Nebraska just proved the 3-3-5 defense is trash

[Azeagle]

Illinois just ran through 3-3-5 Nebraska Defense like they were a junior high team.

[MeanGreenGlory]

Yeah, running the 3-3-5 defense well seems to be the exception and not the rule.

[Venson]

The 3-3-5 is probably only best run when it is an obvious passing down like 3rd and very long. It should not be used as a base defense.

[DeepGreen]

I’m telling you guys when I first witnessed the 3-3-5 defense in the UNT Spring game I said, “what the hell is that alignment”?  Who came up with that scheme?

[Venson]

The 3-3-5 to me is like a Prevent Defense. 

[southsideguy]

Our defense does not prevent anything from happening.  Maybe we go wild once in a while and throw a four man line at them.   What I have seen with the great DC of ours he doesn't adjust to anything.  This is my game plan and damn it I am not going to change it.  Sounds like a previous coach.  Cant wait til I can say that about the current DC.  I thought we a coach from USC on the staff, could he not move up and be the DC.  I mean a year and three games and we are as bad as ever on defense.  

I think our old DC , the good one, has a a book on amazon "how to stop the spread offense". The guy knew what he was doing and he taught his players to tackle.  Maybe we need to send a copy to the DC and Morris.  

You know when we hire a new dc , we will hear it take a year to get the players I need because we have recruited for the god awful defense we are using.  So that will put morris at four years into his contract.  Word of advice Morris get rid of him now.   What the hell do we have to lose.  We drop from 126 rated defense to 129 rated defense.  

[greenminer]

5 hours ago, Venson said:

The 3-3-5 is probably only best run when it is an obvious passing down like 3rd and very long. It should not be used as a base defense.

I think that's one way to look at it.  I've read over and over that it is predicated on confusing the QB.  Not supposed to know where the defensive pressure is coming from.

I think it's a great change-of-pace package, but we have plenty of evidence to say it is not a good base.  Unless you have that all-world DT that can constantly hog up two OL in the middle.

Edited 4 hours ago by greenminer

[Meangreen Fight]

5 hours ago, Venson said:

The 3-3-5 is probably only best run when it is an obvious passing down like 3rd and very long. It should not be used as a base defense.

Only with great smart athletes in the back 8 against Air Raid systems is it even a logical primary defense.  This is why coaches in love with the Air Raid think it is a viable base defense because they can’t figure it out the 3-3-5 when there are no obvious athletic mismatches on the field they can create in the pass game.  I think Air Raid saturation in FBS has now made it pedestrian when comes to effecting your team’s win total as a primary offense.  It can be 70% of your offense but you need 12 personnel and 11 personnel.  I also think the athletes capable to playing in the back 5 that can absorb/shed blocks and cover a fast RB out of the back field are just too rare.  To me the 3-3-5 now in FBS reminds me of the 46 defense in the late 80s early 90s of the NFL.  Great defense in a league that wasn’t putting 3 WR on the field regularly on 1st and 2nd downs AND you that (46) guy that was good at everything and maybe great at one thing.  In the 3-3-5 that (46) guy is akin to the “joker” position.  But now when you take that 4th WR off the field most downs it  has the same effect on the 3-3-5  as spreading out your offensive alignment did on the 46 defense.   Air Raid isn’t a cheat code especially now since everyone is familiar with it. 

[MeanGreenGlory]

Random question: Did Mike Leach every run the 3-3-5?

Just curious because Morris seems to constantly reflect on what Leach did and implement that. Surely Leach had some defensive philosophies…I’m just wondering if the 3-3-5 is aligned or unaligned with Leach’s defensive philosophies. 

[Meangreen Fight]

18 minutes ago, greenminer said:

Unless you have that all-world DT that can constantly hog up two OL in the middle.

You can run any base defense you want if your players are disciplined and smart with an all-world DT wreaking havoc.  😂.   With that DT recking things NOTHING on offense will be consistent and eventually chaos will force offensive mistakes (penalties, incompletions, and turnovers) that kill drives.  

[meaniegreenie]

19 minutes ago, greenminer said:

I think that's one way to look at it.  I've read over and over that it is predicated on confusing the QB.  Not supposed to know where the defensive pressure is coming from.

I think it's a great change-of-pace package, but we have plenty of evidence to say it is not a good base.  Unless you have that all-world DT that can constantly hog up two OL in the middle.

And on the rare occasions that we finally get that guy, he'll be gone at the end of the season.
Then you're stuck trying to get the next one.

[meaniegreenie]

7 minutes ago, MeanGreenGlory said:

Random question: Did Mike Leach every run the 3-3-5?

Just curious because Morris seems to constantly reflect on what Leach did and implement that. Surely Leach had some defensive philosophies…I’m just wondering if the 3-3-5 is aligned or unaligned with Leach’s defensive philosophies. 

It seems like the D philosophy is "hurry up and get off the field any way you can so we can put our offense back out there".  (The problem is that also includes letting them score.)

[Mean Green 93-98]

25 minutes ago, MeanGreenGlory said:

Random question: Did Mike Leach every run the 3-3-5?

Just curious because Morris seems to constantly reflect on what Leach did and implement that. Surely Leach had some defensive philosophies…I’m just wondering if the 3-3-5 is aligned or unaligned with Leach’s defensive philosophies. 

That's not a good question to ask.  Even at their very peak, Tech under Leach usually had terrible defenses.

[TIgreen01]

19 minutes ago, meaniegreenie said:

It seems like the D philosophy is "hurry up and get off the field any way you can so we can put our offense back out there".  (The problem is that also includes letting them score.)

Bennett’s philosophy was to steal as many possessions as possible to put the O back on the field.  Generating turnovers and just generally making sure we had more possessions than the bad guys was the goal.  After watching this new staff for a year and change I have no clue what they want to do.

[DentonLurker]

The 3-3-5 may be a trash defense without stud LB’s, but that game isn’t the one to “prove it.” Statistically those two teams were basically even. I watched the game, and I would not say Illinois “ran through” the Nebraska defense.

[Mean Green 93-98]

1 minute ago, DentonLurker said:

The 3-3-5 may be a trash defense without stud LB’s, but that game isn’t the one to “prove it.” Statistically those two teams were basically even. I watched the game, and I would not say Illinois “ran through” the Nebraska defense.

I have to agree.  Illinois has a pretty solid team, and I thought Nebraska's defense looked better than it has in recent years.

[Venson]

1 hour ago, MeanGreenGlory said:

Random question: Did Mike Leach every run the 3-3-5?

Just curious because Morris seems to constantly reflect on what Leach did and implement that. Surely Leach had some defensive philosophies…I’m just wondering if the 3-3-5 is aligned or unaligned with Leach’s defensive philosophies. 

I don't think Leach ran the the 3-3-5, but I could be wrong. I think these air raid guys think it's such a great defense because they all want to continue to pass even when the pass is not working. They refuse to switch to the run so their thinking is this 3-3-5 is a great defense instead of thinking maybe I should switch to the run to beat it. So, they hire a DC thinking it's the best defense instead of realizing their offensive philosophy is the problem.

[greenminer]

1 hour ago, Meangreen Fight said:

You can run any base defense you want if your players are disciplined and smart with an all-world DT wreaking havoc.  😂.   With that DT recking things NOTHING on offense will be consistent and eventually chaos will force offensive mistakes (penalties, incompletions, and turnovers) that kill drives.  

Yeah, having that level of play at the position is great for any formation, but I think you're kind of watering down the point here:  If you're a 3-3-5 base coach, and you want to work at a G5 school,  you face a massive uphilll climb without that DT playing at an AA level.  We are seeing this scheme fail over and over because, as we are learning, even with elite play in the back 5, it's nearly impossible to compensate for a 3 man front that is facing 5 men other side of the line every single down.

Counterpoint: I don't think the answer is necessarily going back to a traditional 4-3.  Don't be surprised if in the next 5-10 years (or less!) we see an evolution on that side of the ball, where your formation has 4 up front, but they get creative with the back 7.  Might be worth investigating what has already been done with a 4-2-5.

Edited 2 hours ago by greenminer

[Meangreen Fight]

28 minutes ago, greenminer said:

Yeah, having that level of play at the position is great for any defense, but I think you're kind of watering down the point here:  If you're a 3-3-5 base coach, and you want to work at a G5 school,  you face a massive uphilll climb without that DT playing at an AA level.  We are seeing this scheme fail over and over because, as we are learning, even with elite play in the back 5, it's nearly impossible to compensate for a 3 man front that is facing 5 men other side of the line.

If an Air Raid OC is impatient and refuses to run the ball that isn’t necessarily true (which a lot of them are).   A 5 yard run on 1st or 2nd down with anything less than 13 yards to go is a good play (a great play with 8 or less).   In a 3-3-5 the Joker is expected to make the read avoid or get off the block and tackle a RB before he gets 5 yards down the field.  If your down lineman are taken out in one on one matchups regularly you are screwed whether you are running 3 down lineman or 4.  Nothing inherently weak about  3 down linemen defenses.  Saban’s 3-4 defense wasn’t weak.  You sub out a linebacker for a “joker” 20-40 lbs lighter than Saban’s ideal linebacker that can run faster who can avoid getting blocked and tada, you are running a 3-3-5.  My problem with the 3-3-5 a base is its lack of versatility.  It is built just to take away big plays from Air Raid offenses. They are an analytical bet that Air Raid offenses won’t drive the field patiently taking 4-7 yard gains without making a mistake.  And it is decent bet if your defense is never defending a short field.  But it is rare that you get out of a game without defending a short in a tight game or trailing.
 

 If I am facing a team running a  3-3–5 primarily, I am running the ball down the 3-3-5’s throat, until my team is trailing by more than a TD.  Fatigue for the back 8 comes into play in second half then its name you score.  

[greenminer]

1 hour ago, Meangreen Fight said:

It is built just to take away big plays from Air Raid offenses.

If some say current versions of the 3-3-5 are for this, then I can buy that.  But My understanding of the 3-3-5 goes back to Dunn, then the Urlacher era under Long/Franchione.

They explicitly used the scheme because they were outmanned up front against bigger OL.  Having a super-athlete like Urlacher allowed them some versatility and success in the back.  Neither of these motives had to do with facing the Air Raid.

I am really speaking to our current situation: we are not facing Air Raid every week, nor are we a super P4 with P4 talent across the two-deep like Alabama is.  Other than that, I enjoyed reading your points about the scheme.