PDA

View Full Version : Pressure without blitzing


buddyboy
01-08-2012, 12:55 AM
Anyone see ESPN's little stat ticker?

"The Texans' defense rushed four or fewer pass rushers on 37 of Andy Dalton's 47 dropbacks on Saturday, and Dalton struggled throwing into coverage."

I remember someone having concerns that we relied too much on blitzing, but the stat surprised me! We still got some pretty good pressure on Dalton without blitzing; our defensive line is getting back to playing at a high level. Gotta keep it up for next game!

bo orlando
01-08-2012, 01:05 AM
Anyone see ESPN's little stat ticker?

"The Texans' defense rushed four or fewer pass rushers on 37 of Andy Dalton's 47 dropbacks on Saturday, and Dalton struggled throwing into coverage."

I remember someone having concerns that we relied too much on blitzing, but the stat surprised me! We still got some pretty good pressure on Dalton without blitzing; our defensive line is getting back to playing at a high level. Gotta keep it up for next game!

seemed to me like texans blitzed some early in the game and got burned with the screens and short passing (and i think the PI play to aj green as well). once texans started rushing four, dalton seemed flustered when he had to scan the field and look for his second and third options.

dream_team
01-08-2012, 01:07 AM
No surprise... they did this in the first game too.

TheCD
01-08-2012, 01:28 AM
Hopefully this means that we have plenty of tricks up our sleeve for the ravens game...and they lay an egg since they seem due for it again.

Allstar
01-08-2012, 01:31 AM
http://www1.pictures.zimbio.com/gi/Joe+Flacco+Houston+Texans+v+Baltimore+Ravens+8L78x HTc0n3l.jpg

LET'S GET IT

thunderkyss
01-08-2012, 01:39 AM
Anyone see ESPN's little stat ticker?

"The Texans' defense rushed four or fewer pass rushers on 37 of Andy Dalton's 47 dropbacks on Saturday, and Dalton struggled throwing into coverage."

I remember someone having concerns that we relied too much on blitzing, but the stat surprised me! We still got some pretty good pressure on Dalton without blitzing; our defensive line is getting back to playing at a high level. Gotta keep it up for next game!

That was me, my point being we don't need to talk about going forward without Mario until we can pressure the QB without the blitz.

Now, we can start having that conversation.

buddyboy
01-08-2012, 01:44 AM
That was me, my point being we don't need to talk about going forward without Mario until we can pressure the QB without the blitz.

Now, we can start having that conversation.

Bengals' O-line isn't a strength, is it? I wanna see how they do against a more legit opponent/O-line.

Too early to say we need Mario, too early to say we don't. Judging by our overall defensive pressure this year, I'd say we're doing pretty well. Mario just may be that piece that would be nice to have, but not necessary.

Marcus
01-08-2012, 03:08 AM
I have never thought this team would be a winning team until the day ever arrived that they could get pressure on the QB without having to "manufacture" it with the blitz.

I know I'll get disagreed with, but I believe our ability to get a rush with just 4 people, instead of rushing 5 or 6, has made a bigger difference in the improvement of the defense than Wade Phillips scheme or improved secondary. I know Phillips and the secondary are getting the most credit, but to me, it it's music to my ears when I hear about the QB getting hurried with 4 man rush. You always have to sacrifice something if you rush more than 4.

Regarding Mario, I would think the injuries that we've had this season would be reason enough to dispel any notion of "going forward without Mario". You can't have too many legitimate pass rushers.

Nitrofish
01-08-2012, 04:07 AM
The key to being successful is being able to adapt. To say that we should never blitz is laughable, even if the front 4 are generating pressure. Some QB's will pick you apart when you blitz while others will fall apart.

Adapt to your opponent and blitz when necessary.

We have to see what Mario can do in this system, especially with a full camp, etc. In my mind there is not even a question whether we keep him or not.

TexanBacker93
01-08-2012, 09:15 AM
Bengals' O-line isn't a strength, is it? I wanna see how they do against a more legit opponent/O-line.

Too early to say we need Mario, too early to say we don't. Judging by our overall defensive pressure this year, I'd say we're doing pretty well. Mario just may be that piece that would be nice to have, but not necessary.

They only gave up 25 sacks this year. That's not even 2 a game. While it's not indicative of great line play I think it's safe to say they are good. Benson had 1,000 yards as well.

amazing80
01-08-2012, 09:17 AM
Our dline is awesome. Our lb core is awesome. Our secondary is awesome.


Too bad Brice McCain is like 5 foot, because I think he is our best cover corner, but just too small to match up against bigger wide outs.....he has made play after play all season when he is in there

welsh texan
01-08-2012, 09:42 AM
Too bad Brice McCain is like 5 foot, because I think he is our best cover corner, but just too small to match up against bigger wide outs.....he has made play after play all season when he is in there

Dude looked pretty good as a rookie as well, regressed last season and looks better again this year. This team is going to have to cut some really good depth players from their CB core this off-season as the numbers are too many.

Lucky
01-08-2012, 09:52 AM
Bengals' O-line isn't a strength, is it? I wanna see how they do against a more legit opponent/O-line.


They only gave up 25 sacks this year. That's not even 2 a game. While it's not indicative of great line play I think it's safe to say they are good. Benson had 1,000 yards as well.
I think the Bengals' o-line has done a very good of protecting Dalton this year. They don't open a lot of holes, which is one reason their running game is so pedestrian. But as far as protecting the passer, I'd say they're as good, or better, than the Ravens' o-line.

Too bad Brice McCain is like 5 foot, because I think he is our best cover corner...
No, Joseph is the Texans best cover corner. But McCain, and all of the returning players in the secondary, have improved under the new coaching staff. With the improved pass rush the Texans have this season, they've held their own more often than not.

Houston_Fanatic
01-08-2012, 11:16 AM
I have never thought this team would be a winning team until the day ever arrived that they could get pressure on the QB without having to "manufacture" it with the blitz.

I know I'll get disagreed with, but I believe our ability to get a rush with just 4 people, instead of rushing 5 or 6, has made a bigger difference in the improvement of the defense than Wade Phillips scheme or improved secondary. I know Phillips and the secondary are getting the most credit, but to me, it it's music to my ears when I hear about the QB getting hurried with 4 man rush. You always have to sacrifice something if you rush more than 4.

Regarding Mario, I would think the injuries that we've had this season would be reason enough to dispel any notion of "going forward without Mario". You can't have too many legitimate pass rushers.

The only part I disagree with is not giving Wade the credit for adjusting our scheme to fit the opponent. The guy is phenomenal at reading the offense and making adjustments.

But agree that you have to have the talent to rush 4 and get pressure or you are limited in the adjustments you can even make.

CloakNNNdagger
01-08-2012, 11:27 AM
FWIW, Dalton was tied with Brees at 22nd with 24 QB sacks. Flacco at 15th with 31 sacks is certainly not invulnerable.

Marcus
01-08-2012, 11:56 AM
In preceding seasons, blitzes were completely ineffective because the opposing team knew that that we couldn't generate pressure with just the down linemen. That made it super easy for them to read our defense.

To say that was only a "scheme" issue is laughable. You have to have the talent also, as J.J. Watt has clearly demonstrated.

dream_team
01-08-2012, 12:40 PM
I think most of the pressure was due to good coverage.

In the first half, Texans were leaving a lot of the underneath stuff open, and Dalton was hitting them quick. In the second half, they seemed to do better against the short routes, and gave time for the pass rushers to get to Dalton.

thunderkyss
01-08-2012, 12:46 PM
I have never thought this team would be a winning team until the day ever arrived that they could get pressure on the QB without having to "manufacture" it with the blitz.

I know I'll get disagreed with, but I believe our ability to get a rush with just 4 people, instead of rushing 5 or 6, has made a bigger difference in the improvement of the defense than Wade Phillips scheme or improved secondary. I know Phillips and the secondary are getting the most credit, but to me, it it's music to my ears when I hear about the QB getting hurried with 4 man rush. You always have to sacrifice something if you rush more than 4.

buddyboy is right, this may still be too early, other factors have to be taken into account.

If the stat is true, it is only for this game. From what I've seen, we still rely on the blitz way too much to generate pressure.... but I haven't seen the Bengals (play-off) game yet.

thunderkyss
01-08-2012, 12:52 PM
The key to being successful is being able to adapt. To say that we should never blitz is laughable, even if the front 4 are generating pressure. Some QB's will pick you apart when you blitz while others will fall apart.


What's laughable, is that you think someone even said we should never blitz.

If a team can only get pressure on the QB by blitzing, that team has a problem, a weakness that can be exploited.

dream_team
01-08-2012, 01:07 PM
In technical terms, are we actually blitzing just about every down?

Since we're technically a 3-4 team, wouldn't it be considered a blitz if we rush 4 guys?

If we're always rushing 4 guys, then wouldn't that actually make us a 4-3 team?

Not trying to be an ass, just something I've wondered about. What's the difference between a 3-4 & 4-3 defense if we're stilling lining up 4 guys on the LOS most of the time?

Marcus
01-08-2012, 01:39 PM
In technical terms, are we actually blitzing just about every down?

Since we're technically a 3-4 team, wouldn't it be considered a blitz if we rush 4 guys?

If we're always rushing 4 guys, then wouldn't that actually make us a 4-3 team?

Not trying to be an ass, just something I've wondered about. What's the difference between a 3-4 & 4-3 defense if we're stilling lining up 4 guys on the LOS most of the time?

If you have more than one linebacker that has the ability to get to the QB, then the 3-4 is an advantage, because until the ball is snapped, you don't know which 4 players are rushing.

By the same token, if you don't have linebackers who can get pressure with just rushing 4 people, then the 4-3 has the advantage.

The 3-4 works if you have a talented core of linebackers than can get pressure when called upon, and also cover when called upon.

Too much has been made of scheme, and not nearly enough of talent.

Allstar
01-08-2012, 01:49 PM
In technical terms, are we actually blitzing just about every down?

Since we're technically a 3-4 team, wouldn't it be considered a blitz if we rush 4 guys?

If we're always rushing 4 guys, then wouldn't that actually make us a 4-3 team?

Not trying to be an ass, just something I've wondered about. What's the difference between a 3-4 & 4-3 defense if we're stilling lining up 4 guys on the LOS most of the time?

No, a blitz is more than 4. The 3-4 works well because you're never sure which OLB is coming pre-snap.

CloakNNNdagger
01-08-2012, 06:46 PM
No, a blitz is more than 4. The 3-4 works well because you're never sure which OLB is coming pre-snap.

It wasn't until last year that I myself came to understand that sending in 4 is NOT technically a blitz in a 3-4...and that not until at least 5 rush is it considered such.

TimeKiller
01-08-2012, 10:32 PM
Blitzing is sending more rushers than available blockers. I think generally that refers to total but I think overloading one side of the line, say sending 3 or 4 against a OT/OG on one side is also technically blitzing.

One thing the Texans do a lot is delayed rushing. Cushing and Reed do this a lot, they'll read what the backs are doing and if they stay in to protect the LBer will charge in hopes of cleaning up the pocket or taking out screen passes. Really, the design was just to rush 3 or 4 but during the play 5 or even 6 will blitz the ball. They didn't blitz often, which I didn't expect at all but great things came from the pressure. Maybe it was the extra man in coverage giving them time or just the blitz getting after it to create bad throws but getting sacks and INTs, the blitz feeding off the coverage, the coverage taking advantage of a QB dodging blitzers....it was just some nice defense!!!

thunderkyss
01-09-2012, 09:21 AM
No, a blitz is more than 4. The 3-4 works well because you're never sure which OLB is coming pre-snap.

That "theory" is thrown out the window when you have a DC like Wade who says the WOLB is coming every time..... Demarcus Ware dropped into coverage 6 times the last year Wade was in Dallas.

beerlover
01-09-2012, 09:24 AM
Thought I saw Mitchell penetrate (get skinny) slipping threw the Offensive Linemen clutches for a sack.

amazing80
01-09-2012, 09:27 AM
Thought I saw Mitchell penetrate (get skinny) slipping threw the Offensive Linemen clutches for a sack.

You did, he played amazing, our front 7 IMO he top 3 in this league. They are so darn good.

HuttoKarl
01-09-2012, 10:15 AM
Thought I saw Mitchell penetrate (get skinny) slipping threw the Offensive Linemen clutches for a sack.

He got through that line sooooo freaking fast...9 yard loss...gotta love it.

CloakNNNdagger
01-09-2012, 04:35 PM
We did a nice job getting in there without blitzing.

It was pretty obvious that Dalton's flu recovery was not complete. His endurance was turfing by the second half. He only attempted 3 runs (for total of 17 yds, with his run in the second quarter alone accounting for 15 yds). He was sacked 3 of the 4 times after the last remaining minute of the first half. He was not moving spritely and it showed.....and we did a good job of taking advantage of it.

A funny piece I came across about Dalton's flu by Dead Spin. Evidently he had a pretty miserable bout.

Andy Dalton Has Finally Stopped Pooping (http://deadspin.com/5873705/andy-dalton-has-finally-stopped-pooping)

TimeKiller
01-09-2012, 04:39 PM
We did a nice job getting in there without blitzing.

It was pretty obvious that Dalton's flu recovery was not complete. His endurance was turfing by the second half. He only attempted 3 runs (for total of 17 yds, with his run in the second quarter alone accounting for 15 yds). He was sacked 3 of the 4 times after the last remaining minute of the first half. He was not moving spritely and it showed.....and we did a good job of taking advantage of it.

He had the flu? I vividly remember thinking he looked kinda sick when they showed a close up...I thought maybe the game was just getting to him! Hey, no sympathy from Houston, we had to sit and watch Tracy McGrady be just healthy enough to suck at basketball for years while making millions. At least dude has some chops, Dalton is going to be a good QB for years.