Sacks vs Pass Defense...

[MichaelWinicki]

Couchscout brought up an interesting point in his thread about "Almost" Anthony Spencer being more of a pass-rushing threat if the secondary could cover for more than 2 seconds.

Just for grins I looked up the defensive rankings for sacks and pass defense over the last several seasons:

Sack ranking Pass defense ranking
2011 7 23
2010 16 26
2009 7 20
2008 1 5
2007 3 13
2006 19 24
2005 14 11

As you can see the defense has ranked in the top 10 in sacks 4 times in the last 7 seasons. Pass defense has ranked in the top 10 only once.

Also you can see that the team's pass defense hasn't been higher than the team's sack ranking in 7 years.

Yeah, I can understand the reasoning for getting more sacks. I'd like to see this team to be in the top 5 when it comes to sacks.

But Couchscout makes a good point, i.e. how many more sacks would this defense get if there was better coverage? Obviously over the past several seasons it has been a better team at sacking the quarterback than it has been at defending the pass.

 

[THUMPER]

I don't know, it just seems like opposing QBs have all day to throw but maybe that's just in comparison to Romo.

 

[sonnyboy]

First and foremost. When you've had the leagues best pass rusher since 2005, it's unlikely your pass defense will rank as high as your defense in sacks.

But I agree with your premise. We need better cover people before we do thing one to improve the pass rush.

Not much doubt in my mind that IF we could significantly improve at LCB and S, our sacks/pressure will improve. And we wouldn't have all these posts about how poor we are in an area that's obviously a strength.

 

[sonnyboy]

I don't know, it just seems like opposing QBs have all day to throw but maybe that's just in comparison to Romo.

Just imagine how much time they had against the 25 teams that registered fewer sacks than we did?

But I get it. It seldom if ever "feels" like your team is getting enough pressure.

 

[DallasDomination]

This might be one of the rare occasions where sacks don't translate to a defense creating pressure.

 

[Risen Star]

I don't know, it just seems like opposing QBs have all day to throw but maybe that's just in comparison to Romo.

It's flawed analysis from a corner *****.

If we excel so much sacking the QB and those numbers are concrete proof of that, then our secondary has to cover less than the teams that don't get to the QB as much.

In other words there should be a direct reflection of those numbers between the two categories if sack totals are a true indicator of QB pressure. Sack totals are up, pass defense follows....and vice versa.

You can look at those numbers and come up with any conclusion you want. The OP has been on a mission since I've known him to out cover our way to a Championship. Death, Taxes, Winicki's cries for cornerbacks in the spring.

Watch the games. Anybody who thinks we have a disruptive front seven must be seeing a different team than I am.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

I don't think yards allowed is a very good stat for judging defenses. The four worst pass defenses in yards allowed last year were the Packers, Patriots, Saints, and Giants.

Those were, of course, the top three scoring offensive teams in the league plus the Giants, who were number nine.

For the record, the Giants were tied for third in sacks to go along with all those yards.

 

[honyock]

I don't think yards allowed is a very good stat for judging defenses. The four worst pass defenses in yards allowed last year were the Packers, Patriots, Saints, and Giants.

Those were, of course, the top three scoring offensive teams in the league plus the Giants, who were number nine.

For the record, the Giants were tied for third in sacks to go along with all those yards.

That's a nice point. Makes you wonder how that correlates league-wide every year, if the top scoring teams tend to rank low in passing yards surrendered, on the idea that opposing teams are passing more to play catch-up...if it skews the numbers.

 

[theogt]

I don't think yards allowed is a very good stat for judging defenses. The four worst pass defenses in yards allowed last year were the Packers, Patriots, Saints, and Giants.

Those were, of course, the top three scoring offensive teams in the league plus the Giants, who were number nine.

For the record, the Giants were tied for third in sacks to go along with all those yards.

You're right. Yards per attempt is the better stat. Other than the Giants, none of these teams had good defenses, though, so regardless of what stat you look at, it just shows that having a great offense is better than having a good defense.

As for the Giants, their YPA over their last 7 games (including post-season) was 6.08 (6.07 in the post-season alone). That would have ranked them second in the league during the regular season. That 6.07 YPA in the playoffs is just sick. That defense was absolutely on fire -- and against some of the best teams in the league at that.

Our front seven is not the problem. Our coverage is abysmal. Just completely and utterly terrible. You add talent on the back end, and this defense will be very strong.

 

[Doomsday101]

To me this is like the chicken and egg debate which came 1st.

I would say to be a top defense you need to have a very good pass rush but you also need a quality secondary and both can help each other be it coverage sacks because the QB has no where to go with the ball or putting on the pressure to force the QB into making bad throws.

Great pass rush is important but if a QB can take a 3 step drop and hit a WR on a 5 yard pass play and then turns into a 30 or 40 yard play then that pass rush is not going to be a big help. You need both

 

[MichaelWinicki]

OK, here is the chart, but with YPA rankings included...

Sack ranking Pass defense ranking YPA ranking
2011 7 23 24
2010 16 26 29
2009 7 20 13
2008 1 5 8
2007 3 13 6
2006 19 24 26
2005 14 11 13

Kind of a mixed bag but still the same in that it's been 7 seasons since either the pass defense ranking or the YPA ranking were either equal or better than the teams sack ranking.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

Great pass rush is important but if a QB can take a 3 step drop and hit a WR on a 5 yard pass play and then turns into a 30 or 40 yard play then that pass rush is not going to be a big help. You need both

That's exactly right.

A 3-step drop offense can move the ball, create points and frustrate a pass rush.

That's where you need good quality coverage in the secondary.

 

[Doomsday101]

That's exactly right.

A 3-step drop offense can move the ball, create points and frustrate a pass rush.

That's where you need good quality coverage in the secondary.

Right, offense will combate what you are doing. If you can bring the heat and make plays on the back end then you likely have a very good defense but if you show holes offense will exploit it.

2008 Dallas ranked 1st in sacks with 59 we also ranked 30th in ints with only 9. We had a good season but in the end our weakness was exploited.

 

[THUMPER]

To me this is like the chicken and egg debate which came 1st.

I would say to be a top defense you need to have a very good pass rush but you also need a quality secondary and both can help each other be it coverage sacks because the QB has no where to go with the ball or putting on the pressure to force the QB into making bad throws.

Great pass rush is important but if a QB can take a 3 step drop and hit a WR on a 5 yard pass play and then turns into a 30 or 40 yard play then that pass rush is not going to be a big help. You need both

I agree, you need both to be truly successful. Also, passrush is more than just sacks but pressure and knockdowns/hits on the QB, making him hurry his throws. You get a QB thinking about the guys coming in on him and he is nowhere near as effective.

Pass-coverage should be measured not in total yards allowed but but a number of factors such as:

Passes defensed
INTs
Opposing QB passer rating (includes a lot of factors)
Pass plays over 20 yards
3rd down conversion % via pass
PI/illegal contact penalties

I did not see an effective passrush from us nor did I see solid coverage, hence a number of blown leads late in the game and an 8-8 season. When teams needed to move the ball through the air against us they usually were able to.

We need to upgrade the DBs and get more pressure on the QB up the middle. I love Ratliff but he doesn't put a lot of pressure on the QB forcing him into Ware and Spencer. Our CBs and Safetys were below par for the most part and we need to upgrade at least 2 starters at DB. A coverage CB and a ballhawk FS plus better depth behind them.

Forgot to add that we also need to improve the short pass coverage from our inside LBs. Lee was particularly good in this area until he got hurt.

 

[TellerMorrow34]

I think this is one part of football that absolutely is so hard to decide how you fix the two because they both, essentially, go hand in hand.

The better the rush the better the pass defense is going to be. Of course the better the coverage the better the rush is going to be as well.

 

[casmith07]

Ware skews the stats.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

Ware skews the stats.

How do you mean?

 

[Risen Star]

To me this is like the chicken and egg debate which came 1st.

I would say to be a top defense you need to have a very good pass rush but you also need a quality secondary and both can help each other be it coverage sacks because the QB has no where to go with the ball or putting on the pressure to force the QB into making bad throws.

Great pass rush is important but if a QB can take a 3 step drop and hit a WR on a 5 yard pass play and then turns into a 30 or 40 yard play then that pass rush is not going to be a big help. You need both

If an offense has to rely solely on three step drops and the short passing game, the pass rush has already won. You've significantly shortened the field for the cover guys and the time they need to cover. It's big time advantage defense.

To put it bluntly, the theory that three step drops negate the pass rush is just wrong. You're operating your offense as if your QB is constantly under heavy pressure.

 

[Risen Star]

I think this is one part of football that absolutely is so hard to decide how you fix the two because they both, essentially, go hand in hand.

The better the rush the better the pass defense is going to be. Of course the better the coverage the better the rush is going to be as well.

I've never seen a great pass rush be a product of a great secondary.

And I've never seen a great defense led by a great secondary.

 

[burmafrd]

I've never seen a great pass rush be a product of a great secondary.

And I've never seen a great defense led by a great secondary.

yeah. You look at the very best D's of the last 50 years and everyone of them had a dominant front 7.