Should we have blitzed more?

[KYPack]

Well, I got rocked pretty good in the game thread yesterday for a contarian stance. In the middle of our loss when Kurt Warner was tearing us apart, many posters were screaming for the blitz. We must pressure Kurt Warner, so let's blitz him, right? I would pretty consistently say.. no. Why, doesn't KY want us to win?

Yeah, I want to win. But you must do things in the game which allow you to win. Capers was pretty well handcuffed by his personnel groupings. And I will readily admit that at certain instances, a well placed storm might have helped our cause.

First of all, Warner has reached elite status. He is a HOF QB. He is a guy you can't blitz. You didn't blitz Joe Montana. You didn't blitz Marino and you don't blitz Kurt Warner.

Kurt was sacked just 24 times this past season. He is one of the best in the business at beating the blitz. In fact, Warner's passer rating against the blitz (100.4) is even better than his overall rating of 93.2. He makes a living whipping teams that do blitz him. He was the best QB in the league against blitzes in 2009. I maintain that Capers had a shitty hand to play, but played his cards as best he could.

If Dom were to send five on a consistent basis, who would be our fifth rusher and who would cover the blitz? Collins leaps to mind. I don't recall any safety blitzes. So Bush and or Giordano are going to protect us deep?

Hawk is no blitzing LB. So you send Chillar or Barnett, right? You start blitzing one of those two and Warner would eat that shit up. Woodson also comes to mind, but with the young corners struggling, it wouldn't have helped to send CW on corner blitzes.

It also would have been nice to get pressure from Brad Jones, but after some nice work in the second half of the season, he disappeared in the play-off game. He's a good kid, but he was revealed to outmanned at his job in the play-offs.

Bigby? Well he was hurt later, but maybe a SS blitz might have helped us some early. I know Dom was trying to get his coverages ironed out before he went to sending safeties. And there was trouble back there early also.

Like GB, AZ's Head Coach is it's defacto OC. Whisenhunt was an offensive assistant with the Pittsburgh Steelers for five seasons, working regularly against the 3-4 zone-blitz defense that Capers and Dick LeBeau created in the early 1990s. Once Whiz saw the Packers trying to get 5 man pressure, we would have been gouged worse (if possible) than we already were.

We got beat by a guy with a playoff record of 8-3, a passer rating of 98.8 and three Super Bowl appearances, including a world title in 1999.
We are about at the same point we were when Dallas blew us up in 1995. We are a young team that doesn't have the horses, yet.

We will get better. Capers helped keep MM's job for him this year. Dom isn't going anywhere soon, nor should he worry about his job. if you fire coordinator after one weak performance in the play-offs, it doesn't bode well for the organization. Dom's approach is sound, we just need experience and to play better.

[Smidgeon]

Agreed. Especially on the blitzing thing. Warner was hot and hitting all the right routes. Giving him more open routes would not have done any good at all. The only thing the Pack could have done is outscore him, and they almost did.

[pbmax]

I think there is a chance the coverage could improve based on experience. It may not be enough, but I would expect better reactions/anticipation that would lead to tighter coverage just from seeing everything a second time. What I am curious about is why the middle of our defense is vulnerable. Football Outsiders (during the game after Fox shared the Kurt Warner observation that they could attack the middle - and did) mentioned that out of six areas, short/deep, left/middle/right, it was our worst area of pass defense.

As for blitzing, the only way it makes tactical sense is if you play tight to the LOS and send everything. The downside is that one error and its a TD on any play. But there is a reason the Bear defense is not used regularly anymore.

[denverYooper]

We are about at the same point we were when Dallas blew us up in 1995. We are a young team that doesn't have the horses, yet.


Excellent post KY. I thought they sent Wood once and they got gashed for ~17 yards.

At the beginning of this season I was hoping for 9-7/10-6 and maybe a WC win. That to me would indicate that this team was headed in the right direction. In the end, I felt like we'd overachieved that and was wondering if we ended up more like the 95 team than the 93/94 teams.

[KYPack]

We are about at the same point we were when Dallas blew us up in 1995. We are a young team that doesn't have the horses, yet.


Excellent post KY. I thought they sent Wood once and they got gashed for ~17 yards.

At the beginning of this season I was hoping for 9-7/10-6 and maybe a WC win. That to me would indicate that this team was headed in the right direction. In the end, I felt like we'd overachieved that and was wondering if we ended up more like the 95 team than the 93/94 teams.

Yeah, Yoop. They sent 5 a few times and it didn't seem to me the results warranted more of the same. I wanted to look at the tape, but shit, I don't wanna watch that thing yet. We made some great plays and ARod is the "slinger of the future" in the NFL, but that thing it still too painful to watch.

Is that Colorado weather makin' ya homesick for the UP?

[denverYooper]

Is that Colorado weather makin' ya homesick for the UP?

:lol: No way man. It was 50 degrees here yesterday, about twice what it was back in da yoop.

We have UP weather for 1 week per season here. I miss it in the summer, but not in mid-January :).

[Fritz]

I normally like the blitz, but that's from a fan's perspective. What my question in all this is, is where does the improvement specifically have to happen?

They can't chuck every defensive player - so what position groups need to be addressed? Does this defense need different linebackers than the ones that are back there? Do they need safeties more than linebackers? Or do they actually need an upgrade on the d-line? It was all so wrong yesterday I don't even know where they need to start.

Anybody with a cooler head and more expertise have some idea what position group is the most in need?

[Bretsky]

The answer in retrospect is yes; because we failed in mixing things up enough and what we did clearly failed.

Of course easy to answer this now.

Dom made the call to let Woody single cover Fitz all over the field most of the game instead of let Williams take him and double him with a safety over the top. Maybe we should have tried the other route more and turned Woodsen loose on some blitzes.

I don't know anymore; I feel we all need some rehab and it ain't coming soon.

[KYPack]

The answer in retrospect is yes; because we failed in mixing things up enough and what we did clearly failed.

Of course easy to answer this now.

Dom made the call to let Woody single cover Fitz all over the field most of the game instead of let Williams take him and double him with a safety over the top. Maybe we should have tried the other route more and turned Woodsen loose on some blitzes.

I don't know anymore; I feel we all need some rehab and it ain't coming soon.

Yeah, we didn't get it done with cover.

The big advantage to zone blitz is you show a lot of blitz looks and then do it when you have an opening.

For instance, Beanie Wells can't blitz pickup very well yet, etc.

The problem is we don't really have an ILB that can get home.

Our best blitz guys are a corner and the two safeties.

We need backers who can really tear ass up from the inside.

We are a season away.

You can nail Dom for not preparing properly, but I really feel he was several cards short in the game and Whiz just out finessed him.

[Smidgeon]

The answer in retrospect is yes; because we failed in mixing things up enough and what we did clearly failed.

Of course easy to answer this now.

Dom made the call to let Woody single cover Fitz all over the field most of the game instead of let Williams take him and double him with a safety over the top. Maybe we should have tried the other route more and turned Woodsen loose on some blitzes.

I don't know anymore; I feel we all need some rehab and it ain't coming soon.

Yeah, we didn't get it done with cover.

The big advantage to zone blitz is you show a lot of blitz looks and then do it when you have an opening.

For instance, Beanie Wells can't blitz pickup very well yet, etc.

The problem is we don't really have an ILB that can get home.

Our best blitz guys are a corner and the two safeties.

We need backers who can really tear ass up from the inside.

We are a season away.

You can nail Dom for not preparing properly, but I really feel he was several cards short in the game and Whiz just out finessed him.

The Pack couldn't get home because Warner was red hot. My number 1 "Worst Fear" (you can look at the thread) going into the game was Warner's three step drop. The ball was out of his hand too quickly for any blitz to be effective.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

The answer in retrospect is yes; because we failed in mixing things up enough and what we did clearly failed.

Of course easy to answer this now.

Dom made the call to let Woody single cover Fitz all over the field most of the game instead of let Williams take him and double him with a safety over the top. Maybe we should have tried the other route more and turned Woodsen loose on some blitzes.

I don't know anymore; I feel we all need some rehab and it ain't coming soon.

Yeah, we didn't get it done with cover.

The big advantage to zone blitz is you show a lot of blitz looks and then do it when you have an opening.

For instance, Beanie Wells can't blitz pickup very well yet, etc.

The problem is we don't really have an ILB that can get home.

Our best blitz guys are a corner and the two safeties.

We need backers who can really tear ass up from the inside.

We are a season away.

You can nail Dom for not preparing properly, but I really feel he was several cards short in the game and Whiz just out finessed him.

Spot on.

Warner isn't particularly susceptible to the blitz, but he does have problems with pressure up the middle. That is what we didn't have.

It amazes Ty how packer fans can ignore the fact that we were told repeatedly that it takes 2 years to transition to the 3-4...for whatever reason..players, learning curve, etc.

Without DC we don't make the playoffs. DC was a victim of his own success.

[Bossman641]

I agree with the others. A blitz is worthless if you aren't getting any push up the middle, which we weren't. Honestly, I don't know if anything would have slowed Warner down. He was lights out yesterday. The Packers blitzed, he got the ball out quickly to the open man. The Packers sat back, he went through his progressions and took what the defense gave him. It was really just a great game from him.

[Freak Out]

The only way we had a chance to rattle Warner was if we did it with our base rush...blitzing would have just opened it up even more. The guy was just red freakin hot. We needed a Jolly or Jenkins tipped ball and never got one. :lol:

[LEWCWA]

The answer in retrospect is yes; because we failed in mixing things up enough and what we did clearly failed.

Of course easy to answer this now.

Dom made the call to let Woody single cover Fitz all over the field most of the game instead of let Williams take him and double him with a safety over the top. Maybe we should have tried the other route more and turned Woodsen loose on some blitzes.

I don't know anymore; I feel we all need some rehab and it ain't coming soon.

I was saying that early in the game. I didn't like the fact that CW was following Fitz around. If it is Harris locking him up everyplay I don't mind. With CW following him around, they know where are playmaker is coming out of the huddle. Not good in my opinion. I wish they would have committed to taking Fitz out of the game and forcing Breaston and Doucet to beat them. I don't think they confused them all day. I think when it was apparent that you weren't going to stop them, I think bringing the house would have at least changed things up a little. Maybe cause a turnover....

[Pugger]

Would another speed rushing OLB opposite CM3 have made any difference? Should we bring back Kampman and use him like we used to use KGB = a situational pass rusher? :?:

[KYPack]

Would another speed rushing OLB opposite CM3 have made any difference? Should we bring back Kampman and use him like we used to use KGB = a situational pass rusher? :?:

Bookend OLB's in a 3-4 are very important. Jones invisible man act allowed AZ to help and chip on CMIII. Pressure from the other side would have helped some for sure.

As far as Capers gameplan, I think it was sound. Last year, Pittsburgh blitzed the hell out of Warner in the SB, right? no. They covered Warner. Woodley and Harrison ran some very sophisticated buzzes and switches and jumped Warner's quick stuff. That play that Harrison intercepted the pass and took it back to the house was a very sneaky switch in coverage. They covered Warner the whole game. Because you have to. Warner is pretty much blitz proof.

[Maxie the Taxi]

KY,

Normally I agree with you. But not today. Yes, I think we should have brought the house just about every other play right from the start of the game. And by the "house" I mean 6 or 7 guys. Why?

1. Agreed that Warner is great against the blitz, but he isn't God and he isn't immune to pain. It's not written in stone that he'd gash us easy if we blitzed. On the other hand, he's not going to gash us every play. On the plays he doesn't, we'd get to him, maybe not sack him, but hurry him and knock him on his butt after the throw. That would keep him on his heels and, perhaps, force a mistake. Sooner or later a back and/or tight end stay in to block. Sooner or later a blitzer gets through. The chances of forcing an error go up. The chances of forcing a turnover go up.

2. We've tried the strategy of rushing with four and covering up before against Favre (twice) and Big Ben and Carson Palmer. The result all losses with these elite QB's throwing a gazillion TD passes. The point is, it was clear that our past strategy didn't work against these elites, so why do the same thing against Warner. Besides, if Warner and Whisenhunt are saavy enough to know our weakness -- whether do to scheme or personnel -- then Capers ought to know it and adjust to do something different. Bringing the house was his only alternative move.

3. I agree with Ty. We were getting beat up the middle. Warner is susceptible to pressure up the middle and we didn't give Warner pressure up the middle. The days Warner looks incompetent are the days you rattle him with pressure up the middle and knock him on his ass. Admittedly, it doesn't help that he's playing with a big lead, but we were playing with no tomorrow. So what we got to lose? Gang blitz up the middle.

4. I don't buy the fact that elite QB's are blitz-proof. We've seen Favre get rattled, and Warner too. Warner's rating against the blitz may be good, but what's his rating when he's not blitzed? These elite guys have to be put on the ground early by whatever it takes to have a chance. They have to be rattled. Then I'll take my chances.

5. It was obvious early that our LB's were either out of place or beat on just about every play, so what good is it to keep them back in "coverage." I'll take my chances sending them after Warner and hoping we force a mistake, either by Warner or his blockers.

6. Last year, if I recall right, Arizona got as far as they did in the playoffs because they consistently sent the house and got away with it. Maybe they figured they were overmatched personnel-wise and forcing turnovers was their only chance. It worked until they met their match in Big Ben.

7. We'll see what happens during the next round. We've got three "elite" QB's playing, two against each other. Either Brees or Warner has got to lose. And the Cowboys have to deal with Favre. My hunch is NO will find a way to rattle Warner and that the Cowboys will put Favre on his butt more than once. It will be interesting to see if they do it by means of the blitz because their personnel is similar to ours.

[KYPack]

I hear ya Max.

I don't agee totally, but yeah, what we did didn't work too well to say the least.

I watched some game tape finally. Not the whole thing, but about the whole second half. We blitzed a lot more than I thought we did. Woodson blitzed 3 times in the section I saw, two fire zones and an "exotic". He never got close on any of 'em. Those bunches and bubbles they ran worked like greased lightning.

Incidently, Warner is higher rated WHEN he's blitzed.

One thing that has been said, but must be mentioned is we got little help from the guys up front. Jolly, Raji, and Pickett played like dogshit. Or got handled, however you want to term it. Jenkins played hard and won some battles, but the rest of 'em played like the 3 monkeys. Hear no evil, don't push, don't shove.

Add Brad Jones to that list. He spent 90% of the game staring at his guys facemask. He played like the skinny kid he is.

You can't give all the blame to the boys on the back line. The fat boys didn't help 'em much.

We should have sent 6 or 7? Nah, but what the hell, we wudda got beat that way then.

[Maxie the Taxi]

I hear ya Max.

I don't agee totally, but yeah, what we did didn't work too well to say the least.

I watched some game tape finally. Not the whole thing, but about the whole second half. We blitzed a lot more than I thought we did. Woodson blitzed 3 times in the section I saw, two fire zones and an "exotic". He never got close on any of 'em. Those bunches and bubbles they ran worked like greased lightning.

Incidently, Warner is higher rated WHEN he's blitzed.

One thing that has been said, but must be mentioned is we got little help from the guys up front. Jolly, Raji, and Pickett played like dogshit. Or got handled, however you want to term it. Jenkins played hard and won some battles, but the rest of 'em played like the 3 monkeys. Hear no evil, don't push, don't shove.

Add Brad Jones to that list. He spent 90% of the game staring at his guys facemask. He played like the skinny kid he is.

You can't give all the blame to the boys on the back line. The fat boys didn't help 'em much.

We should have sent 6 or 7? Nah, but what the hell, we wudda got beat that way then.

I think what you're saying is that you can't win football games by "going through the motions." Football is an emotional game and if you're not "up" for the game, you won't win no matter what the scheme.

I have a theory that the team that wins is the team that keeps the other guys on their heels. You can do that by being in a higher emotional state than the other guys, but if both teams are up there are a couple other things you can do:

1. On offense, start out in big games with a rushing attack and keep at it until the other team stops you more than once. Nothing is better at keeping the other guys on their heels than the OL exploding off the ball and going right after them. This is especially important in big games when veteran guys are really pumped up, or when you have a lot of inexperienced players bursting with adrenylin. The passing game is more sophisticated and requires more timing. Rushing is basically pin back your ears and go hard. It gives the guys a chance to blow off nerves and get into the flow.

When the Packers came out throwing Sunday I almost shit my pants. That was McCarthy's error and it was a huge one. If they were gonna come out throwing instead of rushing, they should have deferred and put the defense on the field first. Let the defense give time for the guys to shake out the butterflies.

And the thing about getting back on your heels, once your on them, everything starts going bad, just like it did for the Packers at the start of th game. We gave Arizona an opening and they took it. Got us on our heels and it took a whole half before we got off of them.

2. On defense, I'm a proponent of being aggressive right from the start. Get the guys on the DL moving forward and the LB's moving forward as well. Yes, maybe even start off with a blitz or two to press the issue. Plus, no matter what the strategy, the defensive players have to be schooled to hit somebody hard at the start of the game. No finesse crap and loop-de-loops on the DL. Just straight ahead bull rushes. Knock the OL back on their heels. Take it to the blocking backs and nail the receivers on the LOS. Do it initially even if you're not planning to do it all game long.

The problem with the Packers Sunday was they weren't emotionally prepared for the Cards' intensity and got surprised and knocked back on their heels.

The other problem that cost them the game was they got suckered into a passing shootout when our rushing game was never stopped and hardly utilized. Edgar Bennett and his guys are the real, no-nonsense, no-fumble strength of this team and they were neglected and forgotten. Used right, they could have taken the ball out of Warner's hands, eliminated the turnovers by receivers and created a huge differential in time of possession and field position.

But I'm tired of beating this dead horse. McCarthy doesn't get it. He played like it was the end of the world two minutes into the game.

And the guys in this forum? Hell, they'd crucify me if I brought up the subject of rushing again. :) :) :)

Oh well. We're a passing team... Live by the sword. Die by the sword.

[denverYooper]

Arizona blitzed a lot and gave up 45 points. That generally won't win a game unless the other team gives up 51 :(.

[pbmax]

The problem with the Packers Sunday was they weren't emotionally prepared for the Cards' intensity and got surprised and knocked back on their heels.
Given a choice between an INT on the first play then a fumble on the Packers fourth offensive play, two field position and scoring gifts plus a blown coverage or two on their first three scoring drives or preparation, I don't think emotionally prepared for opponent's intensity comes into play.

But in this case I do agree about the run being underused. Given two turnovers (and the fact that one was almost predictably a receiver), the running game would have likely kept field position more balanced.

[Cheesehead Craig]

I agree on the intensity pb. To me, this is an overused term. How was the AZ D intense exactly? By giving up over 400 yds of offense and 45 pts?

The AZ offense can explode like this at any time. Was it AZ intensity that caused players to run wide open? Did the WR just run a really intense pattern with all his might that caused him to be completely uncovered? Or was it more of good scouting combined with lack of defensive adjustments perhaps?

[pbmax]

2. On defense, I'm a proponent of being aggressive right from the start. Get the guys on the DL moving forward and the LB's moving forward as well. Yes, maybe even start off with a blitz or two to press the issue. Plus, no matter what the strategy, the defensive players have to be schooled to hit somebody hard at the start of the game. No finesse crap and loop-de-loops on the DL. Just straight ahead bull rushes. Knock the OL back on their heels. Take it to the blocking backs and nail the receivers on the LOS. Do it initially even if you're not planning to do it all game long.
The problem with this strategy is that our front four pass rushers were not getting home on Warner on regular passing downs. I don't any strategy based on them getting home fast would have worked unless there was coverage early.

The only loophole I see is blitzing from the non-Matthews side when they kept a back in to chip. It guarantees you win the numbers game on the defense's left and makes it obvious who the checkdown would be (the back or TE chipping CMIII). But I am unaware if the defense can successfully predict a chip block. Perhaps if the TE is covering Matthews, but I think it would be hard to read a RB.