All-Time Team: 4-3 or 3-4?

by Fooch on May 13, 2008 11:05 PM PDT in All-Time Team

EDITOR'S NOTE 10pm: Alright folks, I'm taking my last final Thursday morning (oh hell yea). Once I get done, the next All-Time Team vote will go up in the afternoon.

I'll have the next player vote up later in the morning, but for now I wanted to throw this out for a vote. While the 4-3 seems to be generally more used, the 49ers have been making the move to the 3-4. However, I was checking out the 49ers starting lineups over the last few decades and it seems like the 3-4 was in vogue for them from 1981 through approximately 1993. Considering that was more or less the height of the dynasty, it certainly makes it interesting to consider what defensive alignment we should use in our all-time team.

So here are the options I'm considering and I've thrown it open for a vote. We could go 3-4 or 4-3. Another option is to go with 4-4. Even though that would mean 12 men on the field with 4 defensive backs, I figure it'll allow us an optimal number of linebackers and defensive linemen. I've included an "Other" option in case somebody has another idea.

EDITOR'S NOTE 8:55AM: So I'm putting together a list of cornerbacks to consider for our all-time team and I've run into a bit of a problem. The 49ers home page has a list of every single starting lineup in team history. However, the older squads have different names for some positions. Does anybody know what some of those old position names would be? For example, 49ers Hall of Fame cornerback is listed next to the position RH, LH and RS. I'm assuming the R and L stand for left and right, but I have no idea what the H and S stand for. Any ideas?

Poll

Which defensive alignment should we use?

3-4

103 votes

4-3

108 votes

4-4 (just to fit in the 4th LB AND DL)

48 votes

Other (please specify in the comments)

5 votes

264 votes | Poll has closed

0 recs | Comment 21 comments

Read Related

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Defense Rocks!!!

Okay I put down other because I personally believe that the 49ers are best when they mix it up, and just because I love talking about defense. Whether it be a 3-3 hybrid, prowl, or some sort-of dime or nickel package. I don’t know if anybody else has seen this defense but I’ll give a famous example first then show the tweak. Probably some readers have seen or heard about Bill Belichick’s famous defense in Super Bowl XXV, where he used 2 down lineman, four line backers and five defensive backs. While they did give up like around 190 yards on the ground they prevented the deep ball and the Giants beat the Bills. The Defense I personally prefer is a more widely used college and high school defense. I refer to it as the X defense but I’m sure their are other names. Basically imagine 4 tiers of groups: D-line, D-lineman/Linebacker, Linebacker, and Defensive Back. The D-lineman/Linebacker is standing and is farther back from the center. Their is two D-lineman and four linebackers. The nice thing about it is you can drop down the D-lineman/Linebacker into a 3-4, drop him back into coverage, or drop two outside linebackers on the line and have a 4-3. It’s a very complicated defense but it is great for blitzing and over-all offense confusion. Their was a community college team that went to the play-offs that used it back in 2005. If anybody knows the team please reply. Just to clarify though this defense that is rarely used.

by StrictlyFootball on May 14, 2008 12:56 AM PDT 0 recs

Me?

I’m just a fan of the 3-4. All personell issues being equal, I think that I just have a natural attraction to schemes that emphasize the middle of a unit. My favorite formation in soccer is a 3-5-2, for instance (that’s 2 Forwards, btw… some people do that backward). I’ve long since held the belief in American Football, whether rightly or wrongly, that linebackers are the stronghold of a defense… that a defense without linemen can function if it has the personnel at LB… that a defense without a secondary can function if it has the personnel at LB… but that a defense without a strong group of linebackers is irretrievably lost…

Just like a soccer team without midfielders.

And then, again whether rightly or wrongly (I understand that the logic is somewhat damaged), I translate that belief that the linebacker is the most important position on the defense into a desire for quantity. Which is to say, “if they’re the most important, then we should have as many of them on the field as we can, within reason.”

Obviously, a defense with 11 linebackers would be awful (probably… though a guy can dream), but you can see how this thought process gears me toward the 3-4 over the 4-3. All other things being equal.

My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.

by howtheyscored on May 14, 2008 2:31 AM PDT 0 recs

Me too?

I really like the 3-4 as well, as I’m a big fan of linebackers in general. Not necessarily so much to say that they’re the most important part of a defense. Of the three groups on defense, I think a functional defense must have at least two of the three, but that’s another story for another time.

I think when thinking of a scheme for a team’s defense, especially in this case where the players are already there, you’d have to scheme around the talent pool. In my mind, the 49ers, while they have played quite a bit of 3-4, have most of their good alumni (the ones we’ll be voting for) fitting in a 4-3. Outside of Michael Carter, what other nose tackle is there? Likewise, do they have many good 3-4 outside linebackers in their past?

With a 4-3, I can already think of at least two defensive tackles and two defensive ends, for sure, and there are quite a few more that will be in the running. I can imagine the three linebacker spots in my head already, too, but beyond that is a little more foggy. Maybe it’s just my (faulty) observation of the past.

by sfgfan on May 14, 2008 9:09 AM PDT up 0 recs

3-4

Hey… they used a 3-4 in Tecmo Super Bowl! That’s all that matters to me!

Of course its difficult, its a shortcut... if it was easy it'd just be "the way."

by chirop1 on May 14, 2008 4:51 AM PDT 0 recs

I'd rather consider Bryant Young a DT than a DE

So I’m going 4-3.

"Want me to punchasize your face, for free?" - Rod Farva

by methodrampage on May 14, 2008 9:12 AM PDT 0 recs

backups

If we go 3-4 I’d probably have DT #2….If we went 4-3 I’d probably have an MLB #2. That way no worries.

Niners Nation - The premier 49ers blog on the Internet!

by Fooch on May 14, 2008 9:19 AM PDT up 0 recs

exactly

and he probably wouldnt fit as a 3-4 DT so we would probably have to put him in there as a DE. I say build the hypothetical team around the available talent, and BY is probably the best true 49er D-Lineman.

by sam23 on May 14, 2008 11:33 AM PDT up 0 recs

OTHER

LE, DT,DT, RE and then another unspecific DL. Similarly OLB, MLB, OLB and unspecific LB. Its more 4-3 than 3-4 but would allow this hypothetical team versatility. one problem with the 3-4 is where would BY play? I’ll always consider him a DT even though he did a nice job playing end in the 3-4 the last several years.

by sam23 on May 14, 2008 11:31 AM PDT 0 recs

LH/RH and LS/RS

According to Pro-Football Reference:
LH = Left Halfback
RH = Right Halfback
LS = Left Safety
RS = Right Safety

I’d imagine that the term halfback on the defensive side for what is now known as a cornerback sort of makes sense, as the corner (in a zone) kind of covers “half” the field in terms of # of wide receivers. Then again, I could just be convincing myself that PFR is correct.

by sfgfan on May 14, 2008 12:28 PM PDT 0 recs

I voted for the 4-3.

In my lifetime,the my fav Niners d-linemen are Fred Dean,Dwayne Board,BY,Michael Carter,and Manu to name a few.Fred Dean was a machine,and somewhat under-rated imho.

My fave LB was Jack Reynolds,and of course Lott is my fave db. (he is actually my fav Niner ever)

by Shawn_1967 on May 14, 2008 1:32 PM PDT 0 recs

Other:

Go with a 4-4-4 and just give one more person recognition. That way you get the best of both worlds.

by rufio on May 14, 2008 1:47 PM PDT 0 recs

that makes sense to me

sometimes we play a 4-3 so let’s choose the best 4 linemen. sometimes we play a 3-4 so let’s choose the best 4 LBs. A base set has 4 DBs so let’s choose Ronnie Lott and 3 other chumps.

Still defending Rich Aurilia, and the Niners' classic unis

by wjackalope on May 14, 2008 2:16 PM PDT up 0 recs

Plus

With Willis on the field it actually looks and feels like there are 12 defenders to 49ers opponents, so its really more accurate to go with a 4-4-4.

by rufio on May 14, 2008 8:41 PM PDT up 0 recs

I agree

I voted for the 3-4 because that’s my favorite, and the base formation for the great 80’s teams. But now that I think about it, and read what others have to say (especially about BY), and see how even the vote is, I think a 4-4-4 makes the most sense as well.

"I been waitin' a long time for this! I been waitin' since the f**kin' amateurs!" --WILL "THE THRILL" CLARK

by Josh from Hollywood on May 14, 2008 10:29 PM PDT up 0 recs

O...The...Power

I have yet to vote. And as it stands there is just a two point difference in the voting. My vote could very well be the deciding factor (unless of course the Foochmeister overrides the vote and calls it in favor of the 4-4-4).

I have never felt this kind of power….in a sinister tone... bwahahahhaha*

By the way, for all you die-hards, my vote can be bought!

"To know clearly what pleases the world is but a brief dream." --Machiavelli

by jfainsf49 on May 14, 2008 2:21 PM PDT 0 recs

also

I guess it kind of depends on how long the voting lasts, how many more people vote.

"To know clearly what pleases the world is but a brief dream." --Machiavelli

by jfainsf49 on May 14, 2008 2:25 PM PDT up 0 recs

I voted other

I think a 3-4 defense is the most logical move, but I do think we need some additional positions. A hybrid DE/LB pass rush spot makes sense-the elephant position. I’d also say another DL should be added, probably a second DT. I’d say 9 guys from the front 7 total, plus 6 DB’s(2CB, FS, SS, nickel CB, dime back). Just my two cents.

"So's your mom"-David Sloane

by gatling on May 15, 2008 5:12 PM PDT 0 recs

All time Nickle and Dime Backs?

Seriously dude the line needs to be drawn somewhere.

"Want me to punchasize your face, for free?" - Rod Farva

by methodrampage on May 16, 2008 8:14 AM PDT up 0 recs

Not exactly pal

You wouldn’t be voting for the guy who was the best all time nickel back, but the #3 corner. Third corners are absolutely a huge part of the game, and have been for quite awhile. Maybe a 6th DB is overkill, but a third corner most definitely is not.

"So's your mom"-David Sloane

by gatling on May 16, 2008 9:28 AM PDT up 0 recs