Thread: Blitzing Oakland Raiders might have to apply brakes against Peyton Manning

ALAMEDA -- The Raiders were tied for the league lead in sacks through the first two games, in large part because of their penchant for blitzing any player, in any situation, from a variety of angles.

Five of their nine sacks came from blitzing defensive backs. At this rate, the Raiders will need only six games to surpass last season's sack total of 25.

Padding that total won't be easy against a Denver Broncos team that has allowed only three sacks on 88 pass plays and is led by a quarterback, Peyton Manning, who welcomes the blitz.

rest - http://www.mercurynews.com/raiders/c...brakes-against

alternate headline; "Blitzing Oakland Raiders might have to roll over and die against Peyton Manning"

As the saying goes, they that live by the blitz, shall die by the blitz. I don't know much about the Raiders' current rostor, but there have been many years in the past when we've had such a pathetic pass rush from our DL that they couldn't get within shouting distance of the QB without the aid of blitzing DBs. We could get away with it against some QB/offenses, but sooner or later, we'd have to pay the piper. This would usually happen in the playoffs &against QBs/offenses of the caliber of Manning/current Broncos' offenses.

I think it's smart coaching, really. They build and scheme that team out of desperation. Look at their QB's, they have little talent, little upside, little ability, so they go with the guy who has some sort of X-factor. Their defense is worthless, so they gamble just so they have a chance. I mean the Raiders are pound for pound one of the worst rosters in the league, but their coaches at least are giving SOME form of a chance. That is a ton of blitzes from the secondary.

Manning will ******* torch that ass, though.

Originally Posted by King87

I think it's smart coaching, really. They build and scheme that team out of desperation. Look at their QB's, they have little talent, little upside, little ability, so they go with the guy who has some sort of X-factor. Their defense is worthless, so they gamble just so they have a chance. I mean the Raiders are pound for pound one of the worst rosters in the league, but their coaches at least are giving SOME form of a chance. That is a ton of blitzes from the secondary.

Manning will ******* torch that ass, though.

I definitely agree that if something is working for you, then keep doing it. However, what are you going to do if it stops working, or doesn't work against your current opponent? What are you going to do then? This is when you pay the piper for being a one trick pony.

Originally Posted by FanInAZ

I definitely agree that if something is working for you, then keep doing it. However, what are you going to do if it stops working, or doesn't work against your current opponent? What are you going to do then?

they'll do what the faders do, of course. . . "just lose, baby!"

worst roster in the NFL. . .

I'm more concerned about that young RDE in the article vs. Chris Clark. If memory serves, Allen blitzed DBs often as our DC, but unless well disguised elite QBs usually spot that, make a hot read and burn the D for a big gain. Like FanInAZ says, that'll work against the Browns, but not playoff teams. We played Brady twice in 2011: How many sacks? We got Rodgers twice, but he got 6 TDs; hardly a good trade.

I'll have to hope the fact it's the Fade will make it easy, and let ya'll and ESPN tell me what happened; I'm not getting up four hours early to see most of a game that won't be over when I leave for work.

Originally Posted by Joel

I'm more concerned about that young RDE in the article vs. Chris Clark. If memory serves, Allen blitzed DBs often as our DC, but unless well disguised elite QBs usually spot that, make a hot read and burn the D for a big gain. Like FanInAZ says, that'll work against the Browns, but not playoff teams. We played Brady twice in 2011: How many sacks? We got Rodgers twice, but he got 6 TDs; hardly a good trade. I'll have to hope the fact it's the Fade will make it easy, and let ya'll and ESPN tell me what happened; I'm not getting up four hours early to see most of a game that won't be over when I leave for work.

How much did you pick Oakland to win by?

Just hope Broncos get through this game without another injury to the o line.

Originally Posted by SeeingRed

How much did you pick Oakland to win by?

We're not getting there with our front four, and Phillips not participating in practice doesn't suggest that will change soon. I prefer good coverage to blitzes, but top blockers, passers and receivers permit few coverage sacks; good offenses shred defenses that can't get pressure without blitzes. I don't think a second year defensive coachs rebuilding Raiders qualify, but that's why we won't be facing teams like that if/when we make the playoffs. Millers suspension will be over by then and hopefully he's enough to make the difference, but one man defenses are the reason double teams were invented.

Originally Posted by Joel

We're not getting there with our front four, and Phillips not participating in practice doesn't suggest that will change soon. I prefer good coverage to blitzes, but top blockers, passers and receivers permit few coverage sacks; good offenses shred defenses that can't get pressure without blitzes. I don't think a second year defensive coachs rebuilding Raiders qualify, but that's why we won't be facing teams like that if/when we make the playoffs. Millers suspension will be over by then and hopefully he's enough to make the difference, but one man defenses are the reason double teams were invented.

Is that why our defensive line is ranked first by football outsiders?

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/dl

Originally Posted by MOtorboat

Is that why our defensive line is ranked first by football outsiders?

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/dl

Yeah, against the RUN, and deservedly; against the PASS our line's just as deservedly ranked 24th. We've been playing some good pass D, but mostly in our very good secondary.

Originally Posted by Joel

I'm more concerned about that young RDE in the article vs. Chris Clark. If memory serves, Allen blitzed DBs often as our DC, but unless well disguised elite QBs usually spot that, make a hot read and burn the D for a big gain. Like FanInAZ says, that'll work against the Browns, but not playoff teams. We played Brady twice in 2011: How many sacks? We got Rodgers twice, but he got 6 TDs; hardly a good trade.

I'll have to hope the fact it's the Fade will make it easy, and let ya'll and ESPN tell me what happened; I'm not getting up four hours early to see most of a game that won't be over when I leave for work.

I'm reasonably sure Denver didn't blitz defensive back anymore two years ago than they did last year.

Originally Posted by Joel

Yeah, against the RUN, and deservedly; against the PASS our line's just as deservedly ranked 24th. We've been playing some good pass D, but mostly in our very good secondary.

So we should be all set for tonight. Oakland can't throw the ball at all.

Originally Posted by TXBRONC

I'm reasonably sure Denver didn't blitz defensive back anymore two years ago than they did last year.

If you say so. Seemed like we tried to get there anyway we could when Allen was here, at least until it became clear Doom and Miller coming from both sides was effective. Maybe I'm just too leery of open receivers to like corner blitzes; I wouldn't really say we did it more under Allen than last year, but only because it seemed to me we did it often last year, too.

Originally Posted by slim

So we should be all set for tonight. Oakland can't throw the ball at all.

Well, yeah; again, not really worried about Chokeland, at least no more than any divisional game. I'm worried about January, when teams like them are gone; I'm ALWAYS worried about January....