If you are playing a 3-4 defense with lots of blitzing, you almost have to have zone coverage. If you play strictly man to man converage, there they will be able to pick a defense apart when you have extra people blitzing.
"RaiderPride" wrote:
A very wise and sophisticated observation.... Indeed.
I never even considerd that aspect.
Well done Bigby!
"Bigbyfan" wrote:
I disagree.... if your blitzing a lot of guys.... say only 4 or 5 guys covering you have play man to man.... (because there isn't enough to play much zone)
As far as picking apart a defense in man to man coverage that doesn't have a lot to do with blitzing or not... it has to do with how good of coverage and how good are the throws are........
Just look at the Colts and Saints games from last year.... both man to man... Packers killed Manning.... and Brees killed the Packers in those games.... the difference is the Packers were able to get pressure on Manning and not enough on Brees.
Heck sometimes when the Steelers blitz a lot of guys they leave their DBs one on one....
The thing is how good are those CBs? The Steelers CBs are the weak part of their defense (not that they're that bad... more like the rest are that good). With Woodson, Harris and Williams the Packers should be able to play man to man if they want.
I agree with Harris that zone is easier than man (well at least for (making up a number) 98% of guys). I think Harris is in that 2% (again made up number) where they're better in man to man than they are zone. So I wouldn't mind if they kept him in man to man...
But if one person messes up the offense can get a big play in man to man... but if you have the talent to do it (which the Packers do) it frees a guy or two that could cover a zone, watch the QB or could blitz.