"We didn't blitz that much"--Bill Parcells

[Screw The Hall]

He will be pushing forward. No play is ever designed for the DE to just squat down and play contain. He may not be rushing forward as strongly as possible, but he pushing forward and occupying a blocker.

Ok. Try and come up with another one that doesn't fit my definition.

I can't draw as pretty as Superpunk but dont rush the outside guy and bring the other end he has in containment.

The end, the NT, and the ILB have created a 3 on 2 advantage inside and that's a blitz by the inside backer.

 

[superpunk]

He is pushing forward and engaging blocker. This counts as the fifth man under my definition. Please, keep trying to "bust" my definition.

:shootme:

Nevermind.:laugh1:

 

[theogt]

I can't draw as pretty as Superpunk but dont rush the outside guy and bring the other end he has in containment.

The end, the NT, and the ILB have created a 3 on 2 advantage inside and that's a blitz by the inside backer.

You're going to have to draw it because I'm not following you.

 

[theogt]

:shootme:

Nevermind.:laugh1:

:mchammer:

 

[NorthTexan95]

I'm glad you've designated yourself as the supreme authority ont his subject.

Irrelevant to the conversation. When charting a game anyone can quantify the number of times that a team blitzes. How do they do this? By the definition that's been given.

I can't designate myself as supreme authority ... you've already designated yourself. As a fan you can define blitzing however you wish but from a coaching standpoint your definition is worthless.

No coach cares about the definition of the blitz or how to "quantify" how many times a team blitzes. They care about which specific player blitzes and what situations do they use the blitz.

 

[Vintage]

About those cupcakes.....were they chocolate? I am a sucker for chocolate...

 

[theogt]

I can't designate myself as supreme authority ... you've already designated yourself. As a fan you can define blitzing however you wish but from a coaching standpoint your definition is worthless.

I guess it's worthless then if you say so, Mr. Supereme Authority. All I've done is used logic to justify my position. You come here and simply say, "I was a coach, so I am right, but you are merely a fan so your position is worthless."

No coach cares about the definition of the blitz or how to "quantify" how many times a team blitzes. They care about which specific player blitzes and what situations do they use the blitz.

Great. This has been very helpful to this discussion. Now can we get back to defining a blitz?

 

[Screw The Hall]

You're going to have to draw it because I'm not following you.

:laugh2: ... I'm afraid my drawing would confuse you and everyone else more than my typing.

Basically I'm just saying if you bring the 3 down lineman and the inside backer. That creates a mismatch on the interior ... and the ILB is blitzing.

The OLB would act like the 4th passrusher until the last second and then back off at the snap. The ILB would do the opposite coming on the blitz at the last moment ideally confusing the blocking assignment.

That's four total passrushers.

 

[superpunk]

About those cupcakes.....were they chocolate? I am a sucker for chocolate...

Did you bring the Romo-Aid? We can make Romo-Aid Pops.

Those were the days. Fill ice trays with Kool aid and put sticks in it. Awesome.

 

[Vintage]

Did you bring the Romo-Aid? We can make Romo-Aid Pops.

Those were the days. Fill ice trays with Kool aid and put sticks in it. Awesome.

What do you mean "were?"

And of course, I brought the Romo-Aid. Duh. Who travels without Moxie anymore? Its so 20th century.

 

[theogt]

:laugh2: ... I'm afraid my drawing would confuse you and everyone else more than my typing.

Basically I'm just saying if you bring the 3 down lineman and the inside backer. That creates a mismatch on the interior ... and the ILB is blitzing.

The OLB would act like the 4th passrusher until the last second and then back off at the snap. The ILB would do the opposite coming on the blitz at the last moment ideally confusing the blocking assignment.

That's four total passrushers.

I see what you're saying. Basically it's 3 linemen and an ILB rushing. Winicki and I discussed this play earlier. Here we reach an impasse. Some may consider it a blitz. Others won't consider it a blitz.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

This is not a blitz? Excuse the crappy paint job.

http://img125.*************/img125/3336/blitzum7.png

They can't block all 4.

Also, you don't need 5 players to overload a gap. You really only need three. If the line doesn't recognize what's happening, or realizes too late, the QB is toast.

I would agree that is a blitz even though there are only 4 men rushing the passer. Having the d-lineman not rush the passer and having an ILB rush the passer creates the blitz package.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

I see what you're saying. Basically it's 3 linemen and an ILB rushing. Winicki and I discussed this play earlier. Here we reach an impasse. Some may consider it a blitz. Others won't consider it a blitz.

This is true.

 

[Screw The Hall]

I see what you're saying. Basically it's 3 linemen and an ILB rushing. Winicki and I discussed this play earlier. Here we reach an impasse. Some may consider it a blitz. Others won't consider it a blitz.

OK fair enough ... good debating with ya I'm out for a bite.

Maybe one of those cupcakes that's being talked about so much around here.

 

[theogt]

I would agree that is a blitz even though there are only 4 men rushing the passer. Having the d-lineman not rush the passer and having an ILB rush the passer creates the blitz package.

The problem is, defining whether the LDE is rushing the passer or not. It's virtually impossible to do. Even if he is "playing contain" he will be pushing forward and engaging a blocker.

 

[superpunk]

I would agree that is a blitz even though there are only 4 men rushing the passer. Having the d-lineman not rush the passer and having an ILB rush the passer creates the blitz package.

*sigh*

Sadly, you're wrong. ogt forced my d-lineman to rush the passer. He didn't want to, and I told him not to, but that dirty bastid offered him Romo-pops.

And noone can refuse Romo-pops.

 

[NorthTexan95]

I guess it's worthless then if you say so, Mr. Supereme Authority. All I've done is used logic to justify my position. You come here and simply say, "I was a coach, so I am right, but you are merely a fan so your position is worthless."

Great. This has been very helpful to this discussion. Now can we get back to defining a blitz?

But you're not trying to define a "blitz". You came up with your own and shoot down anybody you disagrees.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

The problem is, defining whether the LDE is rushing the passer or not. It's virtually impossible to do. Even if he is "playing contain" he will be pushing forward and engaging a blocker.

That's true. He may do that and yes that under your and my definition would be a "blitz". But say he does't? Say instead of stepping one inch forward he retreats a few step to cover a shallow zone... then what do we call it?

 

[theogt]

But you're not trying to define a "blitz". You came up with your own and shoot down anybody you disagrees.

I have taken every single post and used logic to either refute it or show how it fits my definition. I'm not "shoot[ing] down" anyone. If someone comes up with a play that doesn't fit my definition I will gladly attempt to alter the definition to make the new play fit. I've already altered the definition slightly in this thread. Why? Because someone came up with a great logical inconsitency. So far I haven't seen any in the new definition. Since I'm not an all-knowing coach, I guess I don't have the expertise to see the logical inconsistency though.

 

[theogt]

That's true. He may do that and yes that under your and my definition would be a "blitz". But say he does't? Say instead of stepping one inch forward he retreats a few step to cover a shallow zone... then what do we call it?

A zone blitz, which technically isn't a blitz.