Steelers 3-4 Defense Becoming Obsolete?

[GBMelBlount]

New defensive additions could equate to even less base defense for the Steelers

The Pittsburgh Steelers are nothing if not consistent. They have been principally owned by the Rooney family since 1933. They have had three head coaches since 1969. And they have been running a base 3-4 defense since 1982. One need look no further than the franchise’s six shiny Lombardi trophies to understand that this consistency has served them well. Still, as Bob Dylan once sang, “The times they are a-changing.” When it comes to defense in Pittsburgh, Dylan’s refrain rings true.

As many around BTSC and elsewhere have observed, the term “base” is antiquated due to the league-wide trend towards sub packages and personnel groupings. Offenses rarely align in 21 personnel sets anymore in which a traditional fullback and tight end are on the field together. Instead, they are employing three, four and even five wide receiver packages to take advantage of rules changes that make it a felony to touch a receiver or to violate a quarterback’s personal space. In response, defenses are choosing to match these packages with Nickel and Dime groupings that get an extra defensive back or two on the field. Thus, the Steelers are in their base so infrequently that defensive coordinator Keith Butler told The Athletic’s Mark Kaboly in 2016 that the 3-4 was “almost obsolete.”

(Continued)

https://www.behindthesteelcurtain.com/2018/5/10/17336290/new-defensive-additions-could-equate-to-even-less-base-defense-for-the-steelers-3-4-nfl-scheme

[hawaiiansteeler]

I think it's obsolete as a base defense, yes.

[Fire Goodell]

I honestly think they're trying a new type of defense based on the 2 safety picks (which are both BIG safeties). We'll see how it pans out, but yeah generally it's a copycat league, and offenses are designed to exploit a defense's weakness. Just like nature, you have to adapt to survive.

[Mojouw]

The whole debate is a bit cock-eyed. The 3-4 is no more or less out-moded as a base defense than the 4-3 is. The debate is not about "base" defenses it is about what your roster can be made to do to respond to the massive formation flexibility seen in offenses around the league. I think there is no longer only one or two ways to "build" a defense. Find the best most flexible guys you can and create something from that.

Also scheme is only as good as the players on the roster. If they are a bad fit for the scheme, then the scheme will look bad. Different players, and the scheme looks great.

Look at the injuries to Shazier, Berry, and Seattle's entire defensive roster. Suddenly 3 pretty good defensive schemes looked pretty poor because the replacement players couldn't execute the scheme as effectively.

[GBMelBlount]

I honestly think they're trying a new type of defense based on the 2 safety picks (which are both BIG safeties).

We'll see how it pans out, but yeah generally it's a copycat league, and offenses are designed to exploit a defense's weakness. Just like nature, you have to adapt to survive.

and they are tackling machines.

I swear sometimes watching other teams run through our defense last year was like watching a pinball machine.

[steelreserve]

Everything is so situational that I don't even know if you can call a 3-4, or anything, the "base" defense.

I think it's increasingly getting to be where, rather than being strictly defined by position, there need to be one or two "swing" players in what would normally be the OLB-ILB-Safety roles, where they need to be able to play GOOD coverage as well as rush or defend the run, not just specialize in one or two of those.

If you have a big burly guy like Harrison or Dupree (or Williams) being jammed into that role, it's stupid and it's not going to work. You're probably looking for guys in the 6'2", 220-240 pound range with a lot of speed. So maybe that's what we're up to with this draft. Not "moving Edmunds or Allen to linebacker" but creating some flex formation where you've got three linemen, three linebackers, four DBs, and one guy just playing football. At least I hope it's something like that.

[Born2Steel]

The 3-4 best resembles playing a man to man defense. Zone offensive schemes give us fits because of this. You beat zones with speed so we add more athletic players to beat the zone. There will still be some games where our defense looks like burnt toast. Not due to lack of talent or miscommunication, but because we just got beat by better play/technique that day. I hope we closed the gap with this offseason. Teams with good OL play will be the toughest challenges this season.

[teegre]

Many college teams use the 3-3-5, such as WVU... with a big safety playing the SPUR. TCU has a similar role in their 4-2-5. Cowher used the 3-3-1-4 with Derrick Thomas as the Hawk (OLB, ILB, DE)... albeit, Thomas was bigger and used primarily around the LOS. And, honestly, we used a 3-4-1-3 when Polamalu was here, with Troy playing everywhere.

Teams like WVU & TCU rely on scheme. If you have a Derrick Thomas or a Troy Polamalu, you are designing your team around a unique talent. It appears the the Steelers are implementing a new scheme, but man alive!!! it’d be great if Edmunds becomes the next unique talent on our defense.

Grammatical note: I do realize that “unique” means “one of a kind.” Ergo, the phrase “next unique talent” might seem incorrect. But, I’m thinking that Edmunds creates a role that we’ve never seen before: a true SS/ILB hybrid.

[Mojouw]

Many college teams use the 3-3-5, such as WVU... with a big safety playing the SPUR. TCU has a similar role in their 4-2-5. Cowher used the 3-3-1-4 with Derrick Thomas as the Hawk (OLB, ILB, DE)... albeit, Thomas was bigger and used primarily around the LOS. And, honestly, we used a 3-4-1-3 when Polamalu was here, with Troy playing everywhere.

Teams like WVU & TCU rely on scheme. If you have a Derrick Thomas or a Troy Polamalu, you are designing your team around a unique talent. It appears the the Steelers are implementing a new scheme, but man alive!!! it’d be great if Edmunds becomes the next unique talent on our defense.

Grammatical note: I do realize that “unique” means “one of a kind.” Ergo, the phrase “next unique talent” might seem incorrect. But, I’m thinking that Edmunds creates a role that we’ve never seen before: a true SS/ILB hybrid.

Good points. I think that what get's lost in a conversation about formations and alignments is how the league has changed. You can no longer simply be a "3-4 team" or a "4-3 team" put game-day helmets on 11-15 guys and be like "Done!". Things are too complex on both sides of the ball and you need flexibility. Most of the recent "elite" defenses in the league have not been designed around a base scheme. Sure they have that, but it is hardly the point! But rather they have been designed to highlight specific player' talents. So "unique" guys.

Recently the Steelers have had defenses that took advantage of what Polamalu brought to the table. They were attempting to build one around Shazier. I realize that there are other high quality players on the team, but Shazier was clearly tabbed to the straw that stirs the drink so to speak.

The thing is this central idea, don't be locked into a scheme, but scheme to maximize the talent you do have, isn't really all that new. The 4-6 came about because Buddy didn't have the right players on the roster to run another scheme as well so he knocked one together that took advantage of what he did have rather than what he didn't have. And that is my central complaint about Lebeau once he got older and Butler now. They seem to be constantly building towards the ideal mix of guys for the "system" and not innovating and adapting the system to the guys they do have. I am encouraged that this off-season it sounds like Butler is finally moving towards looking at his best 11-15 players and figuring out how to maximize their talents rather than how to best fit them to a pre-defined scheme role.