Jeremy Thompson

[Waldo]

No personnel ever does until brought onboard with a zone blitz 3-4 team. There is no such thing as a zone blitz 3-4 OLB at the college level, the few teams that do run 3-4's zone don't run pro style zone blitz systems. Almost every 3-4 OLB was at one time a DE. Almost every 3-4 DE was at one time a 4-3 UT. Almost every NT was at one time a 1-tech 4-3 DT. Thompson and Kampman actually have more LB experience than most 3-4 OLB's did when they began OLB training. These guys aren't asked to be CB's. They drop back to a point and watch the QB, taking away specific routes that the QB would throw in reaction to the blitz and are there to make an open field tackles if the QB goes to the back in the flats. When guys turn it upfield and run deeper routes, the S's and ILB's do the covering.

When was the last time you read a scouting report on a DT/DE what said he was good in coverage; having fluid hips and good ball skills and hands. Jeremy Thompson is one of the only DE scouting reports that I've ever read that said the player had a good amount of coverage experience.

Just because we haven't asked guys to drop into shallow zones.....doesn't mean that they can't. Kamp actually dropped into coverage quite a bit in preseason and in the first quarter of the season.

[mraynrand]

Waldo,

Have you watched Pittsburgh much? It seems like they shift all the time along the Dline prior to the snap. What is up with that? Is it all show(just trying to confuse the O-line's decision on who to block) and/or are they shifting to pick different gaps or ???

[Joemailman]

When the Packers drafted Thompson, they mentioned that they felt his pass rush skills were underrated because he was often asked to drop into coverage. If anyone on the defense is going to come out of nowhere to excel next season, it's probably him. We'll have to see if Kampman can drop effectively, but I'll just say he's had a great career by proving wrong people who said he lacked the athletic ability to be an outstanding player.

I wonder more about Al Harris. He'll be asked to play more zone, and his problems playing zone are well documented. It will be interesting to see what Capers comes up with.

[Waldo]

They shift to create confusion and because they can. By moving the lineman they are distracting the OL, QB, and RB from seeing other shifts and movements that would give away their blitz. Sanders occasionally shifted guys, but he did it well before the snap (and generally with the backups) in the initial stance, for some reason he didn't coach the guys to make the shift once in their stance with the offense at the line, nor the linebackers to menace the line and taunt blitzes. Vanilla Bob just had no concept of defensive aggression and the positive effect (for the defense) it has on the offense.

[Waldo]

When the Packers drafted Thompson, they mentioned that they felt his pass rush skills were underrated because he was often asked to drop into coverage. If anyone on the defense is going to come out of nowhere to excel next season, it's probably him. We'll have to see if Kampman can drop effectively, but I'll just say he's had a great career by proving wrong people who said he lacked the athletic ability to be an outstanding player.

I wonder more about Al Harris. He'll be asked to play more zone, and his problems playing zone are well documented. It will be interesting to see what Capers comes up with.

Having a set it and forget it CB to dedicate to the opponents top WR is never a bad thing. There is no reason to play him in zone if he take take away one of the opponents top weapons.

[rbaloha1]

Just because we haven't asked guys to drop into shallow zones.....doesn't mean that they can't. Kamp actually dropped into coverage quite a bit in preseason and in the first quarter of the season.

Kampy dropped back a few times and looked stiff. Kampy is powerful and explosive moving forward. Moving sideways is not a strength.

Yes, we have not asked players to drop back into coverage but it doesn't mean they can. Its better to draft or bring in free agents that proven they can.

Yes the majority of IA teams run 4-3 schemes with zone blitzes and 3-4 properties.

For example Pete Carroll (USC) (Read Senior Bowl blog comments about his lbs and ability to play the 3-4), Nick Saban (Alabama), Greg Mackmakin (Hawaii, Previously defense coordinator for the Seattle Seahawks and National Champions U of Miami. Coached Ray Lewis).

It makes no sense to switch to a 3-4 unless one zone blitzes. The zone blitz is critical for the success of a 3-4

[Lurker64]

It makes no sense to switch to a 3-4 unless one zone blitzes. The zone blitz is critical for the success of a 3-4

I think this sentence indicates that either you fail to really understand either "the thesis of the 3-4 defense" or "the zone blitz".

The thesis of the 3-4 defense is that it allows you a lot of flexibility in terms of pre-snap motion and alignment. You can send pressure from a lot of different looks and formations, thereby (hopefully) confusing the QB. It gives you excellent flexibility and access to a number of dynamic attacks, at the expense of "vulnerability to the rush" (in theory). There's also an economic reason for the 3-4; since it's not the dominant defense in the league, 3-4 personnel are somewhat cheaper in terms of money and draft picks. But really, you run the 3-4 because you intend to confuse the opposing OL in terms of their blocking assignments and confuse the opposing QB in terms of what's coming and what's going to be there.

The zone blitz is just one of the techniques that you use to generate confusion and pressure, it's not the be-all and end-all, it's just a tool in your arsenal. It has the advantage of mucking up blocking schemes because OL expect to be blocking DL, and it doesn't decrease the number of people in coverage. The disadvantage though, is that it requires defensive linemen to have to cover, and all of then, to a man, are bad at it. In theory, this isn't a problem, since if the blitzers are effective at creating the desired pressure, all the covering DL really has to do is "be a wrong colored jersey in the vicinity of the receiver" and the QB (who is going through his progression in a hurry) will snap to a different receiver, hopefully running out of time. An effective zone blitz executed by the DL doesn't usually require the lineman to cover more than about 5 yards downfield, which shouldn't be a problem.

Also, the zone blitz is not synonymous with the 3-4. Many 4-3 teams do it, particularly the Spagnulo defense in New York, and the Johnson defense in Philadelphia. Yes, Michael Strahan looked silly and unnatural dropping into coverage in the superbowl last year, but Michael Strahan generally looks silly and Tom Brady ended up on his back anyway. I've seen the Vikings run a zone blitz with Fat Pat lumbering back into coverage. "My linemen can't cover" is never a reason that teams elect not to zone blitz, because inherently "having a DL who's no good in coverage just standing there" is going to result in better coverage than "having nobody standing there" with a conventional blitz.

What do you do if you're a 3-4 team that can't zone blitz? You blitz in a different way. It only makes sense to use a defensive technique, set, or strategy insofar as it actually works. It does, however, make no sense to adapt to the 3-4 if you can't blitz at all, but a lot of blitzing is technique, and can be taught. Still, I don't see us zone blitzing much, not because our DL can't cover (none of them can) but because our CBs are much, much better at man coverage than they are at zone. Zone blitzing is inherently more conservative than blitzing, and having corners that you can leave on an island means you don't have to be as conservative.