The Most Exciting Tape I Have Ever Watched, Part Two: Blitzes Blitzes BlitBLITZES!!
I have this pet peeve. Football fans always want their defensive coordinator to blitz more. I have this other pet peeve, the phrase "pet peeve." Who says that?
When a fan says: I want my defensive coordinator to blitz more. It usually means, I want my defense to execute more, awesome, interception forcing, forced fumble causing, straight out of NFL films, blitzes. It doesn't mean, I want some more of them ineffectual blitzes that create a pile around the quarterback and deprive the coverage of personnel.
Let's say you could design the perfect pass rusher. For our purposes, we'll call him Ndamukong Suh. Suh explodes off the snap faster than opposing linemen, every snap. He wins leverage, bulls through double teams, hand fights like a fire devil whirling watered steel, closes with a burst that wrinkles time-space and squares, wraps, rips and recovers. Every snap.
A team starting Ndamukong Suh could conceivably rush one defender every down. One one one. Ten in coverage. And that would be ideal.
Since teams do not have this fabled pass rusher, they must balance players assigned to attack the quarterback with players assigned to cover the receivers, and additional players assigned to blitzing are players lost in coverage. Elementary.
A blitz, as we traditionally think of it, is a sacrifice taken to compensate for insufficient pass rush. Most teams have insufficient pass rush, but that's okay. What isn't ok, thank you very much John Marshall*, is overcompensating, sending the 53 man roster at the opposing quarterback, not scheming in variety, surprise and thus trading throw aways and the ultra occasional sack with huge completions.
The balance, the sweet spot between disguising pass rush, overwhelming blockers and creating pressure while not punching holes in the secondary, is blitzing, but creative and disciplined blitzing.
That's what Seattle's defensive brain trust accomplished last Sunday.
- It deked Lofa Tatupu on blitzes and freed him to move out and cover.
- Then, after baiting that on subsequent snaps**, Seattle dropped Chris Clemons into cover and Tatupu shot through the left "A" gap and closed and nearly crushed Philip Rivers. Sadly, Tatupu stumbled to the turf, perhaps tripped by Kris Dielman, but Rivers had enough and threw it away towards Legedu Naanee.
- Lawyer Milloy stepped up next, attacking off right end.
- Three blitzes in five plays, each creates pressure and all involve only five defenders.
- Seattle sends six on the next play and it doesn't work. Vanilla blitz, overload left, and only a saving pass defense by Kelly Jennings prevents Seattle from being burned. Jennings stays on Malcom Floyd and then does something unexpected: spots the ball and works inside to attempt the pick. He doesn't but it's progress.
- Seahawks blitz five again, create pressure but Earl Thomas blows cover. Crayton receives for 16.
- Not a blitz, but I'd be remiss not to mention Tatupu smashing Jacob Hester into the hole and then working around his fallen foe to tackle Tolbert after two.
- Not a blitz, but a payoff. Seattle has rattled Philip Rivers. Rivers sacks himself. Brock is credited. Not a blitz, but a stunt executed by Kentwan Balmer and Brandon Mebane creates pressure from the outside, and though Mebane falls, Rivers tucks and scrambles and is wrapped. The key, consistent pressure gets Rivers thinking and when he looks for his outlet on the right, Tolbert, Tolbert is busy blocking Brock. Compensation, compensation. Rivers tucks, Brock disengages and the rest is self-sack history.
- Babineaux blitzes out of a 3-3 but Floyd dices the zone and receives for 24 and the first. Lame.
- But all this beautiful play is rewarded. David Hawthorne throws Antonio Gates, buries a shoulder into the ball and forces Tolbert to fumble. Bryant recovers.
Maybe not all of the blitzes worked, but quite a few did, and while San Diego was chewing yards, they were playing snap after snap on the verge of turnover.
More of this, Gus.
*Marshall wasn't always so bad. In fact, looking at the entirety of Marshall's career, someone like Gus Bradley should be happy to have that kind of success, but at his end in Seattle, it sure felt like Marshall blitzed the house too damn much.
**2-12-SD 18 (9:07) 17-P.Rivers pass incomplete short left to 85-A.Gates.3-12-SD 18 (9:03) (Shotgun)
17-P.Rivers pass deep left to 80-M.Floyd to SD 34 for 16 yards (21-K.Jennings).
30 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Do you think that one requirement the braintrust has for the LEO
is the ability to be semi-effective in coverage (as much as your standard LB), so that we can work in a number of exotic blitzes while still being able to defend the pass? That might be one reason why some DEs are valued over others.
by Greetings from the Lord Humongous! on Sep 29, 2010 7:47 PM PDT reply actions
Good stuff
The balance, the sweet spot between disguising pass rush, overwhelming blockers and creating pressure while not punching holes in the secondary, is blitzing, but blitzing creativity and discipline.
Think something went wrong in this sentence. Or I’m misreading it. Shouldn’t that be “is not blitzing, but”?
Also what’s with Jennings looking good (if also still looking pretty bad on some plays). It confuses me! Argh!
I think it means he's human. Much like me, you, and Hass
Some good, some bad, some incredible, some stinkers.
I just like the D-coordinators being creative and making QBs and O-coordinators think and have to adjust. Marshall, for all the crap he takes around here, had an absolutely brilliant scheme in the playoffs years ago when he put Bentley (LB) jamming Smith (WR) all game, which caused Carolina’s vaunted offense to crumble. Kind of like a box-and-one in basketball.
Anyway, I prefer a risky, creative, blitz that succeeds sometimes and fails to the big play any day to being slowly picked apart as the opposing QB gets comfortable and gains confidence and rhythm over the course of a game, as we throw predictable, vanilla schemes all game long.
John's sentence is mostly correct
It should probably read “…is blitzing, but blitzing with creativity and discipline.” Or basically, blitzing, but with the caveat that you must do so with creativity and discipline. Unless John hates those concepts, which would have made for a strange article.
by splintrdmind on Sep 29, 2010 8:45 PM PDT up reply actions
Bradley has certainly given Bradford a lot to think about in film study this week.
I hope we really dial up some exotic blitz packages for him.
I'm not sure why I love the 3-3-5 so much.
I think it’s because, in Madden, you can just get 3 bad ass LB/SS hybrids, 2 80’s LB/DE hybrids, and a good DT, and your front six are just pure carnage all the time.
In real life, when it’s executed well, it is so fun to watch.
I am the concur
It is basically what Pittsburgh does with Polalamolamu, I have pipe dreams of Chancellor turning into that guy.
Good bye Big Walt.
by Generzal Zod on Sep 29, 2010 8:16 PM PDT up reply actions
The concur is a mythical beast.
Nobody argue with the General or he’ll eat you.
inside of a dog it's too dark to read.
You magnificent bastard
I READ YOUR BOOK!
by Thomas Beekers on Sep 29, 2010 8:28 PM PDT up reply actions
Fixed fortifications are monuments to the stupidity of man.
Or as Nimzowitsch put it, any structure without the potential to move will inevitably become weak.
And if you know who Nimzo is or what he was talking about, well then, you and I could be the swellest of friends!
inside of a dog it's too dark to read.
I know who Nimzo is
but I’m pretty awful. What do I win?
My Fred Reinfeld collection, all in descriptive notation.
Not sure if “winning” is the word, though…
inside of a dog it's too dark to read.
Not necessarily--it depends on what you do with them
Trusting in fixed fortifications, yes. Using them as baffles to constrain and direct your enemy’s movements, however, can be very wise — if you understand what you’re doing and have the ability to take advantage of that. (This is especially true in urban warfare.)
by The Ancient Mariner on Sep 30, 2010 9:02 AM PDT up reply actions
I was quoting Patton--
but the subject line pulled out the quotes. I make zero claim to knowledge of warfare.
inside of a dog it's too dark to read.
Patton was the Nathan Bedford Forrest of his day
brilliant at what he did, but rather all-or-nothing as a military thinker.
by The Ancient Mariner on Sep 30, 2010 1:56 PM PDT up reply actions
At the very least
He’ll make you kneel.
by splintrdmind on Sep 29, 2010 8:46 PM PDT up reply actions
20 guys! How can we possibly defend 20 guys! That oughtta be against the rules or something!
by jacobstevens on Sep 30, 2010 11:51 AM PDT up reply actions
Kentwan Balmer
It seems to me that Balmer has been a good pickup so far this season. I’ve watched him create pressure and cause holding penalties.
How has LoJack looked this season?
I don't like pet peeves either
but they can be interesting to observe in the wild.
by The Ancient Mariner on Sep 30, 2010 9:03 AM PDT reply actions
speaking of pet peeves...
Linebackers don’t blitz. Only defensive backs blitz. Linebackers dog. I may be the only personeft in the USA who uses the terminology but I’m right, dammit!
by Johnny Slick on Sep 30, 2010 12:00 PM PDT via mobile reply actions
THIS is precisely the reason I've become a huge fan of Field Gulls.
Fantastic writeup, John. Thank you for your hard work, and empirical analysis. It isn’t simply uniquely informative, but it’s also damn fun to read.
(He wins leverage, bulls through double teams, hand fights like a fire devil whirling watered steel, closes with a burst that wrinkles time-space and squares, wraps, rips and recovers. Every snap. – Very nice!)
You’re the antithesis of Mike Florio (and associated gossip-clones) and I, good sir, salute you for it.
"Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn"
by Miskatonic Fighting Cephalopods on Sep 30, 2010 12:31 PM PDT reply actions

by 





























