3-3-5/4-2-5 defensive discussion

Discussion in 'The Trifecta' started by Dru50, Feb 12, 2010.

?

Should we allow the 3-3-5 and 4-2-5 defenses

  1. Yes

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  2. No

    100.0%
  1. Dru50

    Dru50 Still Chicago's #1 son

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2009
    Messages:
    16,269
    3-3-5/4-2-5 defensive discussion

    Guys, after a lot of thinking, I'm not really sold on the idea of the 3-3-5 being banned but the 4-2-5 being allowed. I understand the reasons why TF banned the 3-3-5 but the same issues exist for both defenses. IMO - they are either both in or both out.

    Therefore, with season 2 in mind, please vote in the poll above on whether you feel both should be allowed or both should be banned. Feel free to post any commentary you feel would be helpful.

    My vote is to allow both, just so everyone is aware. Also, this poll is not being introduced because I want to or anyone else has requested to use the 3-3-5. I will be sticking with a 4-3 or 3-4 or Multiple D either way.
     
  2. astealthyhippo

    astealthyhippo happy painting and god bless

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2009
    Messages:
    1,204
    I voted yes to allow both. If the 4-2-5 is allowed I think the 3-3-5 should be as well. I can't remember, but what was the original idea behind banning the 3-3-5 but allowing the 4-2-5?
     
  3. Dru50

    Dru50 Still Chicago's #1 son

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2009
    Messages:
    16,269
    It's mentioned in the New Members Lounge that it's due to the 3-3-5 being abnormally effective against power running sets. The 4-2-5 has the same quirk to it, hence my thought that either both are in or both are out.
     
  4. EaglesIrish5

    EaglesIrish5 Walk On

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2009
    Messages:
    915
    I say chuck them both.

    Neither seem "SIM" to me.
     
  5. astealthyhippo

    astealthyhippo happy painting and god bless

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2009
    Messages:
    1,204
    Yeah, I'm not really a defensive guru like some people here, but my thoughts were those defenses (4-2-5 and 3-3-5) allow users to put more speed on the field and line up safteies at or near the LOS (not-sim). I agree though, it should be both are allowed or neither.
     
  6. Dru50

    Dru50 Still Chicago's #1 son

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2009
    Messages:
    16,269
    Eagles, please vote in the poll as well so that I can track the group's decision. Thanks.
     
  7. EaglesIrish5

    EaglesIrish5 Walk On

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2009
    Messages:
    915
    Totally missed the poll at the top.
     
  8. MaxATX34

    MaxATX34 Texas Football

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2009
    Messages:
    4,719
    I say Allow them. They arent super defenses and both are very beatable. As far as them not being sim I totally disagree. Heck, the university I go to runs the 4-2-5 (Texas State). So do other schools (TCU and Rice off the top of my head - Longhorns run a modified Nickel base D which is basically a 4-2-5). Taking them out of the game allows us to either run the 4-3 or the 3-4. That doesnt seem very realistic to me as not every team runs the same 2 defenses.

    Just my 2 cents and I will of course roll with whatever the dynasty decides.
     
  9. Dru50

    Dru50 Still Chicago's #1 son

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2009
    Messages:
    16,269
    I would kind of disagree that they are 'very beatable'. Especially when you see lots more people using it in NCAA than in real life, often regardless of their defensive personnel. Someone wouldn't pick a 4-2-5 over a 4-3 if they have better LB's than S's unless there was a reason in the game code that makes one defense perform better than the other. Also, I think it would be hard to dispute that the 4-2-5 (for example) stops the run far better than a 4-4 in this game, which really doesn't make sense.

    That being said, my position is that if the majority of the OD wants to allow the 4-2-5 then people should also have the option of using the 3-3-5.
     
  10. KnightNoles

    KnightNoles Learn to Compete

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2009
    Messages:
    19,820
    It doesn't matter to me also. There's only one true team that runs a 3-3-5 west virginia Florida runs a version of a 3-3-5 4-2-5 because there so talented but only a small amount of teams run these formations
     
  11. mcyork

    mcyork Walk On

    Joined:
    May 17, 2009
    Messages:
    3,913
    I hate the 4-2-5 but thats because Max runs it in TF4 and has kicked my ass the last few seasons. I can't do ish against it. SO BAN THIS MOFO!!!!! not Max just the defense!!!!
     
  12. bogey21

    bogey21 Walk On

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2009
    Messages:
    1,459
    I'm not in this league but this has been a hot topic throughout TF for months now so I figured I add my two cents as well.

    There is one of two reasons to run the 4-2-5 IMO.

    1 - Your team cannot cover the pass very well so you sub out a LB for a more athletic DB to help in pass coverage. (This is why any REAL teams in the NCAA would go to the 4-2-5, Rice/TCU).

    2 - You want to get a faster guy in your lineup to blitz from off the edge and you realize few, if any teams can make you pay for the slight step back you may take from losing that extra backer. (The reason most people run this in NCAA 10').

    I guess if you run the 4-2-5 and you can honestly tell yourself it is for reason 1, it would be fine, but if its reason 2 you might want to change things up.
     
  13. astealthyhippo

    astealthyhippo happy painting and god bless

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2009
    Messages:
    1,204
    I like how one dude voted that isn't even in the league...kind of odd.
     
  14. bogey21

    bogey21 Walk On

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2009
    Messages:
    1,459
    I didnt vote, just added to the discussion bro.
     
  15. astealthyhippo

    astealthyhippo happy painting and god bless

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2009
    Messages:
    1,204
    I know, I was referring to Legend Rips who actually voted in the poll.

    It's good, and I agree with your last thought on the 4-2-5, good stuff (y)
     
  16. EaglesIrish5

    EaglesIrish5 Walk On

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2009
    Messages:
    915
    The only reason people run a 4-2-5 in the game is because it is good against the run. Teams in real life run it because they are less talented at 1 position and better at another. Guys who use it on here do it because they are trying to get a leg up and that isn't SIM. I have used this D in the past myself and switched because it is a cheese defense.

    That is just my opinion.
     
  17. Dru50

    Dru50 Still Chicago's #1 son

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2009
    Messages:
    16,269
    Bogey, hippo wasn't referring to you, he was referencing Legend_Rips voting in the poll even though he is not a league member.

    I appreciate your perspective, bogey, and I totally agree with the way you put it. Thanks.
     
  18. Mike E

    Mike E Earth Rocker

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2009
    Messages:
    3,415
    I love the 4-2-5 defense. At the school where I coach, we run a variation of it. Now, we are a school that has very few big, athletic kids to play line backer. We have a TON on
    5'10 185 pound white kids. They are decent athletes, but bot the linebacking type. We have our 4 bigger guys on the line, the two 'bigger' kids at backer and the other 5 play DB/Monster for us.

    It helps us get better athletes and disrupts standard blocking angles in the zone run schemes we face each week. Also, due to the fact that we play spread teams, it helps us against the pass quite well and we are successful.

    Just my 2 cents.

    I am fine with whatever the league wants
     
  19. marcman777

    marcman777 Walk On

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2009
    Messages:
    562
    I voted to allow it, but after reading all this, i think i would change my vote. I don't really care either way. I do use the 4-2-5, but i mix it up with nickel and and quarter. I must admit though, i mostly use it to get the speed off the edge. Not always for blitzing, but for covering the flats and RB receivers.
     
  20. Dru50

    Dru50 Still Chicago's #1 son

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2009
    Messages:
    16,269
    Ok, it seems there is enough support to allow both base defenses (unless marcmann changes his vote).

    Some things that I want to make sure everyone keeps in mind:
    1. You really should not be running these sets if it means you are benching a highly rated OVR lineman or LB to put a lower rated S on the field. That screams that you are running the defense mainly because you know the games programming makes these defenses more effective than they would be in real life.
    2. You still need to mix up your plays on defense, same as someone using 3-4 or 4-3. That means you should not run safety blitzes every play or run a cover 2 all game.

    Thanks everyone for chiming in, I will update the league page and please post in the playbook thread if you want to switch to 3-3-5.
     

Share This Page