Sacks vs. Tackles for loss

[Toruk_Makto]

If they are averaging 4 yards/carry but there is a high percentage of tackles for loss, that indicates that they are occasionally gashing the defense for 8 to 10 yards.

Example A:
1st down: 10 yard gain
1st down: 10 yard gain
1st down: 4 yard loss
2nd/3rd: Low probability of converting

Example B:
1st down: 3 yard gain
2nd/3rd high probability of converting

1st down: 3 yard gain
2nd/3rd high probability of converting

1st down: 3 yard gain
2nd/3rd high probability of converting

And in example A the offense just flipped field position and got into field goal position.

It is much harder in example B to consistently be good and dink and dunk down ALL the way down field.

Give me the defense that demands the offense continually executes a great 20 yard drive than one that gives up a ton of explosive plays.

 

[theogt]

If they are averaging 4 yards/carry but there is a high percentage of tackles for loss, that indicates that they are occasionally gashing the defense for 8 to 10 yards.

Example A:
1st down: 10 yard gain
1st down: 10 yard gain
1st down: 4 yard loss
2nd/3rd: Low probability of converting

Example B:
1st down: 3 yard gain
2nd/3rd high probability of converting

1st down: 3 yard gain
2nd/3rd high probability of converting

1st down: 3 yard gain
2nd/3rd high probability of converting

Uh....am I missing something? You would take Example A ten times out of ten.

 

[visionary]

This is different than your question, but...

In terms of the running game, would you prefer a defense that had a high percentage of tackles for loss, but their overall rushing average against is 4 yards/carry or would you prefer a defense that rarely has tackles for loss, but their rushing average against is 3 yards/carry?

Depends on the context

If 3 yards/carry us because we are stifling their run game, I would take it because if we make them one dimentional the pressure will come

If 3 yds/carry is because they are torching us through the air and don't need to run , then no

 

[Hoofbite]

Uh....am I missing something? You would take Example A ten times out of ten.

That's kind of where I am at. As another poster pointed out:

And in example A the offense just flipped field position and got into field goal position.

Going a step further example A is clearly a single possession. Example B could be a single possession but it could also occur over the span of 2 (or even 3) possessions.


Edit: Then again, the situation is from a defensive perspective so there's that.

 

[DallasEast]

Am I alone in not being overly concerned with how many sacks Dl players have had in the past? Granted, it can be a huge swing in the game, but it happens so rarely for most, I'm not sure why Dl's are typically defined only by how many sacks they get. Please don't misunderstand, I like seeing sacks just like the next guy, but for me what truly determines a Defense Lineman effectiveness as a player are tackles for loss/minimal gain, in general, and of course keeping consistent pressure on the QB. Getting inside the QB's head and never letting him be comfortable in the pocket combined with shutting down the running game are the true critical attributes of any defense, regardless of scheme you employ. If you can do those two things as a unit consistently, your team will have success; especially with an offense like the Cowboys that seems poised for greatness this year.

First of all, the answer is no. Second, I'm not sure how good the offense will be, but its potential should not be underrated by anyone in my opinion. And third, damn good OP.

 

[Irvin88_4life]

Yes, the numbers are lies! TD's are not the important part of a game. 3rd downs are.

If we are in 3rd down situation we need to convert. That being said if we pick up first down on 1st and 2nd down and score a TD is 3rd down still more important? Not that is happening, I'm going by what I saw and this offense was top 2 red zone scoring. Can we use work. ..yes, but this offense is close to elite

 

[JBS]

If the offense was elite last year, what sense does it make to demote the play caller?

 

[Clove]

Consistent pressure is the key. Consistent pressure disrupts the QBs mindset. And when you can disrupt that, look out! Charles Haley was the king of consistent pressure, although he didn't rack up the sacks. He was always in their face, around the QB and it made them very uncomfortable contributing to a lot of mistakes. Ware was not known for tons of pressure, but would put up the sack numbers. He did have plenty of games where he was in and around the QB all day, but not on a consistent game-by-game basis like Haley was.

 

[TrailBlazer]

Yes, the numbers are lies! TD's are not the important part of a game. 3rd downs are.

What about the inconsistency?

The 0-16 streak on 3rd downs. Ya, that happened. Sorry, too inconsistent to be 'great'. I don't like to throw that word around like it means nothing.

 

[JBS]

What about the inconsistency?

The 0-16 streak on 3rd downs. Ya, that happened. Sorry, too inconsistent to be 'great'. I don't like to throw that word around like it means nothing.

Not even close to great on offense ... Broncos game inflated numbers greatly...

This offense was a no show many times when they needed to show up ..

 

[Cebrin]

What about the inconsistency?

The 0-16 streak on 3rd downs. Ya, that happened. Sorry, too inconsistent to be 'great'. I don't like to throw that word around like it means nothing.

I understand the concern of the third down issues. I watched the games and mostly what I saw was a lack of consistency in runnin the ball effectively. Especially early in the year. I recall being puzzled after such a strong outing in pre season that we were struggling soon after. The O Line really gelled later in the season. Every team albeit Denver, has something they sucked at for the year offensively. We could have been better and more consistent and my expectations are that we will with the offseason moves. I just didn't like the badgers beating at the offense like it wasn't pretty great. Were the only team in 20 years to average 27 points per game and fail to make the playoffs. That defense is what should be taking the licking.

 

[TrailBlazer]

I understand the concern of the third down issues. I watched the games and mostly what I saw was a lack of consistency in runnin the ball effectively. Especially early in the year. I recall being puzzled after such a strong outing in pre season that we were struggling soon after. The O Line really gelled later in the season. Every team albeit Denver, has something they sucked at for the year offensively. We could have been better and more consistent and my expectations are that we will with the offseason moves. I just didn't like the badgers beating at the offense like it wasn't pretty great. Were the only team in 20 years to average 27 points per game and fail to make the playoffs. That defense is what should be taking the licking.

I expect, with the new additions, that Dallas will be more consistent.

Chicago and New Orleans were bad showings offensively. Even though Dallas scored 28 against the bears, it was a very bad performance offensively if you watched. PPG can be skewed by games like that one. I just don't think they were great offensively. Just good. And of course the defense was abysmal. But the offense has room to improve and I think it will.

 

[viman96]

IMO a defense that prevents 1st downs is what matters most. Keep the opposing offense from moving the chains with whatever they need to do is all that matters.

 

[Cebrin]

IMO a defense that prevents 1st downs is what matters most. Keep the opposing offense from moving the chains with whatever they need to do is all that matters.

Yeah. speaking of third downs. I wonder how many were converted no matter the yardage against our defense. I recall throwing a fit watching 3rd and longs converted constantly. God it was hard to watch games last year.

 

[xwalker]

Yeah. speaking of third downs. I wonder how many were converted no matter the yardage against our defense. I recall throwing a fit watching 3rd and longs converted constantly. God it was hard to watch games last year.

.....

 

[jrumann59]

I am jnday, I put more stock in tackles for loss and minimal gains than just raw sack numbers. I also put in hurries and pressures as good stats. D-Ware was a prime example he could rush the passer but it always seems like he disappeared when you needed him the most a critical sack to end a drive or QB hurry. It just seemed D-Ware was awesome the first 3 quarters when the game was not on the line and when it cam time for our defnse to step up Ware always got stonewalled.

 

[burmafrd]

I am jnday, I put more stock in tackles for loss and minimal gains than just raw sack numbers. I also put in hurries and pressures as good stats. D-Ware was a prime example he could rush the passer but it always seems like he disappeared when you needed him the most a critical sack to end a drive or QB hurry. It just seemed D-Ware was awesome the first 3 quarters when the game was not on the line and when it cam time for our defnse to step up Ware always got stonewalled.

another surface expert, does not matter that a greater percentage of DeWares sacks came in the 4th Qtr. You have your opinion and no facts will change it.

 

[jrumann59]

another surface expert, does not matter that a greater percentage of DeWares sacks came in the 4th Qtr. You have your opinion and no facts will change it.

The last two years Ware has not had a sack that means anything. He was always a step late to the sack.

 

[Cebrin]

.....

period.period.period.period. ? I've heard playtex is great for those.

 

[percyhoward]

Not even close to great on offense ...

4th.

Broncos game inflated numbers greatly...

4th, taking out every team's best game.