Blechen moving to LB'er doesn't make him a LB'er.

I think that the 3-4 ironically dampens some the problems that we had at lb last season. One olb would be a de/olb hybrid in the mold of Reilly(or Koa Misi as a past example). This player would primarily be a rushing/blitzing olb.

The other olb would be in the mold of someone like Blechen( someone a little too slow to play safety, but not quite prototypical lb size). They would primarily cover TE our backs out of the backfield.

That would leave the two ilb positions that we would want to fill with two more all-purpose lb's. These are the tough recruits for us (by pac-12 standards). But right now, we are trying to fill all 3 positions with players in the mold of Sly. In the change to the 3-4, we would injury need to fill two positions with that caliber of a player.

[crazyute]

the 3-4 makes sense with guys like gaius and sam tevi coming in. both are 6'5"-6'6" 290-300. those are prototype 3-4 DE's. big strong physical types.

palepoi, stevie, sese, dan neilson are great NT types. fire plugs that are hard to move.

reilly, orchard, and whittingham fit the mold of OLB's in the 3-4 as well. long athletic pass rushers.

then fehoko, filiaga, and norris are prototype ILB's. big physical types.

You can always go to a 4 man front in passing downs and play a nickle type. or the TCU defense a 4-2-5.

orchard-palepoi-seni-reilly

blechen-hooker

mcgill-carter-rowe-morrisedwards-thomas

[Jarid in Cedar]

the 3-4 makes sense with guys like gaius and sam tevi coming in. both are 6'5"-6'6" 290-300. those are prototype 3-4 DE's. big strong physical types.

palepoi, stevie, sese, dan neilson are great NT types. fire plugs that are hard to move.

reilly, orchard, and whittingham fit the mold of OLB's in the 3-4 as well. long athletic pass rushers.

then fehoko, filiaga, and norris are prototype ILB's. big physical types.

You can always go to a 4 man front in passing downs and play a nickle type. or the TCU defense a 4-2-5.

orchard-palepoi-seni-reilly

blechen-hooker

mcgill-carter-rowe-morrisedwards-thomas

The Trinity duo really are the perfect 3-4 DE's. I had these thoughts about the change as we watched the recruits that were coming in last year.

Dan Neilson transferred to Nevada, iirc.

[Jarid in Cedar]

The Trinity duo really are the perfect 3-4 DE's. I had these thoughts about the change as we watched the recruits that were coming in last year.

Dan Neilson transferred to Nevada, iirc.

I would add that Hunter Dimick is also a perfect DE for the 3-4.

[UtahsMrSports]

The Trinity duo really are the perfect 3-4 DE's. I had these thoughts about the change as we watched the recruits that were coming in last year.

Dan Neilson transferred to Nevada, iirc.

Hes still on the roster online, but that doesnt mean much. I hadnt heard this.

[Utah]

I would add that Hunter Dimick is also a perfect DE for the 3-4.

Mom, you guys have convinced me. 3-4 it is.

[utebehindenemylines]

While a 4-3 may be our base defense, it seems like we spend just as much time in the Nickel (4 dl, 2 lb, 5 dbs). Personally, I like the 4-3 against pro style teams like Stanford and USC but Nickel and 3-2-6 dime against the spread heavy teams.

The trouble with the 3-4 d linemen is that their roles change considerable once you try and play them in a Nickel or Dime. In the 3-4 they aren't predominantly pass rushers and more just space fillers, when you have to switch to Nickel or Dime on long down and distance, you are then relying on them for your sole pass rush (unless you blitz lbs or dbs), which they generally aren't very efficient at.

I think the 3-4 works well for teams that play lots of zone and have great cover lbs (BYU). We rely too much on cover 1 or cover 0 (man) and therefore our lbs would be even more exploitable in the pass game.

[Hot Lunch]

I think that the 3-4 ironically dampens some the problems that we had at lb last season. One olb would be a de/olb hybrid in the mold of Reilly(or Koa Misi as a past example). This player would primarily be a rushing/blitzing olb.

The other olb would be in the mold of someone like Blechen( someone a little too slow to play safety, but not quite prototypical lb size). They would primarily cover TE our backs out of the backfield.

That would leave the two ilb positions that we would want to fill with two more all-purpose lb's. These are the tough recruits for us (by pac-12 standards). But right now, we are trying to fill all 3 positions with players in the mold of Sly. In the change to the 3-4, we would injury need to fill two positions with that caliber of a player.

With Rielly and Orchard, I think that a 3-4 better fits the talent that we have this year. I think those two play better standing up in space. Orchard could have a really big impact on games with his athleticism. I would love to see us run a 3-4 this year.

It has taken me awhile to buy into a 3-4 defense but over the past year or so, I have come to prefer it.

[Hot Lunch]

While a 4-3 may be our base defense, it seems like we spend just as much time in the Nickel (4 dl, 2 lb, 5 dbs). Personally, I like the 4-3 against pro style teams like Stanford and USC but Nickel and 3-2-6 dime against the spread heavy teams.

The trouble with the 3-4 d linemen is that their roles change considerable once you try and play them in a Nickel or Dime. In the 3-4 they aren't predominantly pass rushers and more just space fillers, when you have to switch to Nickel or Dime on long down and distance, you are then relying on them for your sole pass rush (unless you blitz lbs or dbs), which they generally aren't very efficient at.

I think the 3-4 works well for teams that play lots of zone and have great cover lbs (BYU). We rely too much on cover 1 or cover 0 (man) and therefore our lbs would be even more exploitable in the pass game.

The benefit that Utah has here is that they can put Riley and Orchard at DE in this situation. Both have experience at that position and, can play/rush the passer with their hands in the ground in these situations.

BYU doesn't nor did they have great cover lbs. They had one in Van Noy, their other LB's last year were not good in coverage.

[Jarid in Cedar]

With Rielly and Orchard, I think that a 3-4 better fits the talent that we have this year. I think those two play better standing up in space. Orchard could have a really big impact on games with his athleticism. I would love to see us run a 3-4 this year.

It has taken me awhile to buy into a 3-4 defense but over the past year or so, I have come to prefer it.

I am a 4-3 guy at heart, but until teams move away from the spread attack, I don't think it is a viable defense. Look at the NFL as well, how many teams have dumped the 4-3 for a 3-4 in the last 3 years?

I agree that Orchard and Reilly will thrive in a 3-4.

[Jarid in Cedar]

Also, from the interview Whitt has done today, it sounds like we may be playing more 4-2-5, which I am not sure I like as much. But basically, this year Blechen would be playing the LB/SS hybrid that the 4-2-5 would entail.

[crazyute]

Also, from the interview Whitt has done today, it sounds like we may be playing more 4-2-5, which I am not sure I like as much. But basically, this year Blechen would be playing the LB/SS hybrid that the 4-2-5 would entail.

I actually really like the 4-2-5. it is perfect for the spread offenses.

[sancho]

Here's what I think. We have to do the best we can, but nobody is stopping the read options, the spreads, etc right now without superior speed and strength. Nobody has really figured out what to do schematically yet, and the college defensive coordinators have had a decade to try and figure it out.

Basically, we have to outscore these teams - something we are not yet ready to do.

[Sullyute]

This article about Utah's new defensive looks was just posted in the SLTrib.

What you won’t see so much anymore are the formations the Utes were known for in the past. The 4-3 might be what Kyle Whittingham literally grew up with in his family, but it’s time for a change, he said.
"Football is evolving and you have to go in a different direction," said Whittingham. "The offense sets the trend and the defense follows suit and the spread offense necessitates the defense adapt. Basically you won’t see three linebacker defense anymore, it just doesn’t lend itself to these offenses."