NFL 2011/2012 Discussion - Page 130

Welker's made that catch many times throughout the course of his career, in poorly and in well thrown balls. This one hit his hands and eventually his head. Similarly, Brady overthrew it. Both of em fucked it up.

I lol'ed

I have a question for all the great football minds out there. In a hail-mary situation like the last play of the Superbowl, why are defenses content to rush three and drop eight defenders into coverage? The quarterback needs several seconds for his receivers to reach the end zone, and lack of pressure to step up and make an accurate throw. With this in mind, it seems to me that rushing six -- four down linemen, a blitzing linebacker up the middle, and a blitzing safety off the edge -- and parking five defenders at the goal line is a much better defense. You create the opportunity for a sack, or at the very least, force the quarterback to get rid of the ball before he wants to.

not really when the offence has 4-5 receivers. The whole idea, defensively, is to limit any instances of one-on-one coverage and have all the offensive receivers to be in double coverage (or at least the mot threatening ones). If you opt to rush the qb, you run a significant risk as it can easily backfire if he slips your tackles, or his line holds up. That pretty much gives him that extended time and allows for open receivers down the field.

also, given that throwing it up in the air gives you a greater chance of failure...

If you look at most of the big plays on offense, it's usually against a blitz (at least 5 people rushing). In HM situations at the end of the game, you don't need a big play on defense all you need is an incomplete pass to end the game. The odds of getting an incomplete pass against 8 defenders when everyone knows where the ball is going is much better (probably over 90%) than getting a sack or incompletion with 5 or more people rushing the passer (this is just an estimate but I'd guess it's probably close to 60% if you count all the times a team blitzes). This also helps in case the QB throws short since there are now 8 defenders the ball carrier has to account for instead of only 5 or 6. I can only think of the HM working twice the past 2 years in the NFL. The Green Bay playoff game this year and the Texans Jags game last year.

I always thought it was stupid for D-coordinators to big blitz on 3rd and 6 or longer since an incomplete pass basically forces a punt. Too many coaches are great game planners but don't know situational play calling. Also, if you look at most of the top defenses, they hardly ever blitz. Most of the pass rush is generated by a 4 man rush. Bad defenses tend to blitz 5 or more guys often.

question is... do bad defenses blitz 5 or mroe guys because they don't have a pass rush?

They blitz because the coaches are morons when it comes to situational play calling.

As a Saints fan, the answer would be yes....

That's a pretty big generalization.

Plenty of good defenses blitz (and have blitzed) very often. Being able to bring four and drop seven is a luxury few teams have to begin with and even with a ferocious 4 man rush any halfway decent offensive play caller will begin tearing them apart with underneath passes and screens just because the rush can't get their fast enough on every down to prevent these. Many really good defenses will mix front 4 pressure with a constant variation of LB pressure and blitzes by the DBs.

It's all about a constant pressure from the front 4 and a good mix of blitzing schemes.

I remember during one of the Redskins vs Cowboys games this year, the Skins blitzed eight guys on 3 and 20. Pass complete for 20+ yards. Teams will almost never get 20 years against coverage, big blitzing on long yardage plays is stupid.



Another reason that coaches will drop eight on Hail Mary's is because they're risk-adverse. If they give up a Hail Mary when they dropped eight, they blame luck or a player. If they try anything unusual (even if the "unusual" play is better according to all odds calculations) and it doesn't work, the coach takes the blame instead. Same reason they almost never go for it on 4th down, despite being the better call a lot of the time.

If you watch the top defenses, you'll notice that they hardly ever blitz. They rush more than 4 guys maybe on 10-15% of the time compared to bad defenses which tend to blitz more 30% or more. The best defense I remember watching was the Ravens the year when they won the SB. The leading sacker got like 8.5 sacks for the year. The #2 guy had I think 7. The rest of the team barely had any sacks. You don't really need a ferocious pass rush. What you really need to do is be able to tackle the guy as soon as he catches it. Also, this past SB neither team blitzed that much and the final score was only 21-17.

Next time when you watch the NFL games, keep track of how many times the defenses rush more than 4 people and what happens on the play. You'll notice a much larger percentage of the time the play results in a big gain compared to when teams don't blitz.

however, didn't the giants have one of the top 5 pass rushes in the league (if not the best)?

can't say much about the patriots... but i thought the patriots defense was actually pretty bad.

so... is this a causation thing? you can't keep playing prevent defense the entire game right?

No you can't play prevent the entire game but blitzing on 3rd and long when all you need is an incomplete pass is incredibly stupid. Blitzing on 1st or 2nd down in goal situations is much smarter since the offense has a high likelyhood of scoring a TD already and a sack pretty much stops the TD. This ends up being a low risk (offense is already likely to score a TD) and high reward situation (a sack pretty much forces the offense to a FG).

The Giants have a great pass rush because of their line, not because of blitzing. Only two Giants linebackers and no CBs or safeties had sacks this season. (43.5 sacks from the line, 4.5 sacks from linebackers.)

Prevent defense is the exact opposite of blitzing and should be used just as sparingly, when the only option is to throw the ball deep. The problem with prevent defense is that it opens up the middle of the field and can allow the QB to throw underneath for a big gain (or scramble). Plus, since there are only 3 pass rushers, the QB has plenty of time to scan the field for the best option. Can't tell you how many times I've seen teams give up first downs on 3rd-and-long by playing prevent defense. Prevent defense only works at the end of a game when you have a lead and are trying to keep the clock running. Even then it can be beaten.

There's a balance between coverage and pass rush. They work together. A good pass rush forces a QB to make a decision and throw the ball, and good coverage will take away his options. If the pass rush is bad, the QB will be able to cycle through his reads and give skill players a chance to get open. If the coverage is bad, the QB will be able to get rid of the ball quickly and hit one of his first few reads.

The x factor in the whole situation is execution. Play calling is academic until you take into account the fact that the players are not perfect and you might have to stray from the ideal play call because of it.