Will Diaco Dial Up Some Blitzes This Year!?

[TheTurningPoint]

I have a feeling there will be more time dedicated to getting teams into a 3rd and long situation. With out schedule Diaco isnt going to get away with blitzing going against 3 of the top 5 heisman contenders. Blitzing Jones/Barkley isnt going to be anything they havent seen, and blitzing Denard is a fine line bc if you dont win that play you're going to lose big. I cant see him changing his system bc its working.

 

[BurningRiver]

I'm really looking forward to seeing what a front of Ishaq-Tuitt-Day-Shembo could do on 3rd and long. That could be our version of the Giants' NASCAR package from last season, and ideally that would be successful enough that we wouldn't have to blitz too much on obvious passing downs.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

A blitz is not defined by bringing more guys than they have to block. I have coached for many years and have never heard it defined this way. A blitz is defined any time you take a linebacker or defensive back out of the normal position to attack the qb/backfield. It can be one player or many.
A blitz for a single LB or DB can also be defined when it is predetermined that they attack a specified area of the line of scrimmage before the snap of the ball. This limits or negates at most time player reading their keys. This can be where run blitzes come into place.

From wikipedia:

There is some confusion among average fans as to what constitutes a blitz. Blitz is colloquially used to describe any time a linebacker or defensive back crosses the line of scrimmage, when in actuality, a blitz is defined as the defense rushing the quarterback with more men than the offense has accounted for and can block. For example, when the defense rushes 5 men against the offense's 5 blockers, the defensive attack is not a blitz. For the defensive scheme to be a blitz in this instance, the defense would have to rush 6 to the offense's 5.

Unfortunately, there's no citation for that bit of the article, but I've definitely read that elsewhere as well.

Edit: OMM is completely right. My point was that ND rushed a LB frequently last season, and yet casual fans still feel like we practically never blitzed. They're technically right, but the 3-4 isn't designed around that sort of risk-taking aggression.

 

[micks60]

3-4 is designed to send one guy almost every play. That is what creates the confusion. Not that you are sending on a pass blotz but a run blitz. They are different. Run blitz is more gap oriented where a pas blitz your ears are pinned back with less gap responsibility.

 

[Chris P. Bacon]

I think many ND fans make too much of what ND did in the 1st half against FSU. FSU was starting 4 true freshman on the O-line in that game, ND should have dominated. The fact that they let a team that young on the O-line comeback and beat them was as embarrassing as the Michigan game.

It would be great if ND could be more aggressive and blitz more, but I don't think they have good enough talent in the secondary to get away with it consistently.

My thought, because we are so young and don't have the talent in the 2ndary, we NEED to blitz more. This leaves less time for the DB's to have to stay on and cover the WR's. The less pressure we put on the opposing QB, the more time the QB and his WR to get open. We need to add more pressure then we did last year, this will force the QB to make the wrong decision on his throws and miscommunications between the WR and QB. I wouldn't say we blitz every down, but I would like a 60/40 in blitzs to help with our DB's.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

I guess I don't understand this conversation. It is my understanding that ND plays 2-gap defensively about 40 plays per game.

 

[Black Irish]

My thought, because we are so young and don't have the talent in the 2ndary, we NEED to blitz more. This leaves less time for the DB's to have to stay on and cover the WR's. The less pressure we put on the opposing QB, the more time the QB and his WR to get open. We need to add more pressure then we did last year, this will force the QB to make the wrong decision on his throws and miscommunications between the WR and QB. I wouldn't say we blitz every down, but I would like a 60/40 in blitzs to help with our DB's.

This is what I was getting at. Taking DBs out of coverage to blitz would be crazy. But rushing LBs in to hurry a QB is something I would like to see more. IIRC, our LBs weren't great at coverage last season, so maybe having them in the QBs face all day will work out better. Except against Denard; contain him, let him make bad throws, and hope our corners turn their heads around this time.

 

[Old Man Mike]

Bog: Micks, Whiskey, TP, and I deliberately structured this thread to confuse you. We reasoned that you were becoming too rational, and needed some BOGgling of the mind to release that pent up creativity. It's all part of JPham's philosophy of helping out one's brothers on the IE team.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

My thought, because we are so young and don't have the talent in the 2ndary, we NEED to blitz more. This leaves less time for the DB's to have to stay on and cover the WR's. The less pressure we put on the opposing QB, the more time the QB and his WR to get open. We need to add more pressure then we did last year, this will force the QB to make the wrong decision on his throws and miscommunications between the WR and QB. I wouldn't say we blitz every down, but I would like a 60/40 in blitzs to help with our DB's.

This is what I was getting at. Taking DBs out of coverage to blitz would be crazy. But rushing LBs in to hurry a QB is something I would like to see more. IIRC, our LBs weren't great at coverage last season, so maybe having them in the QBs face all day will work out better. Except against Denard; contain him, let him make bad throws, and hope our corners turn their heads around this time.

I agree with this, to an extent. We typically rushed 5 and dropped 6 last year on passing downs, but that wasn't sufficient to reliably pressure opposing QBs. Our 2011 defense ranked 4th against the run and 13th for standard down efficiency, but they only managed 31st against the pass and 29th on passing downs.

Improved OLB play would go a long way toward improving those stats, but if that's not forthcoming, sending 2 LBs may make more sense on passing downs. Though that's not without risk, since that extra rushing LB is one less player we have defending an underneath zone. That would make it easier for opposing offenses to burn us on the Curl, Flat, etc.

 

[micks60]

I agree with this, to an extent. We typically rushed 5 and dropped 6 last year on passing downs, but that wasn't sufficient to reliably pressure opposing QBs. Our 2011 defense ranked 4th against the run and 13th for standard down efficiency, but they only managed 31st against the pass and 29th on passing downs.

Improved OLB play would go a long way toward improving those stats, but if that's not forthcoming, sending 2 LBs may make more sense on passing downs. Though that's not without risk, since that extra rushing LB is one less player we have defending an underneath zone. That would make it easier for opposing offenses to burn us on the Curl, Flat, etc.

Poor cornerback play on one side hurt ND alot too. Not as much underneath was given up. It was more vertical routes.

 

[notredomer23]

Against UM I want a defense that looks like this. Front five of ishaq tuitt nix klm and shembo. Have manti as the backer. And then have 3 safeties and two corners. Use slaughter in the hybrid linebacker/safety role on one side of the field manti on the other.

I know that is pretty unethical and not going to happen, but I think that's a pretty deadly defensive formation at least for first and second down.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

Poor cornerback play on one side hurt ND alot too. Not as much underneath was given up. It was more vertical routes.

Aside from the 4th quarter melt-down against scUM, I don't recall our secondary giving up many explosive vertical plays. Most of our opponents' 3rd down conversions seemed to be on a Curl or an Out route because our CBs were giving the opposing WRs such a large cushion.

 

[FLDomer]

Aside from the 4th quarter melt-down against scUM, I don't recall our secondary giving up many explosive vertical plays. Most of our opponents' 3rd down conversions seemed to be on a Curl or an Out route because our CBs were giving the opposing WRs such a large cushion.

Except the Wheel Route to Gallon

 

[Black Irish]

Aside from the 4th quarter melt-down against scUM, I don't recall our secondary giving up many explosive vertical plays. Most of our opponents' 3rd down conversions seemed to be on a Curl or an Out route because our CBs were giving the opposing WRs such a large cushion.

True. Getting beat up on short pass plays was a major defensive weakness for several seasons. ND seemed to improve on it last year, but it started becoming a problem again as the season went on. I know plenty of other posters were complaining about the fat cushion our corners were giving. We'll see how Diaco deals with that.

 

[micks60]

Except the Wheel Route to Gallon

That was a junior high mistake by the corner. Absolutely awful and unacceptable.

 

[micks60]

Against UM I want a defense that looks like this. Front five of ishaq tuitt nix klm and shembo. Have manti as the backer. And then have 3 safeties and two corners. Use slaughter in the hybrid linebacker/safety role on one side of the field manti on the other.

I know that is pretty unethical and not going to happen, but I think that's a pretty deadly defensive formation at least for first and second down.

Lol. That would get ugly quick. Really quick.