eom
In the Starting Line-Up
- Joined
- Nov 13, 2007
- Messages
- 4,064
- Reaction score
- 1,487
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.keep the blitzing to a minimum
ohhhhh.....that must be what they all learned from that philly film that everybody keeps going on about.
BLUEPRINT!!
It wasn't as if the the line simply got run over, there's more to it than that. Before, teams were playing conservative in an attempt to merely limit the deep passes. Didn't work. Then teams were more successful at hindering the Patriots offense by using delay blitzes and zone blitzes. I believe the Eagles were the first team to try it extensively. The Ravens also had success with overloads. San Diego also used the zone blitz successfully.
Going crazy with the blitz is like suicide. What teams learned is that you have to keep at least one safety deep, get physical with Moss, mostly rush 4, keep the blitzing to a minimum
I still find it shocking how many people are misinterpreting this argument to make it more 'black and white' than it should be....
No one is saying the offense is a gimmick or that it will flop in 2009. Just that teams now know what not to do against NE. And like it or not, the Patriots benefited greatly from that in early 2007. Look, when teams break down film they figure out what works and what doesn't work - that was the main point of the article with Guinta. We saw teams playing too conservative, trying to limit the the deep pass. We saw teams get too aggressive with the blitz - only to get picked apart. Teams now know not to do that. Playing soft like the Jags did is certain doom. Going crazy with the blitz is like suicide. What teams learned is that you have to keep at least one safety deep, get physical with Moss, mostly rush 4, keep the blitzing to a minimum and make sure the flats are covered in case of the screen.
Not every team can execute this like the Giants did. Obviously. But even if lesser teams follow what the Giants did or some variation the results will at least be better than they would have otherwise been. It's a process of elimination.
You do realize that on a zone blitz you are only sending a 4 man rush, right? You are dropping someone off the D-line into coverage, and sending a LB. And when the Ravens overloaded one side, they were still only sending 4 most of the time.
It's not like a regular blitz where where you are coming at the QB, but at the expense of the coverage - which didn't out well for the Giants in wk 17.
LMAO, are you for real? You did a decent in depth analysis but then crucified the first person who dared to differ with you. And you ask WTF I'm talking about?wtf are you talking about?
eom said:maybe you're just confusing me --- is the secret key to beating the pats lots of overload blitzing like philly, or not blitzing like philly?
Deus, you've summarised my feelings of that game in one foul swoop.1 team beat the Patriots. To do it, it took terrible non-calls by officials, dropped interceptions by the Patriots DBs, Brady being hobbled from the previous game, Neal being lost to injury, Mankins playing the worst game of his NFL career, a fluke catch off of a player's helmet, and more.
That same Giants team that had figured it out so well had given up 30+ points in the previous encounter, when they had busted their ass trying to prevent 16-0 from happening.
The "blueprint" was an easy one: play the Patriots when they are hurt. Get ridiculously lucky. Have the officials err on your side. It's the same 'blueprint' the Colts had in the AFCCG the year before.
Ignoring the strength of opposing defenses and weather makes the "they caught up" argument look better, but it doesn't make it accurate.
I'm just trying to figure what it was that philly was doing that gave the giants all this film to study.
how many guys were they sending, and who were they?
did you read unoriginal's thread yet?
Did you read the article that I posted? That coach seems to focus way more on Baltimore and Cleveland than the Eagles; though he does indeed mention them.
BTW - 'Unoriginal thread,' huh?
WTF is the point of this thread?
I think you're missing the point there, dude.
you are the one who started this off by saying philly gave the nfl all this film on the pats, no doubt influenced by BSPN's omg blueprint!!!1
but just a few posts up you refer to aggressive blitzing and sending more than 4 as 'suicide'.
are you telling me the giants' superbowl defense was similar to what philly used?
what I am telling you is that philly didn't invent some special d to play the pats based on weeks of film study.
they play the d they like to play --- that's it.
baltimore's overload schemes?
that's what they do -- that's not weeks of film on the pats.
are you telling me the giants beat the pats in the superbowl because of all this overload blitzing?
what I am telling you is that the giants beat the pats at the LoS w/simple straight up man rushing from guys like justin tuck, who doesn't play in philly and baltimore.
where was all this film from philly and baltimore in week 14 when they smoked the steelers?
how about week 17 when they put up 38 on the clever giants?
how about a year later when they were ringing up 32 ppg w/cassel and the law firm?
one bad game at the end of the season is not a trend.
The facts in your first post, obviously, are wrong.
WTF is the point of this thread?