Basics of the 3-3-5 Defense

[osugrad21]

Basics of the 3-3-5 Defense



Speed. That is the name of game in today's football world as coaches realized the old Pro-Set I-Formation was not as effective as athletes became bigger, stronger, and much faster at all positions across the board. As the offenses moved to closer to the opposite hashes, power players such as fullbacks and tight ends were replaced with more athletic hybrid athletes who may have given up some blocking power, but more than made up for that with athletic versatility in a quick attack passing game. Therefore defenses were next to adjust from the traditional personnel sets in order to counter this speed and versatility. One such adjustment is the growth of the 3-3-5 defense or the 33 Stack. High schools such as Cincinnati St. Xavier with 33 guru Coach Steve Specht and Byrnes High School in South Carolina have become national powerhouses by putting their best eleven athletes on the field regardless of traditional size requirements per position. Division 1 schools such as South Carolina, Air Force, Tulsa, Akron, and West Virginia have all employed the 33 as their base defense with success. The following is a very basic description of the base alignment of the 3-3-5 and the roles of the various positions.

Numbering systems vary amongst staffs and programs but here is the system I will be using:



Base Alignment:




Defensive Line--

Nose: The Nose will play a head up technique on the center. He is responsible for 1 A gap and must force a double team in that gap. While a 2 gap NG is ideal, controlling his assigned gap is a must.

Defensive Ends: The DEs line up in 4 techniques (head up to the offensive tackle). They also will have a gap to control based on the called slant or stunt and their option responsibility will also vary amongst dive/QB depending on that call.

Linebackers--

Mike: Mike stacks four yards behind the NG. He is responsible for the A gap opposite the call. For instance, if the line slants weak, Mike is responsible for the strong side A gap. In a pass read, Mike has the "hole" or the hook/curl zone depending on straight dropback or sprint out action.

Outside Linebackers: The outside linebackers stack behind the defensive ends at 4 yards depth. These are B gap and C gap players again depending on the DL slant. Like the DEs, their option responsibility depends on the slant which will determine if they are on dive or QB. Usually, these players will also be the press players with sprintout to their side, but normal pass assignment is hook/curl zone.

Spurs: These are the most versatile athletes in the defense as they must be a linebacker/defensive back hybrid. The alignment for a Spur is 3x3 outside leverage from the last man on the line of scrimmage or 4x2 inside leverage from the #2 WR in Twins or Trips. The Spur is responsible for outside contain and must funnel all runs back to the LBs. On option, the Spurs take the pitch out of the equation. In a base formation, the Spurs cover the flats in a passing situation. Again, this position will be everywhere on the field from Safety in a Cover 2 or 4 shell to press Cornerback in a Cover 2 to bringing heat off the edge or B gap.

Defensive Backs--

Not much change amongst the DBs besides alignment/coverage disguises with the Spurs. In a normal Cover 3 call, the CBs will be 6x1 inside leverage on the #1 WR and the safety will be 11 yards off the ball with his alignment depending on the hash, strength, and WR set.

The Backbone of the 3-3-5

The 3-3-5 relies on versatility to match up against any formation. From the base formation above, almost any defense can be run. If the power running game is hurting you, drop a LB down onto the DL for a 40 look like this:


The 33 Stack has an adjustment for every formation that does not require a personnel substitution. The graphic above is only a simple example to illustrate the versatility. Now it should be noted that every Defensive Coordinator in a 33 scheme will also have a substitution ready where a DL will come into the game and one LB will come out. Many High School teams and even a few college teams play what is called a "Stand Up" front. Exactly how it sounds, the DL and LBs stand up and move all over the line of scrimmage before blowing up a gap on the snap. What they give up in size and technique there, the deception and confusion make up for that. Coach Specht at St. X even shows a base alignment of 3-3-3 and then moves from that. By having your best 11 athletes on the field, the versatility to match any offense is always there.

That leads into the next backbone of the 33...deception and pressure. With this defense, pressure can come from anywhere at anytime. Therefore, pre-snap movement is essential. You will see the defensive line shifting across the line of scrimmage, linebackers prowling in the gaps, Spurs stemming to the edges or even starting out lined up with the safety before crashing down to their normal alignment. All of this disrupts the Quarterback's pre-snap reads for coverage and causes havoc amongst the offensive line calls.



Now imagine the possibilities we have now...a mobile unit that will be attacking on every snap. The defensive line will have a slant for every play (left, right, strong, weak, and a cluster call where both ends fire out to C gap and the NG fires strong A). At least one LB will be coming behind that DL slant...but usually more than one or a Spur will come also. We can walk the Spurs up to the edge in a 9 technique for a 50 look or move them out to jam the #1 WRs while the Corners drop to the hashes for a Robber 2 coverage, or we can....

The possibilities are endless.

[osugrad21]

Got a good question via PM regarding tOSU Spurs...

Guys like Moeller, Hines, Coleman, and some of the more physical DB types would be great there. Think of your Spurs as your SS types..

At DE, Wilson, Gibson, and Heyward are definitely athletic enough to play contain...Keith Wells and Nate Williams will be ideal as well.

At LB, Mike better be a hardnosed gap stuffer...the outside two are more athletic so the LBs on roster would definitely fit any of the roles with the biggest question coming at Mike. Would you want to keep JL in the middle or use his wheels on the outside.

Again, this is about as basic of a breakdown for this defense as you can get...if you have anything specific, fire away.

[SNIPER26]

Are you guys running a 3-3-5? Sorry if it's a dumb question, but I didn't see any mention of this before. Or is this just a random, albeit very informative, post?

[osugrad21]

Originally Posted by SNIPER26

Are you guys running a 3-3-5? Sorry if it's a dumb question, but I didn't see any mention of this before. Or is this just a random, albeit very informative, post?

Not running it as a base but it has been dabbled with in the past and this summer as a situational look.

[Jaxbuck]

Given our current personnel I would be very concerned about the Mike and the NG. I don't see any 2 gap dominating NG's or gap stuffing/block defeating/run stuffing Mike's on this team.

This seems like a recipie for another 4th quarter vs Illinois. A team spreads you out by formation but audibles to a run if they catch you in this and you've got problems.

Am I way off base?

[osugrad21]

A 2 gap NG is ideal...but in all reality, he will be slanting every play so as long as he hold his single gap, the defense is fine.

[Jaxbuck]

Originally Posted by osugrad21

A 2 gap NG is ideal...but in all reality, he will be slanting every play so as long as he hold his single gap, the defense is fine.

Thanks.

I'll just trust the coaches on this one.

[Sportsbuck28]

Originally Posted by osugrad21

Not running it as a base but it has been dabbled with in the past and this summer as a situational look.

We ran this a lot against Purdue, right? Or did we run the 4-2-5 nickel?

[ashlandbuck]

Great stuff grad....This defense intrigues me but you really need the athletes to run it. The only way I'd put it to use was if my talent and depth dictated it.
The problem with it is suppose to be that you can run against it and this can be the case due to the two gaps on the d-line. But I really don't think that is it's biggest weakness. If you look at some of the Dickrod's defenses of the past at WVU you'll find that WVU had trouble actually defending the pass in this base defense. Their 2006 defense was absolutely awful against the pass.
Take a mobile QB who has the ability to move and look at his secondary receivers, add some play action and this defense starts to wear down and come apart.

[generaladm]

Great work, grad! Is this D pretty similar to the "UFO" D that the Steelers have run recently? I believe they considered it a 3-4, but they used a lot of pre-snap motion in the backfield. Would the Mike in this formation be more of a hybrid DL/LB, similar to a Leo, but in the middle? In Buckeye terms, would it ideally be a Gibson, Terry, Carpenter, Schlegel type? Or even Gholston, K. Wells, D. Scott? I'm also wondering whether the coaches you mentioned use this almost exclusively, or if they would change to a more traditional D, depending on matchups. If they were facing a team that relied on a power run game, would they switch a DT for a Spur, and run more of a 4-3? Or do they think that the 3-3-5 can handle a power formation?

[osugrad21]

Originally Posted by Sportsbuck28

We ran this a lot against Purdue, right? Or did we run the 4-2-5 nickel?

4-2-5 is just like the Strong adjustment I posted above...so it can be a version of the 33.

Originally Posted by ashlandbuck

The problem with it is suppose to be that you can run against it and this can be the case due to the two gaps on the d-line. But I really don't think that is it's biggest weakness. If you look at some of the Dickrod's defenses of the past at WVU you'll find that WVU had trouble actually defending the pass in this base defense. Their 2006 defense was absolutely awful against the pass.

The gaps are appealing to an offense but the premise of the defense is showing those gaps then moving and blitzing to create a mess up front. What looks like a weakness ends up being a strength for the D.

Originally Posted by generaladm

Is this D pretty similar to the "UFO" D that the Steelers have run recently? I believe they considered it a 3-4, but they used a lot of pre-snap motion in the backfield. Would the Mike in this formation be more of a hybrid DL/LB, similar to a Leo, but in the middle? In Buckeye terms, would it ideally be a Gibson, Terry, Carpenter, Schlegel type? Or even Gholston, K. Wells, D. Scott? I'm also wondering whether the coaches you mentioned use this almost exclusively, or if they would change to a more traditional D, depending on matchups. If they were facing a team that relied on a power run game, would they switch a DT for a Spur, and run more of a 4-3? Or do they think that the 3-3-5 can handle a power formation?

Mike is usually a Schlegel-type...hard-nosed run-stopper that works hand in hand with the NG to control A-A. As for subs, every 33 coach will have packages for substitutions where an extra DL can come in...the sub depends on the individual personnel and what they can do.

[NFBuck]

Originally Posted by osugrad21

Not running it as a base but it has been dabbled with in the past and this summer as a situational look.

Been hearing that the coaches have been working in a lot of different defensive alignments in camp. The personnel we have seem to lend themselves to a lot more flexibility defensively than in the past. Do you expect to see more "tinkering" defensively this year than in years past Grad?

[osugrad21]

Originally Posted by NFBuck

Do you expect to see more "tinkering" defensively this year than in years past Grad?

Yes but I see it more as exploring ways to get all of this talent on the field.

[RB07OSU]

Originally Posted by Jaxbuck

Given our current personnel I would be very concerned about the Mike and the NG. I don't see any 2 gap dominating NG's or gap stuffing/block defeating/run stuffing Mike's on this team.

This seems like a recipie for another 4th quarter vs Illinois. A team spreads you out by formation but audibles to a run if they catch you in this and you've got problems.

Am I way off base?

I'm thinking Abdallah here if we were to go with the 3-3-5...then maybe Larimore the next year and Rowell if he packs the weight back on. Good post and I saw a couple teams run this against us. The defensive players sucked but the D was a formational nightmare to match up with, so I would imagine this would be dynamite with the right players. I like the idea of getting some "spurs" out there in Moeller, Hines, or Rolle, especially Rolle. We have so many "tweener" types that are great players, that the 3-3-5 seems like a great option to fiddle with this year, and possibly implement quite a bit next year. Btw, I loved watching Fred Craig in the 3-3-5 for X last year.

[DontHateOState]

Really fantastic post. I know that 3-3-5 teams have had success against read option offenses in the past. Do you view this as a possibility against Michigan?