With the new coaching staff assembled by Brian Kelly, Notre Dame's defense will feature a 3-4 base package. Defensive Coordinator Bob Diaco installed the new defense in the spring, and along with the installation came a lot of talk about how particular players (Ethan Johnson, Brian Smith, etc...) would get to play the game of football at their more natural positions. And listening in on conversations or lurking any number of Notre Dame internet message boards, it's hard not to also stumble up on notion that the 3-4 may help Notre Dame survive a relative drought of defensive front-7 recruiting during the Charlie Weis era (particularly at the DT position). To try and validate such thinking, we dug into some numbers and have come to a disappointing conclusion: Notre Dame can't hide their defensive front-7 recruiting deficit; it's simply too big.
Note: You may find it helpful to view this spreadsheet of the data (pop-up).
First we took a look at "good" rush defense teams. We did this in 2 ways: First we took a look at the standard "Top 25 NCAA Rush Defenses" statistics available on the NCAA's own website and gathered their defensive front-7 recruiting hauls manually via the Rivals.com recruiting database. Next we ranked teams based on yards yielded per rushing attempt for all teams and came up with another Top 25 teams who give up rather few yards per opposition rushing attempt. And then we took a look at those defensive front-7 recruiting hauls.
First let's take a look at a comparison of recruiting in the defensive front-7 between the typical top 25 rushing defenses as ranked by the NCAA and the top-25 by yield per rushing attempt.
(NCAA T25 in red, yds/rush T25 in yellow)
There isn't a lot of divergence between the 2 sets here, and that's not very surprising since many of the teams in the NCAA Top 25 rush defenses also rank among the top 25 in yds/rush yielded. In fact, only Missouri, Oregon, and Texas Tech made the yds/rush yield top 25 and failed to make the NCAA Top 25 rush defenses. Kansas State, Nevada-R, and Oregon State made the NCAA Top 25 rush defenses but failed to make it into the top 25 of yds/rush yielded.
Interestingly, between the 2 sets of top 25 defenses, the average haul of defensive linemen for both sets was 6.97 players per year, which leads us to Notre Dame's problem...
First, let's look at ND against the NCAA Top 25 Rush Defenses...
(NCAA T25 in red, ND in Blue)
And BLAM, it hits you. Over the 6 recruiting cycles studied, we've found that ND's defensive front-7 recruiting hauls, on average, are about 1.8 men short of the NCAA Top 25 rush defenses of 2009. Only 1 ND class, 2008, featured a front-7 head count that was above the average for Top 25 teams. And that "surplus" of 1.24 men over the T25 average of 6.76 hardly made for a comeback against the absolute hole dug in the 2006 and 2007 cycles, when ND managed only 4 defensive front 7 recruits - more than 3 men below the T25 average both years.
My look at the top yards/rush attempt defenses was prompted by that bad news above. But as you can guess from the similarity in numbers between the NCAA Top 25 rush defenses and the top 25 yds/rush defenses, the Notre Dame situation doesn't look any better.
(yds/rush T25 in yellow, ND in blue)
Again, we see ND is short by about 1.8 men per year in defensive front-7 recruiting compared to the top 25 defenses in yds/rush attempt yielded.
And the story doesn't get much better by limiting scope. If we only consider the last 5 years, ND's average deficit against the NCAA T25 and the yds/rush T25 is 1.8 men. And in the last 4 cycles, ND's defensive front-7 head count, annually, is short of both top 25 sets by about 1.3 men. At best, ND's 2010 roster is 4 men short on the defensive front 7. And it could be the case that ND's roster is short by about 6-8 defensive front-7 position players versus the average roster on either list (I've not the time to figure that all out).
But perhaps not all is as dire as it seems. After all, the 3-4 defense has not been utilized as a base package for most college defenses across the country, and certainly most of the teams that appear in either rush defense top 25 list were not using a 3-4 base package in 2009.
To see if I could find a glimmer of hope, I also took a look at the 13 other teams in major college football with plans to use a 3-4 base package on defense in 2010 (As documented here.). Of those 13 teams, 7 plan to use the 3-4 as their "new" base package in 2010 just like Notre Dame. Of the 6 teams who've already been utilizing the 3-4, 2 teams, Alabama and Cal, appear in the NCAA top 25 rushing defenses and the top 25 yrd/rush attempt yielded defenses.
The results of the analysis were not encouraging...
(Other 3-4 teams in Grey, ND in Blue)
Here, ND actually compared more favorably against the other 3-4 teams when considering the last 6 classes, and the results diverge when you limit the scope of the analysis to more recent years. Where ND managed to narrow the gap a bit between Top 25 teams and themselves in the last 4 recruiting cycles, ND's gap actually widens relative to the 6 year mark against other 3-4 teams to an average of 1.87. If the 3-4 is being implemented by these other programs to help hide some recruiting holes, I don't think their holes look like ours.
Obviously I didn't get into breaking down each position. I've no idea if all 34 defensive front 7 players recruited by Alabama in the last 4 recruiting cycles were defensive ends. Hell, with Alabama, I don't even know if most of them are still in school. But trying to produce such a breakout by position may be fruitless anyway, given the way many college players convert positions over time. Suffice it to say, Notre Dame doesn't have enough bodies relative to these top teams (or even the other 3-4 teams) to harvest a lot of top-quality, converted, well-developed players anyway.
This recruiting deficit need not lead to horrible defensive production out of Notre Dame. Obviously, coaching has a lot to do with production too. Still, the overall head-count in the defensive front-7 firmly places the coaching job under the "challenge" column less so than the "opportunity" column. I am very interested to see how the 3-4 performs this year overall and will continue to track the 14 teams that plan to use the 3-4 as a base package throughout 2010. Stay tuned.
Ephemera:
- TCU, a top rush defense in all regards, had even worse defensive front-7 recruiting hauls than Notre Dame. They were a full man short of ND on average each year.
- BC, also a consistently excellent rush defense, had the same recruiting haul, on average as Notre Dame in the defensive front-7. Coaching matters.
- All 3 of the military academies run a 3-4, but I've been told it's a heavily modified 3-4. Which would make sense, because I'm not sure you could get MLBs at the academies big enough for a standard 3-4. Don't know the details though.
By SDI July 28, 2010 - 3:07 pm
Interesting study. My only hope is that in addition to coaching guys up, maybe the quality of the defensive recruits ND did get, is on average better than the guys on hand at some of the other top 25 rush D schools. Quality over quantity. I can’t imagine that too many teams outside of the top 10 have a better (in terms of star ranking) front line than EJ, IW, KLM, backed up by guys like Cwynar, and LNIII. ND’s situation might also be helped significantly if some guys like Nwanko for example come out of nowhere to have a good year.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By domer_mq July 28, 2010 - 3:11 pm
My concern that quality wont cover lack of quantity is that we’re essentially a full defensive “shift” of players short of the good run defenses. The good run defenses have the bodies to last late in the season and late in games. ND doesn’t, and not just by 1, 2, or 3 bodies. In a 3-4, we an entire DL and 1/4-1/2 a LB corps short.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By Vairish84 July 28, 2010 - 4:02 pm
A couple of thoughts. The conversion issue matters a lot. For instance, TCU tends to convert RBs to LBs so that could account for their being below us. It also helps us is Spond and Roback? (the other QB) get switched to LB, it brings our numbers up.
The second point is not so much that the situation is dire. Figure in most games you play only 14 people on the front 7, maybe less. We have those bodies. We just may not have depth beyond that to sustain an injury and we can’t afford misses. Lots of bodies make up for the inevitable misses or failures to develop.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By domer_mq July 28, 2010 - 4:13 pm
TCU is also weird because they’re rarely every playing with a “front 7″ since they use a 4-2-5 base package. So even in converting RBs to LBs, they only need 2 of em on the field.
The lack of numbers, I think, goes beyond just surviving injuries. It affects the ability to practice. It affects the ability to rotate on the DL. Since MLBs will be going against guards more often, it’ll affect our ability to spell them.
All is not lost just due to this matter, obviously. It just means the coaches have their work cut out.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By TLNDMA July 28, 2010 - 6:42 pm
I never understood Weis’s recruiting along the D-line. Seemed if he couldn’t find a four star, he didn’t want them. While other schools (BC) took two and three stars and made pros out of them, ND went without except in 2008.
Kelly’s late recruitment of Heggie and Schwenke were a change in the right direction. He at least seems to understand you need bodies, if not stars, at these positions.
Kelly’s recruiting thus far this season seems to have him in a good position with many D-line prospects. Let’s hope he can reel ‘em in.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By domer_mq July 29, 2010 - 8:34 am
It was perhaps the most consistent and most accurate criticism of Weis. Though I think the indecision about a defensive base package may have left him hamstrung. He was trying to get the guys who, not matter the system, would end up on the field. Ah well.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By rocket89 July 28, 2010 - 8:04 pm
With one more year of I. Williams and four more of Stockton and Nix 3, I think we’re well stocked at NT with very, very good talent.
We just need better (and more) defensive ends and we’re on our way. It’d be nice if we could throw four or five athletic guys on the ends of the line and keep everybody fresh, but still have the defense play at a high level.
Hopefully, guys like Cwynar and Nwankwo add a little depth up front.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By E-Man July 29, 2010 - 9:21 am
Does it make any sense to convert one of the TEs into a DE? I mean, I don’t think Jake Golic is going to see the field this year as a TE, maybe he could contribute off the edge.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By domer_mq July 29, 2010 - 9:50 am
I’ve no idea what Jake looks like these days, but he was way thin for a TE last year. Can’t imagine he’s filled out enough for a DE in a 3-4 this year.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By Erik '04 July 29, 2010 - 12:46 pm
Agreed, the “DE” in a 3-4 is a lot more like a “DT” in a 4-3 than a speed rushing DE in the 4-3. A converted TE might have a hard time lining up between a 300lb offensive tackle and a 320lb offensive guard.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By The Biscuit July 28, 2010 - 11:16 pm
This is why I missed your blog posts. This is high quality shit! Definitely will make the challenge greater, and sheds light on some of BKs last minute moves last year.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By Brad July 29, 2010 - 10:52 am
While I think our depth could be better, I think we’re ok at the moment. I think the only real weakness at this point in time in our Front 7 is our MLBs.
We have Lewis-Moore, Ethan Johnson, and Ian Williams manning our front line. If we go to a nickel look I’d expect to see Fleming put a hand down, and we’d possibly replace Ian Williams with someone like Sean Cwynar.
But as far as depth goes, we have Nix, Cwynar, Stockton or Brandon Newman to fill in at NT, and a combination of Nwankwo, Hafis Williams, Cwynar to fill in at the DE spots. All those guys are pretty talented and highly rated coming out of high school. I think that depth is sufficient.
At OLB we are ok too. We have Fleming and Brian Smith locking down the outside spots. Both of them are highly versatile and athletic. I think Brian Smith will suprise a lot of people back on the outside. And backing those guys up we have Steve Filer, who may be the best athlete on the team, and Kerry Neal, who many people have forgotten becase he (like Brian Smith) constantly played out of position. Those are four talented kids, backed up by good athletes like Spond, Moore, and Dan Fox.
As I see it, the only weak spot is MLB. We have Teo and McDonald, who should both be good, but behind them we are limited. Posluszny is too small at the point of attack, though a good athlete. I think Carlo Calabrese might wind up the backup, though he is a little slow. I wouldnt be suprised to see a frosh like Kendall Moore or Prince Shembo crack the 2-deep here due to their size.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By domer.mq July 29, 2010 - 1:03 pm
I mostly wanted to sort of show that any claims that the 3-4 could mitigate a real numbers problem is just baseless. Most other 3-4 teams aren’t in any sort of shape as ND is. But yes, we do have some real top-line talent.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By miked9888 July 29, 2010 - 11:14 pm
disagree, CC will win the starting spot next to Te’o… Watch the spring game 44 is all over the field and had a true pick, but Mcdonald took bad angles and missed a few tackles……..
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By OderName July 29, 2010 - 10:59 am
Great post!
I think (hope?) that this shows us more evidence that BK is going to be a great coach. The late recruitment of Schwenke and Heggie adds numbers and the type of athletic ability that BK is looking for, in the same way as adding 3 QBs in the incoming freshman class.
Numbers (even if not high-star talent) = more competition to push everyone, and the possibility of finding a diamond in the rough.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By domer.mq July 29, 2010 - 1:06 pm
I think it’s a good, usually missed point: Mediocre practice competition is better than no competition. And fresher legs in practice beget fresher legs in games.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By Erik '04 July 29, 2010 - 12:52 pm
Our super speedy offense is going to put even more pressure on the D this year to rotate fresh guys in at all positions. Remember that Cinci had such a low time of possession last year. Plus, if our Offense doesn’t start to click and gets a few 3-and-outs our D may see another 2007 again where the talent was there they just couldn’t get a rest for more than a minute on the sideline.
With regard to the academies, I expect they’d have an even harder time recruiting big fat-ass nose guards to take on double teams at the point of attack.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By domer.mq July 29, 2010 - 1:05 pm
Yep. That’s a real problem. I don’t think most people get that the MLBs and the DL will get more wear and tear put on them in this scheme than in the 4-3. It would help a lot to have another “shift” worth of guys who could go out there, particularly if and when ND is up by a few possessions, but still have 3/4ths of a game to play.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By TLNDMA July 29, 2010 - 2:17 pm
If we’re at our full allotment of scholarships but thin at DL & MLB, are we overstocked at other positions? Does a sacrifice have to be made somewhere? I might argue that we are thinner at safety than the other two positions>
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By OderName July 29, 2010 - 3:51 pm
You bring up 2007. This was probably my biggest frustration with Charlie – the defense in 2007 was actually looking good under a new, exciting young coordinator. Statistics were bad, but considering the inability of the offense to make a first down they were improving with young guys under a new 3-4 system I was really excited about.
But then, rather than give Corwin, his 3-4, and his recruits a chance, Charlie brought in Tenuta. We all celebrated Tenuta at the time, but I didn’t really get it. Now it seems just dumb to me.
I think it’s a gift to Diaco that Corwin recruited many of this year’s seniors and juniors for a 3-4 initially, hence they’re a good fit. I love this move back to the 3-4.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By miked9888 July 29, 2010 - 11:21 pm
Dude, well said………3-4
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By trey July 29, 2010 - 4:58 pm
I have to read and create charts and graphs all day at work. Why the hell are you abusing my eyes with this during my LEISURE time now??? I dont come to HLS to learn anything, I just want snarky, sarcastic rants from the authors!
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By GB July 30, 2010 - 2:10 am
I never quite figured out why Weis’ D always did so poorly for the talent they had. Tenuta did well before and I am not sure about Corwin but seems like the chemistry did not work out. Maybe part of it was that the D did not actually do hitting. Anyway, I’m glad to have all of them gone and start out with a new slate. I hope Diaco does better at ND than he did at “UC. At least Kelly and his coaches seem to be on the same page.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By Brad July 30, 2010 - 7:18 am
DMQ,
Excellent point earlier above with regards to the idea that switching to a 3-4 from a 4-3 can provide better depth.
I do think that it will be much easier for ND to recruit for 3-4 personnel. In order for a 4-3 D to be really successful, you need three things. The first is really fast linebackers. Not kinda fast…really fast.
The second is big, athletic pass rushers on the edge who can also hold up against a tackle on the run. Ideally, these guys are 6’4 or so, 270 lbs., and quick. They can often be hard to find.
Then you need your NT and your 3 technique tackle. These guys are the hardest to find. You need ideally for these guys to be 6’2 and around 300, and disruptive enough to demand attention from 3 or so blockers every play.
I think that NDs biggest problem is that it seems to be much more challenging for ND to find those prototype DEs and DTs nowadays than it used to be. Those kind of players are born, and cannot be made. They are freaks of nature. ND may get one or two of them a year who are top line talent, but the rest are guys who merely match the profile and may be second rate. That provides depth issues.
With the 3-4, you can take a skinny 6’4 TE or LB and beef him up into a 6’4 280 lbs. DE in this system. He needs to be athletic, but by no means a speed rusher. He just needs to be strong enough to stand toe-to-toe with a tackle and have the technique to get off his block. ALL of that can be taught.
Same with a NT in this system. Obviously, he has got to have the body. He likely needs to be 300 or over. But really, he just needs to be strong enough and have enough balance and technique to take on two guys.
If you look at the NFL, 4-3 teams will pay big time money to draft the DTs and the DEs they need in their systems to be effective. However, 3-4 teams like the Steelers and Patriots seem to be able to replace people through the draft much easier and sustain success.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By Brad July 30, 2010 - 8:11 am
Oh….sorry about the book up above. As noted, I am unfortunately a lawyer….I tend to be unintentionally long-winded.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0
By domer_mq July 30, 2010 - 8:39 am
No worries, Brad. Enjoying the commentary.
Thumbs Up/Down:
0 
0