Skip to main content


Presented by

Mailbag: Should Cowboys blitz more or less?


The Cowboys are very deep in pass rushers and they also have a fantastic secondary. Does this combination call for less blitz packages because you can trust your secondary? Or do you blitz even more because it's a strength? Great problem for defensive coordinator Dan Quinn to have, but I'm conflicted on which approach makes more sense. – Rob Riggieri/Rutland, MA

Nick Eatman: I've always thought that teams mainly blitz ... because they have to. Obviously, there are going to be times for any defense where a blitz is needed. But this is a tough question to answer in late July. We have to see how things play out, especially off the edge. If you get in a game where Parsons simply can't be blocked on one side and the combination of D-Law, Dorance, Fowler and Sam Williams are also getting home quite a bit. Then a blitz really isn't necessary that often. The best teams are the ones that really don't have to blitz. But at the end of the day, you better find a way to get pressure one way or another. So to my point, answering this right now seems a bit early. The hope is that you won't have to.

Patrik: I say you keep the formula that you've been using the same, because if it ain't broke … you know the rest. This is a great thing for the Cowboys though, because it means they could do either of the two things — blitz more or blitz less — on any respective week, and that makes it extremely difficult to scheme against them. It also allows them to adapt weekly to whomever the opponent will be and in real time as well, in the event their initial plan isn't going as they had hoped it would. So the fact you're conflicted about this is a wonderful thing, because it means you understand just how talented the Cowboys are at all three levels of the defense now; and take a moment to enjoy that because we're not far removed from a time when the defense was the team's biggest liability. What a time to be alive, eh?

Related Content