Sacks vs Pressure

[Galian Beast]

But you are incorrect.
Because 8/9 other teams had worse pressure from their DLs but better performance versus the pass.

so we have a very easily definable way to measure our DBs. They finsihed dead last in what theya re asked to do and thus sucked... BAD.

32nd is 32nd, it doesn't get worse.

Fair to share that with LBs who were terrible in coverage but overall the coverage was the worst in team history.

There is no way to separate the performance of our DBs from the Dline last year. Other DLs might have had worse pressure, but would they have had even worse pressure had their secondaries been worse? It goes hand in hand.

 

[AbeBeta]

Cowboys fans put entirely too much stock into sacks alone. It's a pretty number, but it doesn't tell the whole story. What this team needs isn't necessarily sacks, but constant and consistent pressure.

Seattle was 8th in the league in sacks last year yet they had a 63.4 defensive qb rating. Green Bay had the exact same amount of sacks but their defensive qb rating was 95.9. Night and day. St. Louis had 53 sacks (3rd in the league) yet their defensive qb rating was 94.7.

It helps that when Seattle's D pressures guys into bad throws, there are several elite players there to pick balls off. GB gets the pressures but not the picks.

 

[Doomsday101]

There is no way to separate the performance of our DBs from the Dline last year. Other DLs might have had worse pressure, but would they have had even worse pressure had their secondaries been worse? It goes hand in hand.

and it was not just the passing game, teams ran the ball on us and when they can do that they can keep a defense off balance. You get DB peeking in the back field, safety biting hard on the play action.

 

[jterrell]

There is no way to separate the performance of our DBs from the Dline last year. Other DLs might have had worse pressure, but would they have had even worse pressure had their secondaries been worse? It goes hand in hand.

you are talking in circles.

you started this thread with the idea pressures(not sacks) were key to a low qb rating allowed. --tho you never really proved that point in anyway.
now you are saying lack of pressure is the key to a low qb rating allowed.

yes, pressure is tied to qb rating allowed. it is one part of the component with coverage being the other.

but it is very easy to separate out because they have stats for each group and then they have the stats for the whole.

where DL ranks higher than pass coverage; pass coverage is the real issue.
where pass coverage ranks higher than DL productivity, DL is the real issue.

 

[Galian Beast]

you are talking in circles.

you started this thread with the idea pressures(not sacks) were key to a low qb rating allowed. --tho you never really proved that point in anyway.
now you are saying lack of pressure is the key to a low qb rating allowed.

yes, pressure is tied to qb rating allowed. it is one part of the component with coverage being the other.

but it is very easy to separate out because they have stats for each group and then they have the stats for the whole.

where DL ranks higher than pass coverage; pass coverage is the real issue.
where pass coverage ranks higher than DL productivity, DL is the real issue.

You have assumed too much.

I simply stated that sacks don't equate to lower passer ratings, and that pressure was more important than sacks. You made the final connection on your own. And try to claim some sort of victory that I didn't prove something that I never claimed in the first place...

 

[OhSnap]

Don't forget 2012 which has a chance to be one of the Cowboy's worst drafts ever.

I know allot of people are in a hurry to bury that draft so they can chalk up that trade to Jerrys list but that year they got rid of Newman and Jenkins and grabbed up the 2 best CB's available which was a an achievement in it's self. There wasn't one person in the whole country that didn't think Claiborne wasn't the best CB in the draft. Hanna has been a steady contributor. So far they've probably been the most injured draft class but I think it still has a chance to be a good draft. It would be easier to write em off now but the only thing I like easy is my money and my women.

 

[Nova]

I'd be interested to see how Melton's 2012 stats (or maybe even the 3 games of 2013) look when taking into account knockdowns and hurries in addition to sacks.

Ask and you shall receive.

2012 Melton: 8 sacks 5 hits 24 pressures

 

[Doomsday101]

you are talking in circles.

you started this thread with the idea pressures(not sacks) were key to a low qb rating allowed. --tho you never really proved that point in anyway.
now you are saying lack of pressure is the key to a low qb rating allowed.

yes, pressure is tied to qb rating allowed. it is one part of the component with coverage being the other.

but it is very easy to separate out because they have stats for each group and then they have the stats for the whole.

where DL ranks higher than pass coverage; pass coverage is the real issue.
where pass coverage ranks higher than DL productivity, DL is the real issue.

True but then you can't give an NFL QB time to sit there and scan the field he will find an open man I don't care who your CB are. These WR and QB are too damn skilled to be given time to make plays.

 

[jterrell]

True but then you can't give an NFL QB time to sit there and scan the field he will find an open man I don't care who your CB are. These WR and QB are too damn skilled to be given time to make plays.

There is no doubt that is the case.
But a good CB can cover longer than a lesser CB.
A solid safety can take away things a poor safety can not.

There is no exact equation but pass coverage is a cumulative job. It starts with the actual coverage itself because no sack occurs instantaneously.
Once you provide some coverage how good that coverage needs ot be our how it needs to last is determined by the pass rush.

No matter how good a pass rush is, a QB can ALWAYS get a pass off if the coverage is non-existent.

On a 3 step drop the DL has little to no effect ever unless they dont rush at all and instead just try to jump up in the passing lane.
Same for a post pattern where you have the defense in all the right spots but the ball is just thrown up and a WR runs 15 yards with the ball in air and takes the pass away from the defense.

Now when Carr is asked to cover a WR1 across the entire field on a 20 yard crossing route that's a pressure issue.

But the simple truth is people are using the pass rush(which was bad but not awful) as a scapegoat for truly terrible pass coverage in 2013 when our safety and LB coverage was BY FAR the worst in the NFL.

I think this is for two reasons:
1) People want to go DL in R1. --so do I.
2) People want to draft OL/DL over skill. --generally smart.

But the truth is where we graded out the most poorly last year isn't even debatable. It was in our coverage metrics which set historic lows.

If you put Seattle's 2013 LB and secondary with our 2013 DL that teams easily wins the NFCE.
If you put our secondary and LB with that Seattle DL we 'probably' win the NFCE.

Hatcher, Selvie, Hayden and Ware are a middle of the road NFL DL. We obviously had zero depth but that's 65m that just left in Hatcher and Ware.
If we cut all our safeties and LB not named Sean Lee they might get 10m total.

 

[Nova]

Ask and you shall receive.

2012 Melton: 8 sacks 5 hits 24 pressures

Sorry @perrykemp I meant 24 hurries... 37 pressures total.

 

[Doomsday101]

There is no doubt that is the case.
But a good CB can cover longer than a lesser CB.
A solid safety can take away things a poor safety can not.

There is no exact equation but pass coverage is a cumulative job. It starts with the actual coverage itself because no sack occurs instantaneously.
Once you provide some coverage how good that coverage needs ot be our how it needs to last is determined by the pass rush.

No matter how good a pass rush is, a QB can ALWAYS get a pass off if the coverage is non-existent.

On a 3 step drop the DL has little to no effect ever unless they dont rush at all and instead just try to jump up in the passing lane.
Same for a post pattern where you have the defense in all the right spots but the ball is just thrown up and a WR runs 15 yards with the ball in air and takes the pass away from the defense.

Now when Carr is asked to cover a WR1 across the entire field on a 20 yard crossing route that's a pressure issue.

But the simple truth is people are using the pass rush(which was bad but not awful) as a scapegoat for truly terrible pass coverage in 2013 when our safety and LB coverage was BY FAR the worst in the NFL.

I think this is for two reasons:
1) People want to go DL in R1. --so do I.
2) People want to draft OL/DL over skill. --generally smart.

But the truth is where we graded out the most poorly last year isn't even debatable. It was in our coverage metrics which set historic lows.

If you put Seattle's 2013 LB and secondary with our 2013 DL that teams easily wins the NFCE.
If you put our secondary and LB with that Seattle DL we 'probably' win the NFCE.

Hatcher, Selvie, Hayden and Ware are a middle of the road NFL DL. We obviously had zero depth but that's 65m that just left in Hatcher and Ware.
If we cut all our safeties and LB not named Sean Lee they might get 10m total.

Dallas did not put a lot of consistent pressure, yes the got sacks at times but often not consistent pressure. I don't give a damn who the CB is a QB given time to sit there will find an open man that is pure and simple so yes a pass rush has a hell of a lot to do with it. CB are not going to cover 5 and 6 second not aginst these WR and QB, this is not some college football

 

[Risen Star]

I agree. Pressure over sacks, but odds are a guy getting 12 sacks a season is getting more consistent pressure than a guy getting 6 sacks.

 

[TwoDeep3]

I am not a football coach, or analyst. But I have been watching this game for many years.

It is my opinion the OP is correct about sacks and pressure. Although sacks are the end to the play with a loss of some kind versus pressure that might be an incomplete pass. But to be fair, it might also be an interception.

What has astounded me during the rebuilding phase of this team over the last seventeen years is the idea that the back of the defense predicates what the front of the defense does.

It is the other way around.

Great pressure and sacks makes corner backs and safeties better.

Which is why I have not understood the thinking over the last few years of hiring corners when the opposite is needed.

The Giants - and I have said this over and over here - won championships because of the defensive front. They rotated players in and out - Hello Jimmy Johnson - and kept that aggressive front rested and attacking.

Their corners could take chances because they knew the pressure was going to get there quickly.

The theme to this is simple.

Build a savage defensive front and the back of the defense will be fine. I think this is a pretty simple notion for building a defense. Dallas has the corners to compete.

Now bring a consistent heat and watch a transformational change.