PDA

View Full Version : To blitz might not be bliss!


76Texan
04-17-2009, 04:46 PM
The first two games in 07 (wins over Chiefs and Panthers) clearly demonstrate that:

- you can win big with minimum blitzing
- you can be agressive/effective without relying heavily on blitzing
- you can lose big with blitzes or stacking up too heavily up front
- it's better to bring pressure when you have the personnel to do it

dalemurphy
04-17-2009, 04:51 PM
The first two games in 07 (wins over Chiefs and Panthers) clearly demonstrate that:

- you can win big with minimum blitzing
- you can be agressive/effective without relying heavily on blitzing
- you can lose big with blitzes or stacking up too heavily up front
- it's better to bring pressure when you have the personnel to do it

Our blitzes stunk! I don't attribute much of that to the personnel. Our DC was a mor*n. Good DCs that believe in blitzing actually use blitz schemes to make up for a talent deficiencies. A blitz scheme should create confusion, pressure, and surprise- hopefully creating an advantage for the players. That did not happen in Houston the past 3 seasons!

I agree with the idea that being blitz-happy isn't a winning methodology like some fans seem to believe. However, doing it effectively is, I think, an essential tool of almost any good defense.

tedr
04-17-2009, 05:04 PM
The first two games in 07 (wins over Chiefs and Panthers) clearly demonstrate that:

- you can win big with minimum blitzing
- you can be agressive/effective without relying heavily on blitzing
- you can lose big with blitzes or stacking up too heavily up front
- it's better to bring pressure when you have the personnel to do it

You have to remember, though, that in '07, the Chiefs were 31st in offense, and the Panthers were 29th. Not exactly offensive dynamos. However, you're right in the fact that you don't have to blitz all the time to be effective. If your offense can control the flow of the game, which I believe they did, you can be successful.

However, in those circumstances where your offense might not be firing on all cylinders, you need a defense that can consistently bring pressure, and a good blitzing defense, used correctly, can do that.

infantrycak
04-17-2009, 05:23 PM
You have to remember, though, that in '07, the Chiefs were 31st in offense, and the Panthers were 29th. Not exactly offensive dynamos.

True, but then again those stats would be different if they hadn't lost their starting QB's for the year early in the season. Obviously Green went down in our game but Delhomme played the whole game and went down the next week--prior to going down his QB rating was over 100 in each game (8 TD's, 1 INT).

76Texan
04-17-2009, 05:46 PM
You have to remember, though, that in '07, the Chiefs were 31st in offense, and the Panthers were 29th. Not exactly offensive dynamos. However, you're right in the fact that you don't have to blitz all the time to be effective. If your offense can control the flow of the game, which I believe they did, you can be successful.

However, in those circumstances where your offense might not be firing on all cylinders, you need a defense that can consistently bring pressure, and a good blitzing defense, used correctly, can do that.
We shoulda scored 10-14-17 more points on the Chiefs.

The Panthers were doing fine, until they sustain injuries. (Remember Carr?)
And we spot them 2 TDs
One by 4 mishaps by LBs and DBs no longer on our team, and a lucky bounce.
One on a fumble by Owens at our 13 and another mistake by a pair, guess who?
And that last TD was garbage and funky, too!

But that was only part of the points.

1. The Chiefs were doing OK until they decided to bring it without the personnel. We burned them.
2. The Panthers tried to bring it with enough personnel. We still burned them.
3. We played single safety mostly with Simmons in there and went two-deeps mostly when he was injured.
4. We played mostly two-deeps against the Panthers, and we could have big success there, too, if we only we had minimized the mistakes that are not scheme-related.

76Texan
04-17-2009, 05:47 PM
True, but then again those stats would be different if they hadn't lost their starting QB's for the year early in the season. Obviously Green went down in our game but Delhomme played the whole game and went down the next week--prior to going down his QB rating was over 100 in each game (8 TD's, 1 INT).

Right! The Panthers would have been 5-1 to start the year if they had beaten us at their place!

Carr Bombed
04-17-2009, 05:48 PM
In this league (especially our conference) QBs are too good to just allow them to sit in the pocket, you have to blitz every once in awhile.

A good D coordinator knows when to call his blitzes and how to mix them up to force big plays on defense. Our failure of a D coordinator just threw out 10 yard cushions on the outside and gave up 15+ play drives on the regular.

I want my defense to attack more, not just read and react.

76Texan
04-17-2009, 05:50 PM
In this league (especially our conference) QBs are too good to just allow them to sit in the pocket, you have to blitz every once in awhile.

A good D coordinator knows when to call his blitzes and hot to mix them up to force big plays on defense. Our failure of a D coordinator just threw out 10 yard cushions on the outside and gave up 15+ play drives on the regular.

I want my defense to attack more, not just read and react.

You must haved posted before my above post.

76Texan
04-17-2009, 05:58 PM
Even though we did not have Earl to start the year
When we had Simmons in there, we played single safety even when they have 3 WRs plus the TE.
And because he had some range and was very active, we can play aggressive without hardly any blitz.

When he was injured, we played mostly two deep, even when they only have 2 WRs. That alone ought to tell you how little confidence they have in that other safety! But we played aggressive with the LBs and the CBs, jumping routes, or attacking the run, flying to the ball and not waiting for the play to come to us.

And that was how we played the Panthers as well.

The early part of this year, we did not have Dunta, nor Wilson.
Diles was playing poorly and Greenwood was simply Greenwood.
And you expect us to blitz? http://www.texanstalk.com/forums/images/icons/icon9.gif

TEXANRED
04-17-2009, 06:41 PM
The first two games in 07 (wins over Chiefs and Panthers) clearly demonstrate that:

- you can win big with minimum blitzing
- you can be agressive/effective without relying heavily on blitzing
- you can lose big with blitzes or stacking up too heavily up front
- it's better to bring pressure when you have the personnel to do it

Richard?

BSofA04
04-17-2009, 08:07 PM
Richard?
lol:

CloakNNNdagger
04-17-2009, 08:53 PM
A blitz scheme should create confusion, pressure, and surprise- hopefully creating an advantage for the players. That did not happen in Houston the past 3 seasons!

The blitz scheme of Smiths did just that...........created confusion, pressure and surprise.......though, unfortunately, for only OUR players..........and the fans.

Norg
04-17-2009, 11:22 PM
If we make Manning and Collins run alot out of the pocket they are going to do something stupid .. they cant run anywayz so esp manning we dont want him to just sit in the pocket make the colts just relay on the O line and running game and they will fail

spurstexanstros
04-18-2009, 12:06 AM
The first two games in 07 (wins over Chiefs and Panthers) clearly demonstrate that:

- you can win big with minimum blitzing
- you can be agressive/effective without relying heavily on blitzing
- you can lose big with blitzes or stacking up too heavily up front
- it's better to bring pressure when you have the personnel to do it

First we have to have a team that blitzes to know what a blitz is...

whiskeyrbl
04-18-2009, 12:37 AM
Teaching the guys how to disguise the blitz and coverages will make alot of difference on their effectivness

DBCooper
04-18-2009, 08:43 AM
are we really sitting here talking about Richard Smith's "can't get it done" defense?

Our defense was pathetic last season.

It would be great if we could get to the QB without blitzing.

Why don't you go watch the Steelers or the Giants. Blitzing at the right time with the right "scheme" (I know that's a new word for Texans fans) you can make the game.

CloakNNNdagger
04-18-2009, 09:02 AM
Teaching the guys how to disguise the blitz and coverages will make alot of difference on their effectivness

************************************************** *********

Excerpt from Richard Smith's Blitz Handbook

Chapter 4: Disguising the Blitz


1. Have the entire D line up giving an unmistakeable air of confusion.

2. At the begininning of the opposing QB's cadence, have all D linemen and LBs shout in unison at the top of their lungs, "THIS IS NOT A BLITZ."

3. Then blitz like mad!

:tiphat:

DBCooper
04-18-2009, 09:41 AM
************************************************** *********

Excerpt from Richard Smith's Blitz Handbook



:tiphat:

#3 is misquoted


"3. Nonchalantly walk toward the QB."

76Texan
04-19-2009, 04:18 AM
Richard?

You a football player?

76Texan
04-19-2009, 04:41 AM
The blitz scheme of Smiths did just that...........created confusion, pressure and surprise.......though, unfortunately, for only OUR players..........and the fans.

I'm a little dissapointed here, CNNND!

76Texan
04-19-2009, 04:45 AM
If we make Manning and Collins run alot out of the pocket they are going to do something stupid .. they cant run anywayz so esp manning we dont want him to just sit in the pocket make the colts just relay on the O line and running game and they will fail

Basically true!
So how do you propose to do that?

76Texan
04-19-2009, 04:47 AM
First we have to have a team that blitzes to know what a blitz is...

Do we?