Jump to content

Sacks > Pressure.


EazyEaglez
 Share

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, NOTW said:

 

He's someone I thought would be a good pick but what do I know.

 

26 minutes ago, UK_EaglesFan89 said:

Perhaps but only if they look to move on from him. They may not. 

 

28 minutes ago, NJWolverEagle11 said:

I was livid at the pick and didn't watch any of the duration of the draft. But Carson is making that look like a logical pick 

I was hoping they would pick AJ Epenesa, Chung or Fulton. I was hoping they didn't pick Mims. I was dumbfounded when they took Hurts.

The only way the Hurts pick makes sense is if they wanted another potential option from Wentz. At the time I thought it was not a good move. Wentz had mostly stayed healthy last year and in the last 4-5 games really turned it on. I would have drafted help for the D and given Wentz at least another year. It is what it is, but if yesterday was anything to go by, it hasn't resulted in the desired response from Wentz.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, EazyEaglez said:

A pressure stat is kept by people. The problem is pressure stats can often be misleading. A pressure can be tallied from a defensive lineman running up the field into the face of a quarterback and he dumps it off to a running back. Seems like a good play until you factor in that quarterback wanted to sucker that defensive player in so he could run the perfect screen play. Pressure doesn’t rattle NFL quarterbacks. 

Nobody keeps stats on what the play resulted in.....nobody.

And you're crazy if you think pressure doesn't rattle NFL QBs.....because hits are pressure, even if he gets rid of the ball.  And there are BS sacks that can be misleading too.....especially when your QB is holding the ball too long or won't throw it away.   Wentz could have avoided at least 3 sacks yesterday, maybe 4.......but he's locked into trying to make something out of every play instead of realizing he's a sitting duck.  It's a part of his game that needs to change.  

In NFL,  we're talking about fractions of a second when it comes to releasing the ball, and timing.......The point is, that disrupting the QB with pressure which can lead to a number of things......sacks, INTs, poor throws, throwing off timing, shorter progression times....they all blend in together when a defense is playing well.  

You're arguing about the result of of a play but downplaying what caused the result.  It's the pressure that causes rushed passes, sack, tipped balls,  forcing the QB out of the pocket, altering his read or his progression and sometimes INTs.......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, birdman#12 said:

Nobody keeps stats on what the play resulted in.....nobody.

And you're crazy if you think pressure doesn't rattle NFL QBs.....because hits are pressure, even if he gets rid of the ball.  And there are BS sacks that can be misleading too.....especially when your QB is holding the ball too long or won't throw it away.   Wentz could have avoided at least 3 sacks yesterday, maybe 4.......but he's locked into trying to make something out of every play instead of realizing he's a sitting duck.  It's a part of his game that needs to change.  

In NFL,  we're talking about fractions of a second when it comes to releasing the ball, and timing.......The point is, that disrupting the QB with pressure which can lead to a number of things......sacks, INTs, poor throws, throwing off timing, shorter progression times....they all blend in together when a defense is playing well.  

You're arguing about the result of of a play but downplaying what caused the result.  It's the pressure that causes rushed passes, sack, tipped balls,  forcing the QB out of the pocket, altering his read or his progression and sometimes INTs.......

https://packerswire.usatoday.com/2020/01/01/packers-olb-zadarius-smith-led-nfl-in-total-pressures-in-2019/
 
So clearly pressures are kept. And what I keep telling you is pressures are not nearly as impactful as sacks and hits. A pressure is at best an interception. It can also lead to touchdowns against, completions, and positive plays. A sack at worse is a loss of down. If you can’t comprehend that I don’t know what to tell you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, EazyEaglez said:

https://packerswire.usatoday.com/2020/01/01/packers-olb-zadarius-smith-led-nfl-in-total-pressures-in-2019/
 
So clearly pressures are kept. And what I keep telling you is pressures are not nearly as impactful as sacks and hits. A pressure is at best an interception. It can also lead to touchdowns against, completions, and positive plays. A sack at worse is a loss of down. If you can’t comprehend that I don’t know what to tell you.

You're not comprehending what I'm saying......sacks are a RESULT of pressure.  Those stats list sacks as a subset of pressures.   You can't have a sack without pressuring the QB. LMAO.....why can't you get this?  It's like arguing that a receiver caught a TD without considering that the QB threw the f----- ball.  He can't catch it if it's not thrown.....a sack can't happen without it being counted as a pressure or a disruption.

You can't argue about sacks VS pressure.......it's stupid......one comes from the other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/14/2020 at 3:48 PM, birdman#12 said:

You're not comprehending what I'm saying......sacks are a RESULT of pressure.  Those stats list sacks as a subset of pressures.   You can't have a sack without pressuring the QB. LMAO.....why can't you get this?  It's like arguing that a receiver caught a TD without considering that the QB threw the f----- ball.  He can't catch it if it's not thrown.....a sack can't happen without it being counted as a pressure or a disruption.

You can't argue about sacks VS pressure.......it's stupid......one comes from the other.

Pressures is a joke state created by PFF that idiots who buy their trash want to hype up. Keep your guy who almost gets there. I’ll take the guy who does.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, EazyEaglez said:

Pressures is a joke state created by PFF that idiots who buy their trash want to hype up. Keep your guy who almost gets there. I’ll take the guy who does.

🤣 Yeah....ok.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We are the most pressuring non-sacking defense in the last 5 years. I swear, the pressure does help. But, getting the QB's on the ground is more impactful, painful, and physical.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ever notice that the Eagles and 76ers are so much alike at talent evaluation and drafting talent? Same curse, I guess.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Given we have 3 of the top 20 defensive tackle salaries in the league and not much better than special teams fodder at linebacker, I honestly wouldn't mind seeing us try the odd 5 man front just to switch things up once Hargrave is ready to go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, seengreen said:

We are the most pressuring non-sacking defense in the last 5 years.

That's not really accurate. The implication is we aren't getting sacks, but in reality, we are. We aren't leading the league, but we're around the middle each year. When you factor how teams have played vs our defense with our corners allowing large cushions, most teams preferred to not hold the ball very long. I think this year will be interesting because we seem to be improved in coverage. We didn't have 8 sacks last week, but we did have 3. The way people talk around here, you would think we had zero. We also shut down the other team's run game and allowed the fewest yards in the NFL. 

 

Right now, people are anxious with all that is going on in the world and we finally have our beloved sport back, but our team (not surprisingly) began the season not fully prepared. Young players that needed game work didn't get it (Preseason). Players need time to gel. Things will improve. Mistakes will be corrected. Players will step up. Leaders will emerge. Right now, the anxiety has people overreacting about everything. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, brkmsn said:

That's not really accurate. The implication is we aren't getting sacks, but in reality, we are. We aren't leading the league, but we're around the middle each year.

But surely the advantage to pressures is you force more turnovers? I.e. interceptions? Except this team doesn't do that either. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, brkmsn said:

That's not really accurate. The implication is we aren't getting sacks, but in reality, we are. We aren't leading the league, but we're around the middle each year. When you factor how teams have played vs our defense with our corners allowing large cushions, most teams preferred to not hold the ball very long. I think this year will be interesting because we seem to be improved in coverage. We didn't have 8 sacks last week, but we did have 3. The way people talk around here, you would think we had zero. We also shut down the other team's run game and allowed the fewest yards in the NFL. 

 

Right now, people are anxious with all that is going on in the world and we finally have our beloved sport back, but our team (not surprisingly) began the season not fully prepared. Young players that needed game work didn't get it (Preseason). Players need time to gel. Things will improve. Mistakes will be corrected. Players will step up. Leaders will emerge. Right now, the anxiety has people overreacting about everything. 

We were only around the middle last year because we sacked Luke Falk 10 times when we played the Jets which bumped up our average sacks a game by .6, if we'd played our average the other 15 games we'd have been bottom 10, we were 20th in QB Hurries.

With what we spend on the D Line, its hard to say the production matches the spending.

Given Cox will hit 30 in December, Jackson is already there and there's no way with the cap situation that we can keep Cox, Hargrave and Jackson for next year, we likely need a DT and probably aren't going to have big money for free agency,  plus Graham is 33 before next season kicks in with 11 seasons on the clock (and one of them was lost to microfracture surgery which can take its toll down the line) so the question is how far from the cliff edge is he, Curry is 33 next year so I guess is gone to retirement or free agency at seasons end. Josh Sweat looks like he may be about to break out as a starting caliber DE but even if he does he'll need an extension next year and if he plays like he did Sunday the rest of the year he isn't going to accept a back up level offer, so we'll likely have the equivalent of the Vaitai decision but on the D Line as he elects to test the market if he doesn't get Graham's money.

The rosters a mess if you dig a bit, a lot of groups look old and / or lacking depth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, brkmsn said:

That's not really accurate. The implication is we aren't getting sacks, but in reality, we are. We aren't leading the league, but we're around the middle each year. When you factor how teams have played vs our defense with our corners allowing large cushions, most teams preferred to not hold the ball very long. I think this year will be interesting because we seem to be improved in coverage. We didn't have 8 sacks last week, but we did have 3. The way people talk around here, you would think we had zero. We also shut down the other team's run game and allowed the fewest yards in the NFL. 

 

Right now, people are anxious with all that is going on in the world and we finally have our beloved sport back, but our team (not surprisingly) began the season not fully prepared. Young players that needed game work didn't get it (Preseason). Players need time to gel. Things will improve. Mistakes will be corrected. Players will step up. Leaders will emerge. Right now, the anxiety has people overreacting about everything. 

Most of this is the defensive philosophy in Schwartz's schemes. He wants the line to create all the havoc and then the corners can be in line for better coverage and possible INT's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, seengreen said:

Most of this is the defensive philosophy in Schwartz's schemes. He wants the line to create all the havoc and then the corners can be in line for better coverage and possible INT's.

See there's a real flaw there though... His corners don't sit on the line and they don't get INTs.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, UK_EaglesFan89 said:

See there's a real flaw there though... His corners don't sit on the line and they don't get INTs.

This defense doesn’t get turnovers and they don’t get to the quarterback nearly enough. I feel like the Eagles defense was pretty much exposed by Brady in the SB. They haven’t been good since.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/13/2020 at 4:26 PM, EazyEaglez said:

Can we put that argument to bed now? How many times did we see the Eagles at like 3rd and forever today? Two fumbles by the Quarterback today. The Eagles lost more yards today in sacks than they gained in rush yardage. Wentz was completely rattled after getting hit so much. Meanwhile Haskins looked better as the game went on, because almost getting to the quarterback isn’t nearly as good as hitting him. 

Agreed.  Pressures mean nothing.  Especially when you see the all world stats by QB's when under pressure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pressure means something- IF the pass is incomplete. Pressure can also lead to turnovers. Choosing one over the other? If EITHER leads to an unsuccessful offensive down, I'll take either. If I had my druthers, I would druther have a sack for loss of yards and the demoralizing effect it has. But again- I'll take either if the result is a negative offensive down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, UK_EaglesFan89 said:

See there's a real flaw there though... His corners don't sit on the line and they don't get INTs.

Hey that goes back to coaching and talent eval. They had Douglas at corner who was their best tackling and INT CB. They cut him, due to his lack of speed, and them only seeing him as a CB.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why not speak about the real reason Wentz looked bad and was sacked so much? Dont give me he held the ball to long nonsense as he only did that twice out of the 50+ attempts. Wentz did not have time to get set and find the open guys 95% of the time because the offensive line stunk up the place. AS far as the fumbles 1 was his fault and the other was not. Interception were not his fault. He played with two receivers who never played an NFL game before who though they could just stand there and wait for the ball like in college.  Not to mention Doug flat out refused to run the damn ball again nor would he game plan plays for Deseann, a seasoned receiver. Lastly you have a defense that blew a lead yet again. Schwartz and Doug are not good enough. Bottom line is there are more reasons behind the scenes than just poor play from Wentz. think about it. for the QB to be good the offensive line has to protect(they did not) . For the QB to be good his receivers need to get open and catch the ball (from midway 2nd qt they did not). Defense cant blow leads (ongoing issue). Coach needs to do much better at play calling (been a problem since the Super bowl win).

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, EazyEaglez said:

This defense doesn’t get turnovers and they don’t get to the quarterback nearly enough. I feel like the Eagles defense was pretty much exposed by Brady in the SB. They haven’t been good since.

Absolutely. They don't get enough strip sacks and the lack of turnovers kill us. We never start with great field position on offense. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Cochis_Calhoun said:

We were only around the middle last year because we sacked Luke Falk 10 times when we played the Jets which bumped up our average sacks a game by .6, if we'd played our average the other 15 games we'd have been bottom 10, we were 20th in QB Hurries.

People often want to discount totals because of 1 game against a lesser team (at least on that day). Let's be honest, most big games (statistically) come against teams that have a poor day. Everybody gets these chances. If the Eagles played that same Jets team and managed 0 sacks, then you'd have a gripe. But to discount their performance because they dominated the line of scrimmage is silly. You know why they sacked the inexperienced Luke Falk 10 times? Because our D-line shut down Le'Veon Bell. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No one will ever convince me that only  pressure is better than hits and sacks. If you don’t hit the quarterback he’s going to kill your defense. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Frankie said:

Why not speak about the real reason Wentz looked bad and was sacked so much? Dont give me he held the ball to long nonsense as he only did that twice out of the 50+ attempts. Wentz did not have time to get set and find the open guys 95% of the time because the offensive line stunk up the place. AS far as the fumbles 1 was his fault and the other was not. Interception were not his fault. He played with two receivers who never played an NFL game before who though they could just stand there and wait for the ball like in college.  Not to mention Doug flat out refused to run the damn ball again nor would he game plan plays for Deseann, a seasoned receiver. Lastly you have a defense that blew a lead yet again. Schwartz and Doug are not good enough. Bottom line is there are more reasons behind the scenes than just poor play from Wentz. think about it. for the QB to be good the offensive line has to protect(they did not) . For the QB to be good his receivers need to get open and catch the ball (from midway 2nd qt they did not). Defense cant blow leads (ongoing issue). Coach needs to do much better at play calling (been a problem since the Super bowl win).

 

Since nothing was Wentz fault he had a perfect game! Let’s put him in Canton right now! On a side note this isn’t about Wentz. This is about this ridiculous idea that Sacks are not valued as high as pressures. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, EazyEaglez said:

No one will ever convince me that only  pressure is better than hits and sacks. If you don’t hit the quarterback he’s going to kill your defense. 

Nobody will convince me that FGs are better than TDs, but you can still win a game because of a FG. This thread is a waste of time. Everybody knows that a sack is better than just getting pressure on a QB, but a sack is a result of pressure. An INT can also result from a pressure and most would agree that an INT is better than a sack. 

 

Let me ask one question: If your defensive lineman are not going to get a sack on a play, would you want them to at least get pressure? 

 

One more question: If your defensive lineman are not going to tackle the running back, do you want them to at least disrupt the play?

 

There are 11 players on a defense and usually there is only going to be one or 2 players at most getting a "stat" after each play even if they all execute their responsibility perfectly. This is a team sport and usually there are going to be other players responsible for a sack that won't see it reflected in their stats. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, brkmsn said:

Nobody will convince me that FGs are better than TDs, but you can still win a game because of a FG. This thread is a waste of time. Everybody knows that a sack is better than just getting pressure on a QB, but a sack is a result of pressure. An INT can also result from a pressure and most would agree that an INT is better than a sack. 

 

Let me ask one question: If your defensive lineman are not going to get a sack on a play, would you want them to at least get pressure? 

 

One more question: If your defensive lineman are not going to tackle the running back, do you want them to at least disrupt the play?

 

There are 11 players on a defense and usually there is only going to be one or 2 players at most getting a "stat" after each play even if they all execute their responsibility perfectly. This is a team sport and usually there are going to be other players responsible for a sack that won't see it reflected in their stats. 

To answer your question simply I want players to make plays. There’s been plenty of times Nate Gerry was around the ball "disrupting” yet failing to make a play. If you’re trying to tell me disrupting or pressuring is some how equal or better than actually making the play I call you a fool and you’re wasting your time trying to convince me otherwise. I’ll add if you feel this thread is a waste of time then go and post to the 10 different other posts about Carson going on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...