The trend with teams is to the 3-4 hybrid. It is played like a 4-3 but with far more flexibility because of the types of players you have. The 4-3 is very limited and stresses execution over deception and scheme. Both are 1 gap penetration schemes so I don't get why people think that by going with a dedicated 4-3 scheme it's somehow going to be better. The 3-4 hybrid give a DC the advantages of the 4-3 but the flexibility of the 3-4. For those advocating for strictly a 4-3 they need to understand the 3-4 hybrid system before they say things. Besides why fix what ain't broke.
The 3-4 hybrid allows Wade to move AD, Fowler, and Ebukam around to get the best matchup. You can't do that with a dedicated 4-3 because you don't have the player positional flexibility.