Why Undersized Linemen in EA’s 3-4 and 3-3-5 Defenses Break the Game
If you’ve ever faced a base 3-4 or 3-3-5 team in an EA Sports football game and noticed how easy it is to run the ball, you’re not alone. It’s frustrating, unrealistic, and frankly, not fun. Running the ball 40+ times in a game with little resistance because the defense is using undersized linemen isn’t a test of skill—it’s exploiting a fundamental flaw in the game’s roster logic.
No real-world coach in their right mind would field gap-penetrating linemen as the backbone of a 3-4 or 3-3-5 defense, yet EA’s current system allows this mismatch to happen regularly. Here’s why this is a problem and how EA can fix it to make gameplay more challenging and realistic.
The Role of Linemen in 3-4 and 3-3-5 Defenses
In real football, base 3-4 and 3-3-5 defenses rely on big, strong defensive linemen to control the line of scrimmage. These schemes prioritize size and power over speed and finesse because:
• Nose Tackles (NTs): The NT anchors the defense, clogging up the middle and taking on double teams. These players are typically 315+ pounds with elite strength and block-shedding ability.
• Defensive Ends (DEs): In a 3-4, DEs aren’t edge rushers—they’re larger, two-gapping linemen who can set the edge and hold their ground against offensive tackles and tight ends. They often weigh 280–300 pounds.
When a team fields undersized linemen in these roles, their defense is fundamentally broken:
• Run Defense Suffers: Smaller linemen can’t control gaps or handle double teams, allowing offensive linemen to easily push them off the ball.
• Mismatch Against Power Schemes: Gap schemes like power, iso, and duo dominate undersized defenses, making it nearly impossible to stop the run.
Why This is a Problem in EA’s Games
In EA’s Madden and College Football 25, Franchise and Dynasty Mode, CPU controlled 3-4 and 3-3-5 teams often feature linemen who are too small or lack the proper archetypes for these schemes. Instead of big-bodied linemen built for gap control, you’ll see:
• Undersized Nose Tackles: Speed Rusher Archetype Players with sub-300-pound frames trying to anchor the middle.
• Finesse Defensive Ends: Speed rushers who get blown off the ball in the run game.
This leads to several issues:
1. Lack of Challenge: Running the ball against these defenses becomes trivial. Even average offensive lines dominate at the point of attack.
2. One-Dimensional Gameplay: The defense’s inability to stop the run forces the offense into an overly run-heavy approach. It’s not strategic; it’s just exploiting poor roster logic.
3. Breaks Immersion: No real-world coach would field a base 3-4 or 3-3-5 defense with players ill-suited for gap control. When it happens in-game, it feels unrealistic and lazy.
Would Any Coach Do This in Real Life?
The short answer is no—unless injuries or roster issues forced their hand. Coaches running 3-4 or 3-3-5 schemes prioritize recruiting or signing players who fit their system, even if that means sacrificing athleticism for size and strength.
For example:
• A 3-4 NT like Vita Vea (347 lbs) is essential for controlling the A gaps and taking on double teams.
• A 3-4 DE like Cameron Heyward (295 lbs) can two-gap while still providing pass-rushing ability in certain situations.
Even hybrid defenses, like Nick Saban’s 3-3-5 mint front, still rely on at least one big-bodied NT to anchor the defense. Undersized linemen might be used in pass-rushing packages, but they have no place in a base defense designed to control the run.
How EA Can Fix This
EA can address this issue with a few key changes to improve roster management, gameplay balance, and realism.
1. Scheme-Specific Archetypes
Teams running 3-4 or 3-3-5 schemes should prioritize specific player archetypes:
• Nose Tackles: 315+ lbs, specializing in Power or Run Stopper archetypes with high strength, block-shedding, and power move ratings. These players excel at controlling both A gaps and collapsing the pocket, serving as the anchor of a gap-control defense.
• Defensive Ends (3-4): 280–300 lbs, specializing in Power or Run Stopper archetypes with strong two-gap control skills. These players excel at holding the edge and maintaining leverage to support both run defense and gap discipline.
• Hybrid Edge/OLB (3-4): 240–255 lbs, specializing in Speed or Power Rusher archetypes with strong run-stopping and coverage skills. These versatile defenders can rush the passer, set the edge against the run, and drop into zone coverage during blitz packages. They are the superstars of 3-4 and 3-3-5 defenses, embodying players like Von Miller, T.J. Watt, Khalil Mack, and Nolan Smith.
These archetypes should be enforced in depth charts and during AI roster construction to ensure realistic personnel.
2. Dynamic Gameplay Penalties
EA could implement a “size and fit” mechanic to penalize teams for using undersized linemen in gap-control schemes:
• A 90 overall 4-3 edge rusher (Speed Rusher DE or undersized Power Rusher DE) should see their overall rating decrease significantly when placed on the roster of a 3-4 or 3-3-5 team. This reflects the player’s lack of fit within a gap-control scheme, which prioritizes size and strength over speed and finesse. Better yet, teams running these schemes should naturally avoid recruiting or scouting such players, as their ratings would already appear lower in the context of the scheme. This way, roster building becomes more realistic, rewarding players and teams for prioritizing scheme-specific archetypes.
• Conversely, these smaller players could dynamically transition to hybrid edge/OLB roles on the roster, positioning them to excel in specific pass-rushing situations and favorable base package roles. This adds strategic depth to their use, allowing teams to leverage their strengths without compromising the integrity of a gap-control scheme.
3. Smarter AI Roster Management
• Recruiting (College Football 25): 3-4/3-3-5 teams should recruit Power and Run Stopper linemen who fit their system. Smaller linemen should only be recruited by teams running 4-3 schemes or hybrid fronts.
• Drafting (Madden): Teams using gap-control schemes should avoid drafting Agile or Pass-Rusher archetypes for base defense roles.
4. Adaptive Defensive Alignments
To counter quick pre-snap motions and strength shifts, EA could implement dynamic defensive alignments:
• NTs and DEs should shift gaps when the offensive formation changes strength.
• AI-controlled defenses should use heavier personnel in short-yardage situations.
Why Realism Matters
Fixing this issue would improve gameplay for all types of players:
• For Hardcore Gamers: It adds depth and realism, forcing you to adapt your strategy based on the defense you’re facing.
• For Casual Gamers: It creates more balanced gameplay, making run-heavy strategies less dominant and encouraging more diverse playcalling.
Final Thoughts
Fielding undersized linemen in a base 3-4 or 3-3-5 defense isn’t just unrealistic—it’s a gameplay killer. By prioritizing proper archetypes, smarter AI, and dynamic adjustments, EA can create a more immersive and challenging experience. After all, no real coach would willingly put their team at such a disadvantage, and neither should EA’s games. It’s time for EA to bring modern defensive philosophy into their games and eliminate these mismatches once and for all.
What do you think? Should EA overhaul how it handles defensive archetypes and alignments? Let’s discuss in the comments!
