Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

TMQ Praises Campbell, Warns Against Blitzing


stwasm

Recommended Posts

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=easterbrook/061128

Stop Me Before I Blitz Again! Carolina led 13-10 and had the Redskins, quarterbacked by Jason Campbell in his second career start, facing third-and-8 on their 34 with about four minutes remaining. Since the average NFL play gains about 5 yards, all the Cats had to do was play straight defense and the odds favored a stop. Instead, it's a blitz! The result was a 66-yard, game-winning pass to Chris Cooley.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=easterbrook/061128

Stop Me Before I Blitz Again! Carolina led 13-10 and had the Redskins, quarterbacked by Jason Campbell in his second career start, facing third-and-8 on their 34 with about four minutes remaining. Since the average NFL play gains about 5 yards, all the Cats had to do was play straight defense and the odds favored a stop. Instead, it's a blitz! The result was a 66-yard, game-winning pass to Chris Cooley.

Nice find, stwasm!

Just looking at JC, it's hard to believe that he's only played in 2 NFL games. He looks like a cool, composed veteran out there.

Too bad he didn't mention that Jason called that play himself!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, blitzing on obvious passing downs doesn't make any sense, especially against a guy making his second start. :rolleyes:

I actually remember a game against the Cleveland Browns where the Skins had them at third-and-34. Washington blitzed, the Browns called a screen and ended up picking up the first down. :doh: :doh: :doh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The article also gives props to the Redskins' cheerleaders in a couple of places:

Talking about USC's squad, he says "USC claims. Innovative choreography? Their performance was nothing close to the complex hip-hop done by the Washington, Philadelphia and Tampa NFL cheerleaders, among other squads. . ."

Also, below a nice pic of one of the First Ladies of Football:

"Kickoff temperature 60 degrees, the Redskins' cheerleaders wore bikini-like outfits. Do you even need to ask who won the game?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I actually remember a game against the Cleveland Browns where the Skins had them at third-and-34. Washington blitzed, the Browns called a screen and ended up picking up the first down. :doh: :doh: :doh:

Oh, I'm not saying blitzes can't be burned. But to suggest it's bad policy to blitz on 3rd and 8 is sheer idiocy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=easterbrook/061128

Stop Me Before I Blitz Again! Carolina led 13-10 and had the Redskins, quarterbacked by Jason Campbell in his second career start, facing third-and-8 on their 34 with about four minutes remaining. Since the average NFL play gains about 5 yards, all the Cats had to do was play straight defense and the odds favored a stop. Instead, it's a blitz! The result was a 66-yard, game-winning pass to Chris Cooley.

You mean like GW calling blitzes all season long on third down, on obvious passing downs?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TMQ has this crusade against blitzing on third and long that I will never, ever understand. He has somehow reached the conclusion that, if you don't blitz, the opposing team will, more often than not, only gain the "average" amount of yards for an NFL pass play. Nevermind that the NFL average is affected by situation, down, distance, field position, play call, score, various quarterbacks, and so on. It's a ludicrous argument.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jaworski's write up of Campbell's performance in the Tampa game pointed out that Campbell failed to make a hot read on a safety blitz and check down to Randle El, so it's not like Jason's immune from rookie foibles under pressure.

I'm just sort of taking it all in and enjoying the ride. He made a great play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, below a nice pic of one of the First Ladies of Football:

"Kickoff temperature 60 degrees, the Redskins' cheerleaders wore bikini-like outfits. Do you even need to ask who won the game?"

That was dearest Brittany getting some face time on the Tuesday Morning Quarterback column. Here's a better pic of her:

Stewart-Brittany072706.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He's been going on this anti-blitz thing for a while. It's quite ridiculous. So every week he goes and finds a few plays where teams get burnt when they blitz and uses it as evidence that the blitz is always a bad call. The only thing he ever proves is that he's got 20/20 hindsight.

The guy only barely grasps football.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, blitzing on obvious passing downs doesn't make any sense, especially against a guy making his second start. :rolleyes:

Of course it's a good idea. Teams that have faced us had the luxury of knowing that they weren't going to get burned by blitzing us. The only difference is that now we have have a qb who, at the very least, is capable of making opponents pay the price for blitzing. If Campbell is able to keep this up, it may make things easier for our rbs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's not exactly "praise" for Campbell there...more like finding fault in Carolina's defensive playcalling.

Exactly. If he had said a good defense predictably blitzed in an obvious passing situation and our young QB showed enough poise to stand in the pocket and deliver a perfect strike to his TE, hitting him in stride for a TD, then I might consider sifting through Easterbrook's work for that small fraction of his column that isn't self-indulgent gobledygook ... but lambasting the defense for blitzing? Does he even WATCH football?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He's been going on this anti-blitz thing for a while. It's quite ridiculous. So every week he goes and finds a few plays where teams get burnt when they blitz and uses it as evidence that the blitz is always a bad call. The only thing he ever proves is that he's got 20/20 hindsight.

The guy only barely grasps football.

He doesn't only barely grasp football. He understands it quite a bit. He just challenges conventional wisdom - which makes a lot of people uncomfortable.

Check out the 2006 Pro Football Prospectus. There is a section in the book about Easterbrook's arguments. They charted every play in the NFL and broke them down by down and distance, and counted the number of rushers, and charted the results. They found that in 3rd and long (7 yards +), sending 3 pass rushers stopped the offense 78% of the time. Sending 7 rushers stopped the offense only 70% of the time. Sending 4, 5, or 6 rushers stopped the offense 72, 73, and 77% of the time, respectively. So, the most effective way to stop a team from gaining a first down on 3rd and 7 or more was to send three rushers. That's not theory or conjecture, that is actual fact. Sending 7 or more rushers was begging the opposing team to get the first.

So, it looks like his grasp isn't so bare, after all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He doesn't only barely grasp football. He understands it quite a bit. He just challenges conventional wisdom - which makes a lot of people uncomfortable.

Check out the 2006 Pro Football Prospectus. There is a section in the book about Easterbrook's arguments. They charted every play in the NFL and broke them down by down and distance, and counted the number of rushers, and charted the results. They found that in 3rd and long (7 yards +), sending 3 pass rushers stopped the offense 78% of the time. Sending 7 rushers stopped the offense only 70% of the time. Sending 4, 5, or 6 rushers stopped the offense 72, 73, and 77% of the time, respectively. So, the most effective way to stop a team from gaining a first down on 3rd and 7 or more was to send three rushers. That's not theory or conjecture, that is actual fact. Sending 7 or more rushers was begging the opposing team to get the first.

So, it looks like his grasp isn't so bare, after all.

With all due respect, what Easterbrook is suggesting is akin to seeing that a RB averages 3.5 yards a carry and suggesting that giving him the ball 4 times in a row will give you the best chance to gain a first down.

Because a one year sampling shows that rushing 3 bears out a 1% better chance of stopping a play than rushing 6, rushing 6 is a just plain bad idea? That's nuts.

Statisitics are helpful, but only when analyzed with a modicum of common sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I actually remember a game against the Cleveland Browns where the Skins had them at third-and-34. Washington blitzed, the Browns called a screen and ended up picking up the first down. :doh: :doh: :doh:

Yes, but I remember several 3rd downs that we've been blitzed and we didn't even get off a pass.

It's typically a pretty good bet.

I'm glad that Campbell beat it though!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...