New scheme boosts Bulldogs defense - Shreveport Times

[News_Bot]

A new article has been posted on the Shreveport Times:

Louisiana Tech's defense has shown signs of improvement the last two weeks and one reason has been a shift in scheme.The Bulldogs, which have used a 3-4 alignment the last three seasons, are integrating the 4-3 into their package.

More...

Discuss the article here.

[boxerdog]

Sweet vindication for DONW and Suckupdog. Who woulda thunk Pugh would have such an impact at DE?

[DONW]

It's good that they finally figured out that our players fit a 4-3 better than a 3-4. Too bad it took them half a season to do it and the loss of a very promising freshman. I would love to see Harris and Muse at tackle with Smith and Pugh or McGilton at the end.

[TECH88]

As usual, we've done a poor job of evaluating our talent during practice. It boggles my mind knowing that it takes our coaches 6 or 7 games before we decide that a kid can play.

[boxerdog]

As usual, we've done a poor job of evaluating our talent during practice. It boggles my mind knowing that it takes our coaches 6 or 7 games before we decide that a kid can play.

I don't think any coach in the country could have predicted Pugh's success at defensive end. I thought it was a nice improvisation to try him (due to Harris leaving and Muse being injured).

[Gooddawg]

The 3-4 was GREAT for us last year. Idon't think the coaches have done a poor job of evaluating either. BUT once you lose Muse at NG and Beverage at LB, the 3-4 is no longer a good fit. With Muse and Beverage we would have been just as successful in the 3-4. BUT once you lose one or both of those the 4-3 is a better fit and the numbers have shown it. To their credit, it didn't take them long to figure htis out once Beverage and Muse were missing for about one game. Give them some credit. Don't forget this newfound success has been against Idaho and Utah State, not Clemson and Nebraska.

[suckupdog]

The 3-4 was GREAT for us last year. Idon't think the coaches have done a poor job of evaluating either. BUT once you lose Muse at NG and Beverage at LB, the 3-4 is no longer a good fit. With Muse and Beverage we would have been just as successful in the 3-4. BUT once you lose one or both of those the 4-3 is a better fit and the numbers have shown it. To their credit, it didn't take them long to figure htis out once Beverage and Muse were missing for about one game. Give them some credit. Don't forget this newfound success has been against Idaho and Utah State, not Clemson and Nebraska.

Some people can't let go of the 3-4. Did you read what Muse said in the article? He said that he likes the 4-3 better and that it is a lot easier. It sounds to me like from the beginning that JB3 was the only one that wanted us in the 3-4 and that Darlington finally talked him into going to the 4-3.

[Designated Hitter]

The 3-4 was GREAT for us last year. Idon't think the coaches have done a poor job of evaluating either. BUT once you lose Muse at NG and Beverage at LB, the 3-4 is no longer a good fit. With Muse and Beverage we would have been just as successful in the 3-4. BUT once you lose one or both of those the 4-3 is a better fit and the numbers have shown it. To their credit, it didn't take them long to figure htis out once Beverage and Muse were missing for about one game. Give them some credit. Don't forget this newfound success has been against Idaho and Utah State, not Clemson and Nebraska.

Good comment! We are still undersized to even play 4-3, but 4-3 is easier for players to grasp, especially less experienced ones. 3-4 requires a lot more upstairs to remember and apply. If players are having difficulty and missing way too many assignments, which we wer, then this is a better move for the time being. Actually, I like teams that can switch from one to another in a series within a game, but more of that in NFL than college game.

[theprofessor]

Some people can't let go of the 3-4. Did you read what Muse said in the article? He said that he likes the 4-3 better and that it is a lot easier. It sounds to me like from the beginning that JB3 was the only one that wanted us in the 3-4 and that Darlington finally talked him into going to the 4-3.

earth to suckupdog -- of course the 4-3 is easier for the nose tackle! instead of taking on double teams, most of the time he'll go head up. you need a dominating tackle inside to run the 3-4. we have one in josh muse. he didn't complain about the 3-4 when he was in it. but now this 4-3 stuff is pretty easy for the d-linemen. it does make things tougher on the linebackers. gee, that stuff happens when you take one off the field.

[suckupdog]

earth to suckupdog -- of course the 4-3 is easier for the nose tackle! instead of taking on double teams, most of the time he'll go head up. you need a dominating tackle inside to run the 3-4. we have one in josh muse. he didn't complain about the 3-4 when he was in it. but now this 4-3 stuff is pretty easy for the d-linemen. it does make things tougher on the linebackers. gee, that stuff happens when you take one off the field.

Actually the 4-3 is easier for the LBs, that is what the football players said in the article. They said that it gives the DL a chance to free up LBs to make plays.

[DONW]

You have to have 3 big guys up front to play the 3-4. Last year we had Ruffins at 6-5,280 at one DT and 6-4, 275, White at the other DT, and and 6-3, 330, and 6-3, 310 at NG. If you read the article, Muse mentioned that he had to cover 2 holes in a 3-4 which makes his job a lot more difficult. How do you think Harris liked this as a true freshman? I hope Muse talks Harris into coming back and playing in a 4-3. I believe he'll like the game again playing alongside Muse next year in a 4-3.

[DONW]

earth to suckupdog -- of course the 4-3 is easier for the nose tackle! instead of taking on double teams, most of the time he'll go head up. you need a dominating tackle inside to run the 3-4. we have one in josh muse. he didn't complain about the 3-4 when he was in it. but now this 4-3 stuff is pretty easy for the d-linemen. it does make things tougher on the linebackers. gee, that stuff happens when you take one off the field.

Let it go prof, just admit you were wrong. Everything will be ok. Just go ahead and give SUD some green. It'll make you feel better.

[TECH88]

The 3-4 was GREAT for us last year. Idon't think the coaches have done a poor job of evaluating either. BUT once you lose Muse at NG and Beverage at LB, the 3-4 is no longer a good fit. With Muse and Beverage we would have been just as successful in the 3-4. BUT once you lose one or both of those the 4-3 is a better fit and the numbers have shown it. To their credit, it didn't take them long to figure htis out once Beverage and Muse were missing for about one game. Give them some credit. Don't forget this newfound success has been against Idaho and Utah State, not Clemson and Nebraska.

Beverage never impressed me from the start. At best he had avg speed and avg talent.

[CChandler]

I really liked the new 4-3 wrinkle we put in. Kind of weird seeing Smith (290) at end next to McGilton (245) at tackle. Kind of, I dunno, introverted. But hey, if it works, it works.

Pugh is my new favorite defensive player. He's all hustle, all the time.

[Gooddawg]

Beverage never impressed me from the start. At best he had avg speed and avg talent.

Well, his avg speed and avg talent was enough to make him one of our best LBs last year as a true FR with Seniors starting everywhere on a pretty good team. And his avg talent was good enough to make him one of our best LBs this year. The fact is we are missing him and the depth he allowed us to have at LB, so much so we are now playing a 4-3. I think that says he had a little more than avg talent.

I am glad we are using the 4-3 now; it is working great but don't forget it has been successful against Idaho and Utah State, not exactly A&M or Clemson.