Conclusion to VT vs. Bledsoe

[aznhalf]

What stats would those be? In 2005 we allowed 7 more sacks from EACH tackle position over 2004.

:clap2::clap2:

Sounds like a pretty relevant stat to me.

 

[Zaxor]

:clap2::clap2:

Sounds like a pretty relevant stat to me.

How about because Bledsoe ALWAYS gets sacked more how about 451 times in his career...

pretty silly as it proves my point

 

[superpunk]

Gotta love chest thumping threads started by people convinced they know more than anyone else in the room.

 

[aznhalf]

How about because Bledsoe ALWAYS gets sacked more how about 451 times in his career...

pretty silly as it proves my point

True, I guess it had nothing to do with Tucker compared to Adams at LT.

 

[superpunk]

True, I guess it had nothing to do with Tucker compared to Adams at LT.

Forget that. It really has no relevance that one of the most important positions in football was filled by a turnstyle for more than half the year.

I will submit this. There is NO more crucial position in football than the offensive lineman assigned to protect Drew Bledsoe's blindside. There are precious few positions more crucial to a teams success than LT anyway, one has only to look at the difference in offensive output this very year of the Chiefs and Steelers, when their starting LT was out.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Forget that. It really has no relevance that one of the most important positions in football was filled by a turnstyle for more than half the year.

I will submit this. There is NO more crucial position in football than the offensive lineman assigned to protect Drew Bledsoe's blindside. There are precious few positions more crucial to a teams success than LT anyway, one has only to look at the difference in offensive output this very year of the Chiefs and Steelers, when their starting LT was out.

I guess that would mean that I'm here to refute this. Tell me quick, who was Brett Favre's LT in GB? How about Vick's? Who is McNabbs for the past few seasons? Here's an easy one. Who's the Chiefs and the Steelers LT?

LT is definatly important but it's relative to the mobility your QB has. If you have Bledsoe and zero mobility then it's extreme. If you have a QB who can move around a little bit, you don't have to have Munoz playing LT for you.

 

[DLCassidy]

How about because Bledsoe ALWAYS gets sacked more how about 451 times in his career...

pretty silly as it proves my point

I'm not picking on you but you asked us to "check the stats" and when we did now you say the problem was Bledsoe in any case. That doesn't wash on two levels:

1) Bledsoe's sack rate per attempt for the 1st 6 games with Flozell Adams was 1 every 15 attempts. For the last 10 games it was a wretched 1 in 8.4 attempts. The difference is FA. In case you're following at home, Vinny was sacked once every 14 attempts last year.

2) If you look at Bledsoe's career you can see he's only prone to sacks when he's had a poor line. Look at his sack rates for the first 6 years of his career in NE. His sack rate was right in line with what he was doing the first 6 games of this year- about 1 in 15 attempts which is really quite good. You see his sack rate spike up his last few years in NE when his LT Bruce Armstrong was hobbled by injury and then retired. Buffalo thought Bledsoe was the problem with sacks but this year the combination of Losman and Holcomb are taking sacks at a 30%+ higher rate per attempt than when DB was there in 2004. The fact is Buffalo had one of the very worst OL's in the league while he was there.

If you don't protect Bledsoe he will suck. If you do, he will perform well and is not overly sack prone. His fall off in the 2nd half this year can be directly traced to far worse pass protection. As you suggested, I looked it up.

 

[superpunk]

I guess that would mean that I'm here to refute this. Tell me quick, who was Brett Favre's LT in GB? How about Vick's? Who is McNabbs for the past few seasons? Here's an easy one. Who's the Chiefs and the Steelers LT?

LT is definatly important but it's relative to the mobility your QB has. If you have Bledsoe and zero mobility then it's extreme. If you have a QB who can move around a little bit, you don't have to have Munoz playing LT for you.

Did you notice the part where I said;

"There is NO more crucial position in football than the offensive lineman assigned to protect Drew Bledsoe's blindside."

I understand that Drew's mobility plays a big part in this, which is why it was so foolish to have noone but Torrin "Turnstyle" Tucker to back Flo up. Look at the difference in offensive production with Flo's injury as the dividing point. It's night and day.

For my other examples, Pitt and KC, the same thing happened. When their LTs went down, their offenses struggled badly. Ben R. can move around quite a bit. Trent Green shifts in the pocket to avoid pressure as well as anyone in the league. But still they suffered. It is a HUGE part of an offense, the tackle assigned to the blindside.

 

[aznhalf]

I guess that would mean that I'm here to refute this. Tell me quick, who was Brett Favre's LT in GB? How about Vick's? Who is McNabbs for the past few seasons? Here's an easy one. Who's the Chiefs and the Steelers LT?

LT is definatly important but it's relative to the mobility your QB has. If you have Bledsoe and zero mobility then it's extreme. If you have a QB who can move around a little bit, you don't have to have Munoz playing LT for you.

Im not sure what point you're trying to make.

GB and KC have some of the best LT's in the game. Are you trying to be sarcastic?

Mobile quarterbacks tend to make their line look better, but in the end I'd rather have a pure pocket passer with a solid line than have a Micheal Vick with whoever up front.

 

[superpunk]

I'm not picking on you but you asked us to "check the stats" and when we did now you say the problem was Bledsoe in any case. That doesn't wash on two levels:

1) Bledsoe's sack rate per attempt for the 1st 6 games with Flozell Adams was 1 every 15 attempts. For the last 10 games it was a wretched 1 in 8.4 attempts. The difference is FA. In case you're following at home, Vinny was sacked once every 14 attempts last year.

2) If you look at Bledsoe's career you can see he's only prone to sacks when he's had a poor line. Look at his sack rates for the first 6 years of his career in NE. His sack rate was right in line with what he was doing the first 6 games of this year- about 1 in 15 attempts which is really quite good. You see his sack rate spike up his last few years in NE when his LT Bruce Armstrong was hobbled by injury and then retired. Buffalo thought Bledsoe was the problem with sacks but this year the combination of Losman and Holcomb are taking sacks at a 30%+ higher rate per attempt than when DB was there in 2004. The fact is Buffalo had one of the very worst OL's in the league while he was there.

If you don't protect Bledsoe he will suck. If you do, he will perform well. His fall off in the 2nd half this year can be directly traced to far worse pass protection. As you suggested, I looked it up.

That is very interesting, the sack ratios. Excellent "stat" to use, which in addition to actually watching the games, sheds some light on what a difference Flo was making.

 

[DLCassidy]

I guess that would mean that I'm here to refute this. Tell me quick, who was Brett Favre's LT in GB? How about Vick's? Who is McNabbs for the past few seasons? Here's an easy one. Who's the Chiefs and the Steelers LT?

LT is definatly important but it's relative to the mobility your QB has. If you have Bledsoe and zero mobility then it's extreme. If you have a QB who can move around a little bit, you don't have to have Munoz playing LT for you.

So now Flozell Adams is Anthony Munoz?:laugh1: I like Flo, he's a good player, but let's face it, he wasn't getting a lot of love on this board before he got hurt. But would we take the 13 sacks in 6 games Bledsoe had if that rate continued all season? No doubt. Would we take the Bledsoe we saw in the first 6 games with FA in there? Another given.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Did you notice the part where I said;

"There is NO more crucial position in football than the offensive lineman assigned to protect Drew Bledsoe's blindside."

I understand that Drew's mobility plays a big part in this, which is why it was so foolish to have noone but Torrin "Turnstyle" Tucker to back Flo up. Look at the difference in offensive production with Flo's injury as the dividing point. It's night and day.

For my other examples, Pitt and KC, the same thing happened. When their LTs went down, their offenses struggled badly. Ben R. can move around quite a bit. Trent Green shifts in the pocket to avoid pressure as well as anyone in the league. But still they suffered. It is a HUGE part of an offense, the tackle assigned to the blindside.

The point is that it's only critical because we have a QB who has little to no mobility and has a difficult time securing the ball when hit.

I would also submitt the fact that most of Drew Bledsoe's problems occure when he sees the pressure. Not when he doesn't see it. Drew's biggest issue is when he gets pressure up the middle. That prevents him from stepping up which is about the only thing he can do in the pocket. That's what I'm trying to say here. LT may be crucial but it's no more curcial, IMO, then any other weak link on the line where Drew is concerned. That's the problem. He has real difficulty over coming and dealing with pressure from anywhere.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Im not sure what point you're trying to make.

GB and KC have some of the best LT's in the game. Are you trying to be sarcastic?

Mobile quarterbacks tend to make their line look better, but in the end I'd rather have a pure pocket passer with a solid line than have a Micheal Vick with whoever up front.

And see, I'd rather have a guy who can make good decisions and have the ability to move around in the pocket a bit rather then somebody who can do neither. Extremes are the problem here. You don't need Vick but we don't need the mobility of Bledsoe either. That's a true statement.

 

[superpunk]

The point is that it's only critical because we have a QB who has little to no mobility and has a difficult time securing the ball when hit.

I would also submitt the fact that most of Drew Bledsoe's problems occure when he sees the pressure. Not when he doesn't see it. Drew's biggest issue is when he gets pressure up the middle. That prevents him from stepping up which is about the only thing he can do in the pocket. That's what I'm trying to say here. LT may be crucial but it's no more curcial, IMO, then any other weak link on the line where Drew is concerned. That's the problem. He has real difficulty over coming and dealing with pressure from anywhere.

I know it's MORE critical, that's why I said what I said in the first place. I'd be a big fan of getting a more athletic QB in here, one that can make a play when the pocket breaks down, as it will from time to time. I'm begging for Josh McCown in the offseason. Denny Green appears to hate him, so he's probably not going to be resigned.

The trouble is, Bledsoe's not that guy, but he is OUR guy. You can't argue the simple fact that when he did have a solid player protecting his blindside, he was dynamite for us. Take Flo out, and the offense went flat immediately, even though we continued to win on the strength of our defense for a time. With Flo gone, we had to compensate for two tackle positions, and not just our right side, which is enough of an inconvenience in the first place. The results showed in the stats sheet AND the win column.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

So now Flozell Adams is Anthony Munoz?:laugh1: I like Flo, he's a good player, but let's face it, he wasn't getting a lot of love on this board before he got hurt. But would we take the 13 sacks in 6 games Bledsoe had if that rate continued all season? No doubt. Would we take the Bledsoe we saw in the first 6 games with FA in there? Another given.

I don't love Adams and I never tried to compare him to Munoz. The illustration I'm trying to make here is that you need a Munoz if your going to have a Bledsoe. How do you protect Bledsoe? You allow no pressure, at all. You have to not only be very good along the offensive line but you have to be deep and good. You can't afford to lose your LT or your doomed to get the Bledsoe of the last 6 games. What kind of plan is that? It's no way to run a railroad is all I'm saying.

 

[superpunk]

I don't love Adams and I never tried to compare him to Munoz. The illustration I'm trying to make here is that you need a Munoz if your going to have a Bledsoe. How do you protect Bledsoe? You allow no pressure, at all. You have to not only be very good along the offensive line but you have to be deep and good. You can't afford to lose your LT or your doomed to get the Bledsoe of the last 6 games. What kind of plan is that? It's no way to run a railroad is all I'm saying.

Now THAT I can agree with. BP knew what a disaster it would be if Flo went down, particularly with Pettiti on the other side, and he did nothing to improve our depth. Bledsoe is a good QB, and can play great if you give him what he needs. Bill didn't and he failed.

 

[StanleySpadowski]

I'm not picking on you but you asked us to "check the stats" and when we did now you say the problem was Bledsoe in any case. That doesn't wash on two levels:

1) Bledsoe's sack rate per attempt for the 1st 6 games with Flozell Adams was 1 every 15 attempts. For the last 10 games it was a wretched 1 in 8.4 attempts. The difference is FA. In case you're following at home, Vinny was sacked once every 14 attempts last year.

2) If you look at Bledsoe's career you can see he's only prone to sacks when he's had a poor line. Look at his sack rates for the first 6 years of his career in NE. His sack rate was right in line with what he was doing the first 6 games of this year- about 1 in 15 attempts which is really quite good. You see his sack rate spike up his last few years in NE when his LT Bruce Armstrong was hobbled by injury and then retired. Buffalo thought Bledsoe was the problem with sacks but this year the combination of Losman and Holcomb are taking sacks at a 30%+ higher rate per attempt than when DB was there in 2004. The fact is Buffalo had one of the very worst OL's in the league while he was there.

If you don't protect Bledsoe he will suck. If you do, he will perform well and is not overly sack prone. His fall off in the 2nd half this year can be directly traced to far worse pass protection. As you suggested, I looked it up.

You can make stats say some pretty interesting things. For example, you combined Holcombe and Losman for statistical sake. Holcombe actually took sacks at a lower rate than Bledsoe but Losman's particularly high rate skews the numbers to favor Bledsoe. It's not surprising to anyone that a QB in his first season struggled making timely reads.

You also neglected to note Bledsoe 50+ sack season of 2003 which was a marked increase from Buffalo's '02 season.


If you really want to play a statistics game, I'd suggest you look at Bledsoe's career numbers in inclement weather. Feeble at best and in the NFC East he'll have at least one poor weather division away game in December.

 

[superpunk]

You can make stats say some pretty interesting things. For example, you combined Holcombe and Losman for statistical sake. Holcombe actually took sacks at a lower rate than Bledsoe but Losman's particularly high rate skews the numbers to favor Bledsoe. It's not surprising to anyone that a QB in his first season struggled making timely reads.

You also neglected to note Bledsoe 50+ sack season of 2003 which was a marked increase from Buffalo's '02 season.


If you really want to play a statistics game, I'd suggest you look at Bledsoe's career numbers in inclement weather. Feeble at best and in the NFC East he'll have at least one poor weather division away game in December.

You could also look at the type of offense they ran when Holcombe was in there. Being a dismayed fantasy owner of Willis McGahee, I would often tune into Bills games to see how he was doing. When Holcombe came in there, the offense morphed into the dink and dunk show. He was throwing 5 yard outs and swing passes to RBs all day long. Not that it's a bad thing, but they ran an offense designed to get the ball out of the QBs hands immediately.

You're right, stats can be made to say anything. The only REAL way to know how to interpret them is to actually watch the games in which the stats are formed. Having watched all 16 games of VT and DB, I can honestly say that Drew is 10 times the QB Vinny was. This offense, which struggled running the ball no matter what, was much more scary with Flo in, than with Flo out.

 

[DLCassidy]

I don't love Adams and I never tried to compare him to Munoz. The illustration I'm trying to make here is that you need a Munoz if your going to have a Bledsoe. How do you protect Bledsoe? You allow no pressure, at all. You have to not only be very good along the offensive line but you have to be deep and good. You can't afford to lose your LT or your doomed to get the Bledsoe of the last 6 games. What kind of plan is that? It's no way to run a railroad is all I'm saying.

But Bledsoe was succeeding with FA as his LT, that's the point. Was he not?

We did have a decided and severe lack of depth at LT and RT. Tucker had never played the position, not in college or pro's. LT is just below QB in it's importance to many offenses, usually you lose your starter and if it's for more than a few games you're done. Look at the vaunted KC Chiefs offense this year. They lose Roaf for 6 games, lose 3 of them, 7-3 with him in there.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I know it's MORE critical, that's why I said what I said in the first place. I'd be a big fan of getting a more athletic QB in here, one that can make a play when the pocket breaks down, as it will from time to time. I'm begging for Josh McCown in the offseason. Denny Green appears to hate him, so he's probably not going to be resigned.

The trouble is, Bledsoe's not that guy, but he is OUR guy. You can't argue the simple fact that when he did have a solid player protecting his blindside, he was dynamite for us. Take Flo out, and the offense went flat immediately, even though we continued to win on the strength of our defense for a time. With Flo gone, we had to compensate for two tackle positions, and not just our right side, which is enough of an inconvenience in the first place. The results showed in the stats sheet AND the win column.

I don't dispute any of this. I've posted the same since before we signed the guy. That's the point. Why do we sign a QB and lock ourselves into him if the limitations are so obviouse? Bledsoe is an exceptional passer if he has no pressure. That is not even a thing that can be questioned IMO. However, when will the NFL ever be a league where by you can count on players not getting injured etc? I just hate the fact that we are handcuffed in such a way and we've done it to ourselves.