Comments for Covering the Blitz at http://www.18to88.com , comment 1 to 5 out of 5 comments http://www.18to88.com Wed, 08 Feb 2012 07:02:57 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.3 http://www.18to88.com/2009-archives/september/covering-the-blitz.html#comment-959 How about that special teams play by Mr. Justin "Ice Cold" Snow. Man belongs in that ring of honor. - Derek Tue, 15 Sep 2009 20:21:29 +0100 http://www.18to88.com/2009-archives/september/covering-the-blitz.html#comment-921 Rivers was NOT "frastrated" (ugh) and our DL probably will never be "dong" the job. (sigh) - Bob M Mon, 14 Sep 2009 20:47:21 +0100 http://www.18to88.com/2009-archives/september/covering-the-blitz.html#comment-920 But not on the 3rd and ten issue--sometimes, and some guys, you need to severly limit the time they have to work with. Or just rush two and flood the zones with guys. I just saw it with Rivers tonight--when Oakland blitzed or got pressure with four, Philly boy was ineffective and so frastrated, his mouth earned him a 15 yd penalty. But when the Oakland D dropped back and just rushed four, (true, they dropped their LBs way too far back), Phil had just enough time to bleed them to death and pull out the victory. Moral of the story (for me anyway), blitzing on 3rd and 10 can work, especially if you have a QB and receivers who cannot spread out over the whole field (say a QB like Russell who cannot throw deep accurately or a noodle-armed guy who cannot throw it more than 25 yards). If it's unexpected (because it's done so rarely) it can work just fine. And even blitzing twice as much as last year, as you point out, is still relatively infrequent. If well timed, 3-4 more blitzes a game should suffice. If our DL is dong the job, probably no need unless we want to drive a nail in somebody's coffin on a 3rd and 15 or 1st down deep in enemy territory. - Bob M Mon, 14 Sep 2009 20:45:18 +0100 http://www.18to88.com/2009-archives/september/covering-the-blitz.html#comment-908 Exactly. On 3rd and 10, there's no point in blitzing, but I'm cool with it on other downs and deep in the red zone. I just don't want to see a blitz when the team is already in position to make a stop. - DZ Mon, 14 Sep 2009 10:30:48 +0100 http://www.18to88.com/2009-archives/september/covering-the-blitz.html#comment-907 We do need to blitz more, just not too much more. I think the most appropriate time to blitz is on short yardage situations. It would allow our corners to jump those short routes and teams cant go deep since they will need time for their receivers to get deep. It would also help us against the run. - Robert I. Mon, 14 Sep 2009 10:27:53 +0100