Is ND better suited for the 3-4 than the 4-3?

[chaseball]

In a 4-3 defense the depth chart requires a lot more guys who specialize playing with their hand down along the DL -- and these are the guys ND struggles to recruit. On the other hand, ND is able to attract high quality LBs - a position they've had success recruiting in recent years.

Also, NDs last outstanding defense was a 3-4 defense in 2012.

 

[perseverare]

thr LBers are not 3-4 type either.

conundrum

 

[IrishBlooded]

To me 3-4 is harder to build. Because your guard as to be an elite defensive player. When Kelly / Diaco put Tuitt, Lynch and Irish Chocolate together was the best 3-4 grouping he had.

4-3 is easier to react to areas that lack. Because you have the choice of playing the hybrid DE / LB player.

 

[Telx1]

Agree with IrishBlooded for the reasons stated, although I would be interested to learn what percentage of downs we played the 4-3 versus the 3-4 the past two seasons.

 

[Shakin' Down the Thunder]

The answer that question really depends on the kind of personnel you have. As IrishBlooded said and I agree that the 3-4 is harder to build at the college level, as you have to look for and develop tweeners(DE/DT and DE/LB and need bigger ILBs). I generally like the 3-4 in the NFL and the 4-3 in college. Other thing to note, is that with the amount of spread offenses in college, teams rarely stay in a 3-4 or 4-3 personnel anymore. 4-2-5 or 3-3-5 is really becoming the norm, that some defensive coordinators just make one of those their personnel groups their base defense.

 

[IrishInOntario]

ND has struggled to recruit the pass rushing DE's they need in a 4-3 defense, as well as the elite single middle linebacker that has sideline-to-sideline speed, combined with adequate size. In the 3-4, however, they struggle to recruit the space-eating NG necessary to consistently and continually command double teams.... Not to mention, there is a massive difference between a 1-gapping 3-4 scheme and a 2-gapping 3-4 scheme. Different personnel for each.