PDA

View Full Version : Blitz!


Kvnfaber
12-23-2009, 01:42 PM
Personal opinion here:

With the way that Aaron Rodgers was torching us, wouldn't it have been smart to bring an all out blitz once in a while? I know that we were blitzing, but with our secondary, we need to be bringing down the quarterback as much as possible. This is why i feel that we should be bringing even more blitzes.

1 sack against the worst pass protecting team in the NFL is unacceptable.

We NEED to be in Flacco's face all day Sunday, and even moreso we need to bring him down.

steelcity1974
12-23-2009, 02:04 PM
Amen brother. We blitzed the first couple drives of the GB game and got great pressure. Should have kept it up. If we are going to get torched for 80 yards when it's 3rd and 5, why sit back...may as well force the issue with a major blitz and not give that guy that much time to get down field.

smokin3000gt
12-23-2009, 02:08 PM
Personal opinion here:

With the way that Aaron Rodgers was torching us, wouldn't it have been smart to bring an all out blitz once in a while? I know that we were blitzing, but with our secondary, we need to be bringing down the quarterback as much as possible. This is why i feel that we should be bringing even more blitzes.

1 sack against the worst pass protecting team in the NFL is unacceptable.

We NEED to be in Flacco's face all day Sunday, and even moreso we need to bring him down.

It's a double edged sword. More guys blitzing could have caused a turn over or sack but it could have also caused the long bomb/TD/FG that would have suck our battle ship. I trust that Dick knows what he's doing far better than I and stand by his decisions as DC.

DoubleYoi
12-23-2009, 02:19 PM
It's a double edged sword. More guys blitzing could have caused a turn over or sack but it could have also caused the long bomb/TD/FG that would have suck our battle ship. I trust that Dick knows what he's doing far better than I and stand by his decisions as DC.

Just remember.....You can't blitz more without covering less. But then again, Sticky Dick LeBeau is the master of the zone blitz so disguising blitz/coverage packages is his specialty. I do think you'll see the Steelers bring the house against the Ravens more than they did against the Pack. The Ravens have a better run game than the Packers so it will be easier to sneak more men up in the box.

I definitely trust LeBeau's decision making, even if his game plan is limited because of the available personnel. I'm looking for Flacco to be staring at the sky at least four times this Sunday.

GoSlash27
12-23-2009, 02:25 PM
I gotta go with kvnfaber on this one. Our secondary isn't doing anything anyway. May as well blitz them. :noidea:
Just remember.....You can't blitz more without covering less.
Is that even possible?

Kvnfaber
12-23-2009, 02:32 PM
I have faith in Papa Lebeau, I just want to see Flacco on his back! The less time he has to throw the less chance they have to get open!

stlrtruck
12-23-2009, 02:54 PM
Just remember the immortal words:

live by the Blitz, DIE BY THE BLITZ

solardave
12-23-2009, 02:57 PM
I gotta go with kvnfaber on this one. Our secondary isn't doing anything anyway. May as well blitz them. :noidea:

Is that even possible?

Even if we don't get the sacks but keep Flacco from getting into a groove. Knock his ass around some.

pepsyman1
12-23-2009, 02:57 PM
What was very surprising with that game was that we started off the game using our inside linebackers doing the crossing blitz that we saw quite a bit last year out of Farrior and Foote and then later in the game we saw very little of that. The first two possessions that GB had the ball we kept putting Rogers on the deck, I would have at least like to have seen that happen a little in the 4th qtr.

Kvnfaber
12-23-2009, 03:02 PM
Just remember the immortal words:

Well, we've been dying by the pass for weeks!

GoSlash27
12-23-2009, 03:06 PM
Stlrtruck,
live by the Blitz, DIE BY THE BLITZ
Yeah, I remember. Problem is, at this rate we're liable to die by not blitzing.
In normal times, blitzing means losing coverage. But this ain't normal times. We don't have any coverage to lose anyway. It's either blitz and risk the big play, or don't blitz and risk the big play anyway.

Seems like a no-brainer to me. Go get Flacco and he'll be too busy trying to dislodge the football from his rectum to fry our secondary all day long.

Look at it this way: it's like that onside kick call. There's no downside to blitzing, and there might be an up side.

AllD
12-23-2009, 03:40 PM
If you do the math an all out blitz makes lots of sense. Blitz or no blitz, we will not pick the pass. Therefore, the receiver will either catch it or drop it. Maybe more drops or batting away if we drop coverage, but poor tackling after the catch leans more on blitzing.

revefsreleets
12-23-2009, 04:59 PM
I don't know, Rodgers is a really solid QB. Our DB's are susceptible.

I think I'd still rather keep 'em honest and make em drive and execute rather than jst give up one big play, which is BOUND to happen if we start sending the all-out heat....

Kvnfaber
12-24-2009, 02:46 AM
I don't mean every play Rev, I just mean dial up the all out blitz more often.

If Tomlin doesn't have faith in our fourth quarter defense to make a stop (who would?), then why wouldn't we. Also, I haven't seen the Steelers Defense this bad at forcing turnovers in a lonnng time.

steeltheone
12-24-2009, 03:17 AM
Everybody seems to forget our lack of pass rush and sacks. Not many dbs are good without that.

Rick5895
12-24-2009, 04:41 AM
What was very surprising with that game was that we started off the game using our inside linebackers doing the crossing blitz that we saw quite a bit last year out of Farrior and Foote and then later in the game we saw very little of that. The first two possessions that GB had the ball we kept putting Rogers on the deck, I would have at least like to have seen that happen a little in the 4th qtr.

They started picking up the inside blitz and as we have seen all year our OLB were getting "held" up quite frequently. The problem with the Blitz vs GB, if Rodgers gets the extra second, he has great deep threats, in Jennings and Driver. Against Baltimore the blitz may be more succesfull especially the zone blitz because the deep threat isn't there.

gmfibes
12-24-2009, 07:39 AM
Our secondary has been giving up big plays all season...they can't seem to cover anyone.......so I agree....might as well blitz the QB and hurry his passes.

stlrtruck
12-24-2009, 08:17 AM
In normal times, blitzing means losing coverage. But this ain't normal times. We don't have any coverage to lose anyway. It's either blitz and risk the big play, or don't blitz and risk the big play anyway.

Seems like a no-brainer to me. Go get Flacco and he'll be too busy trying to dislodge the football from his rectum to fry our secondary all day long.

Look at it this way: it's like that onside kick call. There's no downside to blitzing, and there might be an up side.

good points and I'd love to see them nail flacco to the turf Sunday afternoon.

And with the way the secondary has been playing, you're right there is no coverage to lose.

Crow-Magnon
12-24-2009, 08:24 AM
Baltimore's sack #'s are way down this year, because they are blitzing less than before. And the reason why should be familiar to you Steelers fans- lack of secondary play.

You start sending LB's and safeties in on blitzes and if your coverage is suspect, you can get hurt bad.....and fast! if your corners and safeties give up big plays. That's where the lack of Polomalu has really hurt the Steelers.

It's a double -edged sword. If the blitz works, it works great. But if you get burned by it, it can put the nail in the coffin.

Kvnfaber
12-24-2009, 12:02 PM
Farrior has shown that he has CLEARLY lost a step when trying to cover running backs and tight ends this year (nightmares of ray rice ensue).

The less time the QB has the ball the easier it is to cover!

steelpride12
12-24-2009, 03:10 PM
I think Lebeau is playing it smart right now. He realized that if the whole defense brings the blitzes they brought last season the good QB's and wide receivers will torch them more than they already are.
Think about, we are getting light up by the pass game and only bringing four pass rushers imagine if we brought a corner or two. Maybe with Troy in the line up they would bring a little more or an extra attacker, but for now I think its smarter to just keep them in coverage.

CPanther95
12-24-2009, 05:03 PM
We've been burned fairly regularly when we get too blitz happy. I'll trust LeBeau with the frequency.