Define 'blitz'

[Vinny]

the game hasn't changed much since I was a kid and played ball in the 70's and 80's. The "blitz" in "zone blitz" is where the stand up guy rushes and "zone" in "zone blitz" is where the lineman drops back into a "zone".....it started in the 90's as a way to confuse blocking schemes. Guys like Carl Mecklinburg and lots of other Elephant techniques were used the same way in the 60's and 70's.

Actually, to be acurate, Bill " Wild Bill " Thompson The DC of Baytown Lee was using this "the zone blitz" way back to 1968. Stunted takcels and Ends with the Ends coreving the Flat. Drop NT sent the Mike...sent the Mike and NT and drop The DT. It's on film. Got a Picture out there some where of our RDT in the Flat covering the flat twenty five yards away from their end zone. a ball hitting him square in the chest and him dropping it against Aldine 1973.

If we are discussing the NFL, the zone blitz became popular in the 90's. Just like the RnS didn't become popular in the NFL till way after a bunch of College teams used it.

 

[The Pencil Neck]

Several folks in this thread have made a refinement on Vandermeer's general definition of bringing anyone but the DL to note the OLB's in a 3-4 have primary edge rushing responsibility so bringing them is not having them leave their primary responsibility and is not generally considered blitzing.

If there's any grey area, this is one of them.

 

[Vinny]

the game hasn't changed much since I was a kid and played ball in the 70's and 80's. The "blitz" in "zone blitz" is where the stand up guy rushes and "zone" in "zone blitz" is where the lineman drops back into a "zone".....it started in the 90's as a way to confuse blocking schemes. Guys like Carl Mecklinburg and lots of other Elephant techniques were used the same way in the 60's and 70's.

Elephant techniques...

first time I heard that one...

I like it though...

I'm old school....here is a nice read...

http://usctrojanfootballanalysis.blogspot.com/2007/02/uscs-elephant-defense.html

The base defense has been and still technically is a 4-3 under alignment scheme. 2006 was confusing for sports announcers and fans alike as Brian Cushing lined up in an upright stance and played a defensive end technique spot for most of the season. In zone blitz schemes not discussed here he even dropped back into coverage on some downs to play pass protection. That has been done with defensive ends however since Pete Carroll arrived at USC and is nothing new. We'll see if USC continues the use of Brian Cushing in the "Elephant" role in 2007 or if USC moves him back to a traditional SLB role. My guess is that with Dallas Sartz now gone to graduation Brian will move to the strong side linebacker spot. However that decision will probably depend upon the improvement of Kyle Moore and the development of incoming freshmen Everson Griffin. At least USC has the flexibility to use Brian Cushing at the stand up "Elephant" end position in the 4-3 under defense if needed. For more information on Pete Carroll's concepts on defense I'll post some of the speeches he gave at Nike clinics. That should further help to clarify any confusion.

 

[hollywood_texan]

If I play an A minor and call it a G diminished, I'm wrong. I can argue that it's a G dim all day but it's not a matter of perspective or a different point of view. (Now, I could play an A minor and say that it's a C Major 6 without the 5th and I could argue that. But G dim, no.)

Who cares what it is called as long as it sounds good.

The reason this is even being discussed is because whatever you want to call it, it isn't working consistently. If Kubiak said they blitzed the QB 27 times, well they sucked blitzing the QB against Atlanta.

Oh, I am sorry, I need to go start another thread to discuss that matter all togehter.

But, this whole thread was started because of what Andre said, and he brought it up for a reason besides just to debate what people consider to be a blitz.

Maybe this thread is really about people wanting to say Andre is a jerk and doesn't know crap about football. Because that is what this thread seems to really be about.

 

[Vinny]

Maybe this thread is really about people wanting to say Andre is a jerk and doesn't know crap about football. Because that is what this thread seems to really be about.

If some would slow down and listen to some of us older guys instead of trying to be brilliant re-defining the game out of their keysters, someone may learn a thing or two

 

[threetoedpete]

Who cares what it is called as long as it sounds good.

The reason this is even being discussed is because whatever you want to call it, it isn't working consistently. If Kubiak said they blitzed the QB 27 times, well they sucked blitzing the QB against Atlanta.

Oh, I am sorry, I need to go start another thread to discuss that matter all togehter.

But, this whole thread was started because of what Andre said, and he brought it up for a reason besides just to debate what people consider to be a blitz.

Maybe this thread is really about people wanting to say Andre is a jerk and doesn't know crap about football. Because that is what this thread seems to really be about.

Well I wouldn't presume to tell andre ware how to run a veer offense that's for sure. I'm not dening AW's right to have his rice bowl filled. But I do think he should stick to his area of expertise.

 

[hollywood_texan]

Well I wouldn't presume to tell andre ware how to run a veer offense that's for sure. I'm not dening AW's right to have his rice bowl filled. But I do think he should stick to his area of expertise.

A big part of running an offense is understanding the defensive scheme you are playing against.

 

[real]

I'm old school....here is a nice read...

http://usctrojanfootballanalysis.blogspot.com/2007/02/uscs-elephant-defense.html

Nice Article...

Really informative....Especially the part where it breaks down the Dallas 3-4 vs. USC's 4-3 with a stand-up DE...

It also goes to show the different terminology for these kind of "mixed breed" positions...When I played in college we had a Safety/OLB hybrid that we called a Joker....I have seen that defensive front before, but I never heard the term "elephant"...learned something new...

 

[real]

A big part of running an offense is understanding the defensive scheme you are playing against.

Too easy.

 

[hollywood_texan]

If some of you would slow down and listen to some of us older guys instead of trying to be brilliant re-defining the game out of your keysters, you may learn a thing or two

I am not trying to redefine anything. My very first post in this thread I stated first that this is an exellent topic to discuss the nuasances and meaning of the term "blitz". I had a pretty good idea it was going to down this way.

I understand where you guys are coming from and I don't think you guys are wrong. How many times have I said that?

It's a matter of general terminology and the training someone received while playing the game years ago.

To some people, the term blitz is very generic, which means it could be almost any defensive maneuver during a pass play. Or, it could be something very specific as described by Andre.

Either way, the Texans have problems with whatever you want to call it. Which is what Andre was probably trying to say but got sidetracked similar to how this thread is.

I enjoy threads like this anyway. I don't care what you guys say or think about me, you guys are ok!

 

[threetoedpete]

A big part of running an offense is understanding the defensive scheme you are playing against.

Well don't know about AW, but there were a lot of befuddled QBs when REL baytown went against them in the 60's and early 70's. We loved playing the veer. Anything that had a spread to it was DOA. We didn't care what they did with the fake we were taught to beat the gap and get to the ball. and admister as much damage as we could when we got there.

 

[Vinny]

I'm old school....here is a nice read...

http://usctrojanfootballanalysis.blogspot.com/2007/02/uscs-elephant-defense.html

Nice Article...

Really informative....Especially the part where it breaks down the Dallas 3-4 vs. USC's 4-3 with a stand-up DE...

It also goes to show the different terminology for these kind of "mixed breed" positions...When I played in college we had a Safety/OLB hybrid that we called a Joker....I have seen that defensive front before, but I never heard the term "elephant"...learned something new...

outside of some of the chronic emotional crud that infests forums, this is a great place to learn a thing or two about the game. I learn quite a bit from some of the better posters here and it helps me enjoy the game more. Sometimes a message board can give me nothing but headaches but once I learned to spot the guys who know what they are talking about I tend to tune out the "noise" that tends infests all mb's.

This hasn't been all that bad a thread once you pick out some of the dumb stuff.

 

[HOU-TEX]

I am not trying to redefine anything. My very first post in this thread I stated first that this is an exellent topic to discuss the nuasances and meaning of the term "blitz". I had a pretty good idea it was going to down this way.

I understand where you guys are coming from and I don't think you guys are wrong. How many times have I said that?

It's a matter of general terminology and the training someone received while playing the game years ago.

To some people, the term blitz is very generic, which means it could be almost any defensive maneuver during a pass play. Or, it could be something very specific as described by Andre.

Either way, the Texans have problems with whatever you want to call it. Which is what Andre was probably trying to say but got sidetracked similar to how this thread is.

I enjoy threads like this anyway. I don't care what you guys say or think about me, you guys are ok!

Off topic: Are you the one that called 610 this morning and told Marc he shouldn't have questioned Andre yesterday because of the experience that Andre has?

If so, I feel sorry for you.

If not, sorry nevermind

 

[infantrycak]

But, this whole thread was started because of what Andre said, and he brought it up for a reason besides just to debate what people consider to be a blitz.

Maybe this thread is really about people wanting to say Andre is a jerk and doesn't know crap about football. Because that is what this thread seems to really be about.

Actually the fight was entirely about how to define blitz and Andre got his knickers in a twist that his word was not being accepted carte blanche by Vandermeer.

 

[The Pencil Neck]

Who cares what it is called as long as it sounds good.

The reason this is even being discussed is because whatever you want to call it, it isn't working consistently. If Kubiak said they blitzed the QB 27 times, well they sucked blitzing the QB against Atlanta.

Oh, I am sorry, I need to go start another thread to discuss that matter all togehter.

But, this whole thread was started because of what Andre said, and he brought it up for a reason besides just to debate what people consider to be a blitz.

Maybe this thread is really about people wanting to say Andre is a jerk and doesn't know crap about football. Because that is what this thread seems to really be about.

If I call an A minor chord a G diminished and then I go to play with someone and tell them to play a G diminished, then we're going to have a problem if I'm playing an A minor. If we aren't using words to mean the same things, then we're going to miscommunicate and misunderstand each other.

It's like the word "stunt". That applies to some very specific things that linemen and linebackers do. The word has other, non-football definitions that can make it confusing if you're talking about football and then use the word in a non-football context.

I find it very odd that Andre would have this off-the-wall definition of blitz in his mind. I have no problem with Andre but I think he's seriously wrong about this. And like I said, I don't think it's a matter of perspective or context.

And most blitzes don't get to the QB. And, yes, our blitzes were sucking. We are not normally a blitzing team. Harrington has a history of getting rattled when blitzed so we tried blitzing him but since we're not normally a blitzing team, we sucked at it. The best blitz was when Demeco came free right up the middle for the sack. But... according to Andre's definition, that probably wasn't even a blitz. I think we were bringing the 4 down linemen and the MLB on that play... and they had at least 5 linemen in to block and possibly the RB, too. According to almost every else in the world, that's a blitz.

 

[hollywood_texan]

Off topic: Are you the one that called 610 this morning and told Marc he shouldn't have questioned Andre yesterday because of the experience that Andre has?

If so, I feel sorry for you.

If not, sorry nevermind

No, I didn't call in to Marc and say that. I wouldn't say that anyway.

Have you read any of my posts? I have never said to anyone in this thread that they are wrong because of broadly defining the term blitz. I love to listen to Marc and Andre during the games, I think they are great team! Geez, reading comprehension skills please? Talk about taking a thread off topic.

While we are doing that...

You never need to feel sorry for me, pray for me, or do anything else for that matter but treat with respect like anyone else.

I'll make my mistakes and/or got to hell regardless of what any human being says, prays, or thinks about me.

The self-rigtheousness people do is amazing...

No, let's get back to the topic...

 

[hollywood_texan]

If I call an A minor chord a G diminished and then I go to play with someone and tell them to play a G diminished, then we're going to have a problem if I'm playing an A minor. If we aren't using words to mean the same things, then we're going to miscommunicate and misunderstand each other.

The people I play with, we don't get into that.

This is how it goes:

Does it sound kick ass?

Regardless of the answer.

Where is the beer at?

 

[Double Barrel]

I could agrue that quote to Andre's point. Just because you call something a zone blitz, doesn't make it a blitz.

I don't have an issue with Kubiak, Marc, Andre, or any of you guys regarding this terminology.

You wanted a discussion regarding the nuasances of term "blitz" and I came to the table to show you guys a different perspective.

I was merely showing you a different perspective, which is the point of this thread and it appears you have an issue with that.

Well, let's just shut down the MB then. Because what is the point?

Starting another thread would be point less then.

Again, no thanks.

I have no problem in talking about different perspectives. Hence the reason for this thread to begin with. Andre and Marc provided the different perspectives, not you. That was clearly indicated in the first post of the thread.

But the Abe quote was directed at you because you were implying that our head coach was erroneously using a word to cover his ass and do some kind of politician maneuver.

I think that particular take is a load of horse crap, because 1) that's not Kubiak's style, and 2) it is clear that his use of the word "blitz" could be considered normal by the way modern NFL has defined it.

Actually the fight was entirely about how to define blitz and Andre got his knickers in a twist that his word was not being accepted carte blanche by Vandermeer.

Thank you. Nail on the head.

 

[HOU-TEX]

No, I didn't call in to Marc and say that. I wouldn't say that anyway.

Have you read any of my posts? I have never said to anyone in this thread that they are wrong because of broadly defining the term blitz. I love to listen to Marc and Andre during the games, I think they are great team! Geez, reading comprehension skills please? Talk about taking a thread off topic.

While we are doing that...

You never need to feel sorry for me, pray for me, or do anything else for that matter but treat with respect like anyone else.

I'll make my mistakes and/or got to hell regardless of what any human being says, prays, or thinks about me.

The self-rigtheousness people do is amazing...

No, let's get back to the topic...

I said it was off topic and it was only a question. There's no need to bust out in a tantrum.

What topic? I know what a blitz is. Many members have made nice educated posts about "a blitz", but you continue to rant on about people having different perceptions of the term.

If you played the game, you should know what a blitz is.

If you never played the game and do not know what a blitz is, then read every post in this thread except yours.

Good Day!

 

[The Pencil Neck]

The people I play with, we don't get into that.

This is how it goes:

Does it sound kick ass?

Regardless of the answer.

Where is the beer at?

And what if you asked someone where the beer is at, and for them left is right and right is left and you try to follow their directions and end up locked out of the rehearsal studio with no beer and no band? Or if you ask someone for the beer and to them "beer" means "motor oil" and you end up chugging 10W-30?

 

[HoustonFrog]

Blitzed definition

Wrong thread


Blitz

I am not reading 6 pages. Sorry guys, I know there is alot of good info but I'm hustling out of here to help with baby and to buy a 1 year anniversary gift. In high school we played a 4-3 and our blitzes were anyone rushing the passer that did not include the down linemen. Corners, safeties, LBs. I know there are hybrids now and differences with the 3-4 since part of the 4 are standup rushers..that is my simple answer. I do know the zone blitz and have seen it talked about in a previous page in this thread. I didn't hear Andre today

 

[hollywood_texan]

And what if you asked someone where the beer is at, and for them left is right and right is left and you try to follow their directions and end up locked out of the rehearsal studio with no beer and no band? Or if you ask someone for the beer and to them "beer" means "motor oil" and you end up chugging 10W-30?

Now you want to debate with me the usage of the term "left" and "right" in reference to directions given to some one?

There are words that have precise meanings and some that are more generic than precise.

I am merely giving you guys perspective of where Andre may have been coming from.

Not everyone was taught football the exact same way using the exact same terms and meanings. As a result some people use terminology differently, particularly the blitz term. Which is why I never said any of you guys are wrong. Because you are not.

I can clearly understand that a guy learning football in the 80's would have this type of perspective.

My opinion, the term blitz is overused.

So what?

But, it definitely doesn't make me stupid, think Kubiak is a bad coach, that I never played football, know a diminished chord, or any other conclusion you guys come to.

 

[The Pencil Neck]

Now you want to debate with me the usage of the term "left" and "right" in reference to directions given to some one?

There are words that have precise meanings and some that are more generic than precise.

I am merely giving you guys perspective of where Andre may have been coming from.

Not everyone was taught football the exact same way using the exact same terms and meanings. As a result some people use terminology differently, particularly the blitz term. Which is why I never said any of you guys are wrong. Because you are not.

I can clearly understand that a guy learning football in the 80's would have this type of perspective.

My opinion, the term blitz is overused.

So what?

But, it definitely doesn't make me stupid, think Kubiak is a bad coach, that I never played football, know a diminished chord, or any other conclusion you guys come to.

I'm trying to use analogies to show you the problem with what you're saying. You think that the term "blitz" has some sort of fluid meaning when it doesn't. You think that the term "blitz" has changed in meaning over the years, when it hasn't. You think that some people have been taught other meanings for the word and to some people, it might mean something different, when it doesn't and they haven't. An A minor chord is an A minor chord, left is left, and a blitz is a blitz.

It's not overused. It's used to describe something that actually happens and happens a lot.

A long time ago, I had just started posting on a weight training newsgroup. I was wanting to learn more about weight training (and that's were the Pencil Neck name comes from.) A guy made a comment that Creatine makes you retain water in your cells and is a salt (because salt makes you retain water.) A couple of posters came down on this guy like a ton of bricks and I defended him because it seemed to me that they were being way too harsh. I didn't (and don't) know much about the chemical composition of Creatine and argued that it COULD be a salt (I just didn't know for sure.) And those guys came down on me really hard. And we argued for a bit. I didn't know who these guys were. Well, it turned out I was arguing with two of the best supplement chemists in the business who knew EXACTLY what the chemical composition of Creatine is and that it's NOT a salt. I was wrong.

Right now, you're in the same basic position I was in back then. You're defending Andre on the basis that maybe he was taught something different and that maybe different people use the term to mean different things and that Andre was just as right as anyone else. That's wrong. There's not a lot of give about what a blitz is or is not. It's very odd that Andre would have this definition wrong but no one's perfect. If someone taught him this, then they taught him wrong.

It's like arguing over what an A minor chord is. There's one right answer and then everything else.

 

[hollywood_texan]

I'm trying to use analogies to show you the problem with what you're saying. You think that the term "blitz" has some sort of fluid meaning when it doesn't. You think that the term "blitz" has changed in meaning over the years, when it hasn't. You think that some people have been taught other meanings for the word and to some people, it might mean something different, when it doesn't and they haven't. An A minor chord is an A minor chord, left is left, and a blitz is a blitz.

It's not overused. It's used to describe something that actually happens and happens a lot.

A long time ago, I had just started posting on a weight training newsgroup. I was wanting to learn more about weight training (and that's were the Pencil Neck name comes from.) A guy made a comment that Creatine makes you retain water in your cells and is a salt (because salt makes you retain water.) A couple of posters came down on this guy like a ton of bricks and I defended him because it seemed to me that they were being way too harsh. I didn't (and don't) know much about the chemical composition of Creatine and argued that it COULD be a salt (I just didn't know for sure.) And those guys came down on me really hard. And we argued for a bit. I didn't know who these guys were. Well, it turned out I was arguing with two of the best supplement chemists in the business who knew EXACTLY what the chemical composition of Creatine is and that it's NOT a salt. I was wrong.

Right now, you're in the same basic position I was in back then. You're defending Andre on the basis that maybe he was taught something different and that maybe different people use the term to mean different things and that Andre was just as right as anyone else. That's wrong. There's not a lot of give about what a blitz is or is not. It's very odd that Andre would have this definition wrong but no one's perfect. If someone taught him this, then they taught him wrong.

It's like arguing over what an A minor chord is. There's one right answer and then everything else.

Pencil Neck, I like you and I hope we can hook up during the San Diego game. I need to make sure I still have your number.

But comparing the term blitz and it's usage to a scientific term developed precisely due to it's physical composition isn't even in the same ball park, isn't even the same league, isn't even the same sport...

Get it?

We are talking about foot massages here...

And let me tell you, I am the foot f*#$ing master. I got my technique down. I don't even tickle...

 

[Battle Red Flash]

Mark argued that a blitz is anytime you bring someone for a pass rush that is not a lineman. He mentioned a 'zone blitz', where a lineman drops into coverage and the defense brings a LB or CB into the rush. Andre continue to insist that this is NOT a blitz, regardless of what anyone calls it, and it is strictly "bringing pressure" if there are not more defenders than blockers.

Andre is wrong. Marc is right.
Probably why Andre did not make it in the league, and still won't admit that it had to do with his talent level. It's all Detroit's fault.

 

[The Pencil Neck]

Pencil Neck, I like you and I hope we can hook up during the San Diego game. I need to make sure I still have your number.

But comparing the term blitz and it's usage to a scientific term developed precisely due to it's physical composition isn't even in the same ball park, isn't even the same league, isn't even the same sport...

Get it?

We are talking about foot massages here...

And let me tell you, I am the foot f*#$ing master. I got my technique down. I don't even tickle...

That's not a foot you're massaging.