Just thinking aloud here: Under CJT, we were a blitzing team. Zone-dog 50% (sending 5, dropping 6 into zone coverage), 25% blitz (sending 6, playing man free behind it [cover-1]), 10% send 7 ((play man behind it [cover 0]), 15% some form of quarters coverage. And, you never knew where they were coming from and who was dropping - eg. send 2 LB's but drop an extra DE in flats coverage. And, most of our blitzes were designed to stop run first and get after QB as an added bonus. We often led league in TFL and sacks. These things were well-designed, not just "You blitz through the a-gap this time", it was well-coordinated by all involved so that what the DL did was more likely to free up a LB or vice/versa.
We had an identity. We had something we were GREAT at. It's similar to CPJ's offense. We're so good at running the triple because we rep the crap out of it. We do it all the time. That's why we were so good at the defensive pressures we ran, because we did it all the time. Our guys knew what they were doing and what to do out of that z-dog/blitz if they got a certain offensive look. Sometimes I wonder if our defenses try to do everything, try to be good at everything, and by doing so end up not great at anything.
Being 1-dimensional is better than being 0-dimensional. Here's why. When you're good at something, it dictates how the offense can attack you. And, when that's the case, then you know what they're likely to do in a crucial situation. And, in that moment, you can tell your guys to expect it and cheat to it and obliterate what the offense thought they could have success with on a particular play (and by tendency). Sometimes you're going to get burned. But, that will be the exception, not the rule.
This also allows for a defensive team to perform beyond their talent level because it won't be based on individual play/heroics and one-on-one matchups. It will be based much more on just plain numbers advantages, saying to the offense, "If you're going to succeed, here's what you're going to have to do. But, you also know that I know that that's what you're going to have to do. So, you're in a bigger pickle, because this might be the moment I throw the change-up." It's like a pitcher who's got one great pitch and the rest mediocre. "My change-up may not be as good as many of my colleagues, but because my fastball is so good, my change-up will work also." And, by the way, my guys are better at running our plays than your offensive line is at determining quickly who's blocking who and than your QB is at determining quickly who's coming and who's dropping. And, he darn sure know's he better get rid of it quick or he's gonna be on the turf. This also means my secondary doesn't have to be world-beaters at coverage because they won't have to cover for very long.
You know what beats this??? The freakin' option.
