Giants first in sacks with 53

[Oswlek]

I've seen all but 1 Patriots game, and I've seen about half the Giants games. As for getting pressure, you seem to be confused. However, I did type that badly, so I can see your confusion. What I meant, and what that post looks like does differ. I meant it as "New England gets almost as much pressure with 3 players on the line as the Giants get with 4". That's the difference between a 4-3 and a 3-4, but I should have been more explicit.

My apologies for my poor typing in that post. However, the Giants' pass rush is still not 'significantly better' than the Patriots' pass rush. The difference is that the Giants get more of their sacks from their D-linemen, while the Patriots get more of their sacks from the linebacker that attacks, and from the pass rushing specialist known as Jarvis Green.

Having said that, the notion that the pass rush is this defense's biggest weakness is just nowhere near accurate. This defense's biggest weakness if the pass defense of the two interior linebackers and the two safeties.

I just wholeheartedly disagree. Just look at the last NE/NY game. They both got one sack, but NY was in Brady's face all game long while NE didn't lay a hand on Manning until most of the way through the 3rd quarter when they rushed 7 guys. Even after that, despite blitzing repeatedly from then on, NE rarely put much pressure on Eli.

Vrabel had a dominant run around mid-season, but aside from that NE has been inconsistent at rushing the passer. They seem to be good at taking the guy down when they get there but they don't get there very often. It is what it is. There is nothing that will convince me that NE's pass rush is anywhere near the level of NY's.

 

[Watson's IQ]

I just wholeheartedly disagree. Just look at the last NE/NY game. They both got one sack, but NY was in Brady's face all game long while NE didn't lay a hand on Manning until most of the way through the 3rd quarter when they rushed 7 guys. Even after that, despite blitzing repeatedly from then on, NE rarely put much pressure on Eli.

Vrabel had a dominant run around mid-season, but aside from that NE has been inconsistent at rushing the passer. They seem to be good at taking the guy down when they get there but they don't get there very often. It is what it is. There is nothing that will convince me that NE's pass rush is anywhere near the level of NY's.

I'm on your side of this one, for the most part. I can't count the number of times this season I saw our pass rush vainly chasing after a quarterback who was rolling out, and I'm pretty sure I could count on one hand the times they caught him. It's not a passing play, but if you need evidence of their ineptitude in backfield pursuit, watch the Marion Barber goal line play from the Dallas game.

That said, I do think the NE pass rush is underrated, if only because it is rarely if ever mentioned. And I think the Giants pass rush is somewhat overrated, just because so many of those sacks were accumulated in 2 games. I still agree with you generally that it's the one area they have a clear advantage.

 

[Metaphors]

When did I say that NE was some average or abstract team? The Giants took it to NE on the LOS last time. Sure, NE was missing some guys, but they were missing those guys in other games and they weren't beaten on the line in those the way NY did.

NY's pass rush is for real and is significantly better than NE's. There is no two ways about it.

That bold statement may be correct, but you didn't make that determination based on week 17. Here is the cumulative line for the Giants 5 DL in that game: 11 solos, 8 assists, 0 sacks, 5 hurries. They got pressure from blitzing about half the time (Torbor had a sack and 3 hurries and Pierce had a sack negated by penalty).

When you blitz, you are going to be vulnerable in the secondary. Brady was hurried and hit because the Giants brought 5 and he stood in to let plays develop down field. Both TDs to Moss and the huge pass to Welker in the 3rd quarter were on blitz plays. Giants rack up the hurries and the admiration of you and the media. Pats rack up the big plays and the win.

Another thing you don't consider is what the teams were trying to accomplish in week 17. The Pats were perfectly content to drop 8 in coverage and wait for the inevitable Eli implosion. To his credit, Eli stayed within himself until the Hobbs pick. The Giants plan was to bring the blitz about half the time. Which team do you think is going to get more pressure?

Also enlightening...the drives when each team got their only sack:

Pats trailing 23-28 just after the Maroney TD
Giants move to the NE 41 and face 2nd and 8
AD gets a sack (-14 yards) and the Giants end up punting​

Pats leading 31-28 just after the Hobbs pick
Pats face 1st and 10 at Giants 35
Torbor gets a sack (-10 yards)
2 short passes from Brady gain 22 yards and a 1st down
Maroney gets clinching TD​

Giants take a sack and their drive circles the drain. Pats take a sack and are still able to salvage the drive. Part of that is football IQ (knowing when to hold and risk a sack, when to throw it away) and part is design (getting 20 yds in 2 plays with minimal risk).

You may be right that the Giants have a superior pass rush but if the play in week 17 gave you that idea, you should look a little closer.

 

[Metaphors]

I still agree with you generally that it's the one area they have a clear advantage.

You are comparing apples and oranges to some degree. They run different systems. You are seeing the Giants bring Gappy, Osi, Tuck, Robbins and Torbor. You are comparing that to the Pats bringing Wilfork, Seymour and Warren (sometimes Vrabel).

Let's make it an even comparison. Sames Giants configuration. The Pats bring AD, Seymour, Green, Vrabel and Harrison. Think they would get the same or better pressure? Sure...but that wasn't the gameplan in week 17.

 

[Oswlek]

You may be right that the Giants have a superior pass rush but if the play in week 17 gave you that idea, you should look a little closer.

If you go through my weekly thoughts, you will see a trend of me complaining about NE's non-blitz pass rush. I hold up week 17 as anecdotal evidence, not the entire basis of determination.

 

[Deus Irae]

I just wholeheartedly disagree. Just look at the last NE/NY game. They both got one sack, but NY was in Brady's face all game long while NE didn't lay a hand on Manning until most of the way through the 3rd quarter when they rushed 7 guys. Even after that, despite blitzing repeatedly from then on, NE rarely put much pressure on Eli.

Vrabel had a dominant run around mid-season, but aside from that NE has been inconsistent at rushing the passer. They seem to be good at taking the guy down when they get there but they don't get there very often. It is what it is. There is nothing that will convince me that NE's pass rush is anywhere near the level of NY's.

New England was without the entire right side of the line, yet the Giants were only able to get the one sack. I'm not sure how that makes your point. If anything, it undermines it. The Giants were getting most of their pressure off that side of the line, something that Original's thread backs up:

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/showthread.php?t=75967&highlight=giants

 

[Oswlek]

You are comparing apples and oranges to some degree. They run different systems. You are seeing the Giants bring Gappy, Osi, Tuck, Robbins and Torbor. You are comparing that to the Pats bringing Wilfork, Seymour and Warren (sometimes Vrabel).

Let's make it an even comparison. Sames Giants configuration. The Pats bring AD, Seymour, Green, Vrabel and Harrison. Think they would get the same or better pressure? Sure...but that wasn't the gameplan in week 17.

NE rushes AD or Vrabel on nearly every play, and regularly sends both of them.

 

[Oswlek]

New England was without the entire right side of the line, yet the Giants were only able to get the one sack. I'm not sure how that makes your point. If anything, it undermines it. The Giants were getting most of their pressure off that side of the line, something that Original's thread backs up:

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/showthread.php?t=75967&highlight=giants

I know this. See the prior post:

If you go through my weekly thoughts, you will see a trend of me complaining about NE's non-blitz pass rush. I hold up week 17 as anecdotal evidence, not the entire basis of determination.

 

[Watson's IQ]

You are comparing apples and oranges to some degree. They run different systems. You are seeing the Giants bring Gappy, Osi, Tuck, Robbins and Torbor. You are comparing that to the Pats bringing Wilfork, Seymour and Warren (sometimes Vrabel).

I'm aware of the differences. I don't think it's unfair to ask the simple question "who gets more pressure on the QB, regardless of scheme?" because ultimately that's the goal. I think the answer is New York, though I'm not sure the gap is as wide as Oswlek implies.

Maybe not even as wide as the gap in Strahan's teeth. Had to.

 

[Metaphors]

If you go through my weekly thoughts, you will see a trend of me complaining about NE's non-blitz pass rush. I hold up week 17 as anecdotal evidence, not the entire basis of determination.

Understandable and I agree with you. Against the teams with competitive OL, the Pats should be able to pressure better with 4 than they do. My only problem was comparing the Pats non-blitz pressure against the Giants blitz pressure and drawing conclusions from that. If you compare the Pats and Giants when they just brought 4 (or 3 for the Pats in some cases), they were both fairly ineffective in getting to the QB. Ironically, the Giants seemed to play better overall when they dropped 7 into coverage. Something to watch for on Sunday.

 

[Metaphors]

NE rushes AD or Vrabel on nearly every play, and regularly sends both of them.

That is generally correct, but not for week 17. Little more pressure in the 3rd quarter, but the plan seemed to be dropping 7-8 into coverage.

 

[Deus Irae]

I know this. See the prior post:

So you brought up a game which undermines your point after giving me a "you mustn't have watched the games' line earlier? Come on, you're much better than that. The Patriot's problem with the pass rush isn't getting pressure, it's tracking down the quarterback once he breaks contain. New England has been holding back the rush in the first half of a lot of games in order to defend against the run, and playing a lot of prevent defense, which makes the lack of pressure seem far worse than it is.

As for this line:

Vrabel had a dominant run around mid-season, but aside from that NE has been inconsistent at rushing the passer. They seem to be good at taking the guy down when they get there but they don't get there very often. It is what it is. There is nothing that will convince me that NE's pass rush is anywhere near the level of NY's.

Osi and his 6 sacks against Philly says "hello".

 

[Slagathor]

The week 17 game that supposedly filled NY with unmatched confidence to me is really a key indicator of how bad the beating on them will be.

No Neal, Kaczur or Kyle Brady. How huge is that!?

Consider this. Play lots of two TE sets with Brady and O'Callaghan on the ends.

Strahan is not Reggie White...anymore.

Osi is not Jason Taylor nor Freeney.

Tuck is a nice player. Maybe their best. But not a world-beater.

Game 17:

Pats had all the pressure of the worl on their shoulders playing AT NY.

Giants had none....other than the incentive to knock the Pats off their perch.

 

[Metaphors]

I'm aware of the differences. I don't think it's unfair to ask the simple question "who gets more pressure on the QB, regardless of scheme?" because ultimately that's the goal.

I'm not talking about scheme. I'm talking about week 17 gameplan. I'm sure that the Giants go into games where they rarely blitz. The Pats have games where Jarvis plays a lot and the OLB's come off the edge every play with their hair on fire. That just wasn't the case the last time they met.

Looking over the course of a season, you could make the determination that the Giants scheme and personnel generate a better pass rush. I didn't see the Giants enough to say one way or the other. I do know that week 17 is not the game to use to judge the Pats ability to generate pressure on the QB. That wasn't the gameplan.

 

[Oswlek]

So you brought up a game which undermines your point after giving me a "you mustn't have watched the games' line earlier? Come on, you're much better than that. The Patriot's problem with the pass rush isn't getting pressure, it's tracking down the quarterback once he breaks contain. New England has been holding back the rush in the first half of a lot of games in order to defend against the run, and playing a lot of prevent defense, which makes the lack of pressure seem far worse than it is.

As for this line:



Osi and his 6 sacks against Philly says "hello".

I disagree. The game does not undermine my point at all. Sure you can point at NE's missing OL as evidence that the same won't happen this tme, but NY had much better pressure in that game than NE did.

I also disagree about the contain comment. NE has legitimately has had a hard time even getting to the QB with a base rush in many of their games.

I understand that NE has played conservatively in the opening of their games and this has contributed to things. But I am pretty sure that BB would rather play conservative and still be able to get to the QB at the same time.

I also don't see the relevence of the Osi comment since I am talking about pressure, not sacks. I actually think that Osi is overrated becuase of that game. In his other games he averages less than .5 sacks/game.

Lastly, I am not saying that NE's pass rush is terrible, just that it is only ok when they don't blitz.

 

[Giants6timeworldchamps]

You're on. Seriously.

I still think you're more rational than most, but if you think the guy who led the league in interceptions is a good bet to throw fewer than the guy who went 50/8, and you're giving me even odds on that occurring, well then I feel bad for your logic-center.

I am stating this based on the last few weeks. I just feel Eli won't throw any INT. I honestly don't think Brady will either. The Pats will be more likely to throw the ball down field than the Giants during the course of the game. I see the Giants using a short safe passing game.

 

[Sicilian]

NE rushes AD or Vrabel on nearly every play, and regularly sends both of them.

That may be true, but just because we're sending a couple linebackers on a blitz doesn't mean our D-Lineman's sole responsibility is to go after the QB. We may blitz Vrabel and AD from various points, while Seymour and Warren push wide to contain a scramble (not in eli's case, but in general), or maybe or kept reserved on first and second down to watch for an inside run.

Blitzing doesn't = full on pass rush unless all the linemen are told to go fullbore at the QB too.

 

[Oswlek]

That may be true, but just because we're sending a couple linebackers on a blitz doesn't mean our D-Lineman's sole responsibility is to go after the QB. We may blitz Vrabel and AD from various points, while Seymour and Warren push wide to contain a scramble (not in eli's case, but in general), or maybe or kept reserved on first and second down to watch for an inside run.

Blitzing doesn't = full on pass rush unless all the linemen are told to go fullbore at the QB too.

Why isn't the same true for the Giants?

 

[Deus Irae]

I disagree. The game does not undermine my point at all. Sure you can point at NE's missing OL as evidence that the same won't happen this tme, but NY had much better pressure in that game than NE did.

The pressure came mostly against the backups and, for that matter, mostly against O'Callaghan. How that is supposed to support your contention is beyond me. are you claiming that New York is better against backups who've not been playing than New England is against starters who have? If so, I'll agree with that. If not, the game hurts your argument. 1 sack against a backup right side of the line and no starting tight ends is less than impressive.

I also disagree about the contain comment. NE has legitimately has had a hard time even getting to the QB with a base rush in many of their games.

Lemon, Boller and Feeley, just for 3 examples, could tell you about being pressured even when not being sacked.

I understand that NE has played conservatively in the opening of their games and this has contributed to things. But I am pretty sure that BB would rather play conservative and still be able to get to the QB at the same time.

BB would rather play with 11 cornerbacks and still get pressure on the QB and make tackles, too. That doesn't help your argument. Prevent defenses don't get a lot of pressure on the quarterback. It's a function of the prevent defense.

I also don't see the relevence of the Osi comment since I am talking about pressure, not sacks. I actually think that Osi is overrated becuase of that game. In his other games he averages less than .5 sacks/game.

So sacks are required when it's New England on defense, but pressure is enough when it's the Giants on defense?

Lastly, I am not saying that NE's pass rush is terrible, just that it is only ok when they don't blitz.

When New England sends a linebacker as the 4th rusher, they get ample pressure. When they blitz, QB's end up running for their lives. There's a reason the team was #2 in the league in sacks despite playing so much vanilla defense in the first half of games and prevent defense in the second half of games.

 

[Oswlek]

So sacks are required when it's New England on defense, but pressure is enough when it's the Giants on defense?



When New England sends a linebacker as the 4th rusher, they get ample pressure. When they blitz, QB's end up running for their lives. There's a reason the team was #2 in the league in sacks despite playing so much vanilla defense in the first half of games and prevent defense in the second half of games.

We disagree. There is nothing you can say that will change my opinion.

When did I ever say that sacks are required for NE? In fact, in this thread I said just the opposite.

They seem to be good at taking the guy down when they get there but they don't get there very often.

NE does not get "ample" pressure when they rush 4 and I have seen many, many times that NE blitzed and the QB still had plenty of time. You have your opinion and I have mine.