Is it time for the Vikings to switch to a 3-4 defence?

ESPN 1500's Tom Pelissero penned a story this week wondering whether it's time for the Minnesota Vikings to consider switching to a 3-4 defence.

These are the kinds of things that get talked about when a team is 2-7 and going nowhere. Pelissero notes the trend in the NFL is to run a 3-4 defence and the article implies a 3-4 provides a squad with more flexibility and more ways to disguise blitzes and pressure packages and thus it's a better scheme than a 4-3.

Pelissero doesn't overtly take a stand in the piece, but you get the feeling he thinks the Vikings should seriously consider making the switch for the 2012 season.

But is the 3-4 defence really the superior scheme? Well, the top three NFL defences in 2011 are Houston, Pittsburgh and Baltimore – all 3-4 units. But the 4th, 5th and 6th-ranked defensive units are 4-3's: Jacksonville, Cincinnati and Cleveland. Overall, there are six 3-4 defences ranked in the top 10 versus four 4-3 defences. And of the league's top 15 defences, eight use 3-4 schemes and eight use 4-3 schemes (I know, eight + eight is 16, but Tennessee and Seattle were tied for 15th.)

Ultimately, talent matters more than schemes. Fans and writers who follow the Vikings are upset with its 4-3 Cover Two system. But when you've got Asher Allen as your starting corner, Jamarca Sanford as a starting safety and nobody besides Jared Allen can get to the opposing quarterback, any system will fail. And let's not forget a productive offence can be a defence's best friend – grinding out long scoring drives and providing the defence good field position even when they don't score. But the Vikings are no offensive juggernaut this year, either.

The 4-3 served the Vikings just fine in 2008 and 2009. It could do so again in the future. They just need enough adequate talent to make it happen. Sadly, that talent isn't there.