I know sacks aren't everything but...

[BelichickFan]

I have to point this out with the apparent perception that Rex Ryan has never called a defense that hasn't resulted in a sack :

Baltimore was tied for 11th/12th last year in sacks with just 3 more sacks than our disappointing pass rush generated. Their defense was keyed more on being the league leader in INT (some of which could have been generated from QB hurries, I can't look that up).

 

[Metaphors]

Re: I know sacks aren't everything but . . .

I have to point this out with the apparent perception that Rex Ryan has never called a defense that hasn't resulted in a sack :

Baltimore was tied for 11th/12th last year in sacks with just 3 more sacks than our disappointing pass rush generated. Their defense was keyed more on being the league leader in INT (some of which could have been generated from QB hurries, I can't look that up).

Also helps to have the best DB on the planet.

 

[BelichickFan]

Re: I know sacks aren't everything but . . .

Also helps to have the best DB on the planet.

That was basically my point. Reed's 9 INT don't carry over and the sack totals are above average but nothing more.

 

[makewayhomer]

Re: I know sacks aren't everything but . . .

they were an awesome defense last year no matter how you look at it

2nd overall in DVOA, (2nd vs the pass, 1st vs the run), 3rd in PPG, 2nd in YPG

you're right that sacks aren't everything; generating pressure and good coverage is the real goal

 

[BionicPatriot]

Re: I know sacks aren't everything but . . .

Exactly.^^^

Lets see QB pressures. Thats a stat that is rarely seen and I don't know why.

If our guys sack Sanchez just once or twice, but have him running like a chicken all day is it a bad performance?

 

[BradyFTW!]

Re: I know sacks aren't everything but . . .

According to Pro Football Focus, Balt out-pressured the Pats last year 173 to 137 (Pitt got 145)

They got 80 QB hits, vs. 49 for the Pats (Pitt got 59). They didn't get a lot of sacks, for whatever reason, but they were getting pressure more consistently than we were. Their pass rush was much, much better than ours.

That said, the Jets' D isn't even close to as talented as Baltimore's was. They're good, but they're not elite. We'll find out this year how much of Baltimore's excellence was attributable to Ryan.

The site doesn't let you rank by pressures, or even list them, but I'm trying to look through the good pass rushing teams to see who had the most. So far, it looks like it was Carolina, with 181 (53 hits). Vikings had 206 (84 hits). Eagles had 218 (65 hits). Chargers had 183 (38 hits).

All that that list shows me, really, is that PFF either doesn't rate pressures well or getting pressures is not a huge factor in stopping the pass, since I wouldn't call any of those four that I just listed (the four that had more pressures than Baltimore) elite against passers. The Eagles and Chargers maybe, but they also had excellent corners. Definitely not the Vikings or Panthers.

 

[BradyFTW!]

Re: I know sacks aren't everything but . . .

Exactly.^^^

Lets see QB pressures. Thats a stat that is rarely seen and I don't know why.

If our guys sack Sanchez just once or twice, but have him running like a chicken all day is it a bad performance?

Bad. I know pressures are historically overrated, but let's not swing it entirely in the other direction and start underrating them. They're overrated because they don't tell the whole story, but they're still a very critical part of the story. Specifically, they're highly negative plays that absolutely murder drives and swing momentum. You need both pressures and sacks to say that your pass rush had a good day.

 

[Easywolf32]

Re: I know sacks aren't everything but . . .

I'm just trying to figure out how we are going to handle these blitz schemes, I just hope our BB is formulating a bad ass smart plan.

 

[Ice Cold Bruschi]

Re: I know sacks aren't everything but . . .

They've been an awesome defense this decade because of Ozzie Newsome's uncanny ability to draft defensive play makers, theres just a laundry list of pro bowlers on the defensive side of the ball from baltimore this decade off the top of my head.
Sam Adams
Tony Siragusa
Ray Lewis
Peter Boulware
Terelle Suggs
Holoti Ngata
Chris McCallister
I'm sure I'm missing a bunch, but Ozzie Newsome is the reason that d has been so good, not Rex Ryan or Mike Nolan or Marvin Lewis

 

[mgteich]

Re: I know sacks aren't everything but . . .

just normal fare

Screens, dump offs to running backs and completed passes 15-20 yeards down the field

I'm just trying to figure out how we are going to handle these blitz schemes, I just hope our BB is formulating a bad ass smart plan.

 

[RayClay]

Re: I know sacks aren't everything but . . .

Why are we supposed to be down on sacks again? I'm very happy Rexy didn't have a ton.

It's much much better to get to the QB, throw him to the ground and make him lose a ton of yardage, than to "hurry" him (which is also good).

Where is the clearinghouse where all these things are decided? One or two key sacks is not only a statement, a hurting on a QB and a game changer, it fires the team up.

I'd rather a lot of hurries than sacks on TB, that's for sure.

Put me in the sacks are great, yes they are important, column.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Re: I know sacks aren't everything but . . .

Bill says sacks are over rated. Given the officiating emphasis that has developed over the last couple of seasons I'd say he's on to something. We had two sacks last week and all they accomplished was extending drives...

 

[DarrylS]

Re: I know sacks aren't everything but . . .

Ozzie Newsome is part of the BB coaching tree... even though he is not a coach.

Pressures are a better barometer than actual sacks...

 

[RayClay]

Re: I know sacks aren't everything but . . .

Pressures are sometimes a function of the QB. Did you almost get him, did you make him move, did he still make the play? The good ones do. There's no doubt on a sack.

Whether something is overrated is mostly a function of how you think people rate things. I never pay too much attention to that term.

Spend a whole day providing pressure and "almost" getting to a QB works great against crappy quarterbacks, not so well against the better ones.

Of course, like anything else, padding stats with a bunch of garbage time sacks is just that - padding.

 

[Ring 6]

Re: I know sacks aren't everything but . . .

According to Pro Football Focus, Balt out-pressured the Pats last year 173 to 137 (Pitt got 145)

They got 80 QB hits, vs. 49 for the Pats (Pitt got 59). They didn't get a lot of sacks, for whatever reason, but they were getting pressure more consistently than we were. Their pass rush was much, much better than ours.

That said, the Jets' D isn't even close to as talented as Baltimore's was. They're good, but they're not elite. We'll find out this year how much of Baltimore's excellence was attributable to Ryan.

The site doesn't let you rank by pressures, or even list them, but I'm trying to look through the good pass rushing teams to see who had the most. So far, it looks like it was Carolina, with 181 (53 hits). Vikings had 206 (84 hits). Eagles had 218 (65 hits). Chargers had 183 (38 hits).

All that that list shows me, really, is that PFF either doesn't rate pressures well or getting pressures is not a huge factor in stopping the pass, since I wouldn't call any of those four that I just listed (the four that had more pressures than Baltimore) elite against passers. The Eagles and Chargers maybe, but they also had excellent corners. Definitely not the Vikings or Panthers.

How is 2 pressures a game MUCH, MUCH better?

 

[Ring 6]

Re: I know sacks aren't everything but . . .

Bill says sacks are over rated. Given the officiating emphasis that has developed over the last couple of seasons I'd say he's on to something. We had two sacks last week and all they accomplished was extending drives...

That is way to oversimplifying.
BB says sacks are overrated (actually I think he says they dont tell the whole story) when talking from the perpective that if you disrupt a play and the qB throws too early or throws it away, that was an effective pass rush that doesnt show up in the sack total.
I serioulsy doubt he would say a sack isnt better than a throw out of bounds to escape pressure.
And, we had 4 sacks last week, not 2.

 

[Ring 6]

Re: I know sacks aren't everything but . . .

I'm just trying to figure out how we are going to handle these blitz schemes, I just hope our BB is formulating a bad ass smart plan.

The same way we have since 2000.
You sound as if you think Rex Ryan has invented something that we have to spend a week trying to create a way to deal with.
The methods to handle everything Ryan calls where in the offensive system in 2000.

 

[Ring 6]

Re: I know sacks aren't everything but . . .

They've been an awesome defense this decade because of Ozzie Newsome's uncanny ability to draft defensive play makers, theres just a laundry list of pro bowlers on the defensive side of the ball from baltimore this decade off the top of my head.
Sam Adams
Tony Siragusa
Ray Lewis
Peter Boulware
Terelle Suggs
Holoti Ngata
Chris McCallister
I'm sure I'm missing a bunch, but Ozzie Newsome is the reason that d has been so good, not Rex Ryan or Mike Nolan or Marvin Lewis

Not to mention Ryan was the 3rd best of those 3, by any measure.

 

[Ring 6]

Re: I know sacks aren't everything but . . .

Bad. I know pressures are historically overrated, but let's not swing it entirely in the other direction and start underrating them. They're overrated because they don't tell the whole story, but they're still a very critical part of the story. Specifically, they're highly negative plays that absolutely murder drives and swing momentum. You need both pressures and sacks to say that your pass rush had a good day.

Its not that simple. Guys like Manning for example wont be sacked. They will throw it away rather than take the sack.
If we face Manning he has a game with less than 50% complete and 3 picks, but 0 or 1 sacks, BECAUSE he throws it away when pressure comes, that is total success.
Like everything else, you can't chose a stat that is a definitive conclusion on almost anything.

 

[mgteich]

Re: I know sacks aren't everything but . . .

Belichick has seen these all before. This isn't like the wildcat surprise last year. Besides, who believes that Ryan all of a sudden makes the jets defense anywhere near as good as BALT.

The same way we have since 2000.
You sound as if you think Rex Ryan has invented something that we have to spend a week trying to create a way to deal with.
The methods to handle everything Ryan calls where in the offensive system in 2000.