Will not having a legit pass rusher hurt us down the stretch?

[Zimmy Lives]

That's bad because the 3-tech in this defense needs to get one-on-one blocking. Crawford is strong for his size, but he's really light to be taking on double-teams. He said his weight was down to 273 pounds because he started out playing DE. The other problem with that is that if Crawford gets double-teamed, then Hayden is not a pass rusher and can't really benefit from single-blocking.

Josh Brent at his peak would blow up single blocking by driving that OLineman back. He sometimes could drive double-teams back. The concept of him playing again is intriguing but I just don't know how effective he can be without going through training camp to really get into football condition.

I think TMc can beat single-blocking and they've been playing T. Crawford and Melton together on some passing downs.

I'm wondering if the Giants would be willing to trade Jonathan Hankins? Probably not.

 

[honyock]

Don't know what the deal is with HMelton. He is a ghost. If Lawrence can get some pressure, then it should free up some other guys. But who knows. At least we are getting pressure, just not sacks.

I've thought Melton has been pretty good in relatively limited snaps so far. But he wasnt a factor at all during the Giants game. I don't remember him getting any pressure or penetration. Any inside pressure we got was coming from Crawford or McClain.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

I think it does. The good news is that in today's passing game the ability to make sacks and even get pressure is not as important as it was back in say, 2005. Teams have shortened the pass patterns so much that it's hard to get sacks or even pressure when your QB has plays designed to get the ball out of his hand in less than 2 seconds. It used to be you had better reach 40 sacks in a season in order to be successful in the postseason. Now it's more like 35 sacks in a season.

The other part that gets overlooked is that since the Cowboys are dominating time of possession, they have less opportunities to get sacks because the Cowboys have the ball.

For now, my larger concern is eliminating those goofy turnovers the offense makes which I think is pretty fixable.





YR

 

[Plankton]

That defense was on the cusp of being very good. This one isn't. It needs many more players first.

The 1991 defense going into (and during) the 1992 season added a lot of pieces:

Starters:
RDE Charles Haley (for Jim Jeffcoat/Daniel Stubbs)
MLB Robert Jones (for Jack Del Rio)
LCB Kevin Smith (for Issaic Holt)
FS Thomas Everett (for Ray Horton)

They also added Darren Woodson and Mickey Pruitt to provide support in the nickel packages.

I agree that the outlook on the 1991 team at the end of the year felt like it was trending upward, and needing refining as opposed to this defense, which looks like it needs a rebuild in some areas.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

I think it does. The good news is that in today's passing game the ability to make sacks and even get pressure is not as important as it was back in say, 2005. Teams have shortened the pass patterns so much that it's hard to get sacks or even pressure when your QB has plays designed to get the ball out of his hand in less than 2 seconds. It used to be you had better reach 40 sacks in a season in order to be successful in the postseason. Now it's more like 35 sacks in a season.

The other part that gets overlooked is that since the Cowboys are dominating time of possession, they have less opportunities to get sacks because the Cowboys have the ball.

For now, my larger concern is eliminating those goofy turnovers the offense makes which I think is pretty fixable.





YR

This.

Some like to disregard the "3-step drop" as being inconsequential when it comes to sacks and pressures, but the game has changed. Shorter routes and higher percentage passes have made a difference.

 

[Wood]

Dallas has no chance in playoffs without an improved pass rush.

 

[burmafrd]

we are on track to get 14 sacks this year

despite all the excuses that is pathetic.

 

[StarBoyz83]

Im hoping we can trade for somebody. Then draft mostly denfense.

 

[perrykemp]

Dallas has no chance in playoffs without an improved pass rush.

I think they can win a playoff game. The chances they can win 2 (or 3) playoff games and a Superbowl without putting Rodgers / Rivers / Manning on the ground is problematic.

 

[honyock]

No. Marinelli seems dedicated to Hayden for some reason. IMO, they're more likely to go with an extra DLineman active (9 vs 8) than to bench or cut Hayden. T. McClain can play the 3-tech or 1-tech position which gives them flexibility if they did add another 1-tech like Josh Brent.

I've had the same opinion for awhile, but I'm starting to wonder if we might see Hayden be an inactive later in the season.

A couple of things would have to happen first. McClain would have to continue to play like he did on Sunday...a big upgrade to Hayden at the 1. And Brent would have to show he can be effective and gradually able to handle 25 snaps or so per game. Neither of those are a sure thing at all.

But if that happens, and by then both are obvious upgrades to Hayden, and if the team is in a position for a playoff run...man, I could see Hayden being an inactive by the last 2-3 regular season games. Loyalty is one thing. But if you're staring at a high seed and the real possibility of a deep playoff run, you might have to make a cold blooded decision or two.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

This.

Some like to disregard the "3-step drop" as being inconsequential when it comes to sacks and pressures, but the game has changed. Shorter routes and higher percentage passes have made a difference.

And when you look at the # of pass attempts against the defense per game it's quite low. The other teams that have a lower pass attempts per game are not good and have lousy run defenses and low scoring offenses. So for opponents, they tend to run against those teams because they can score points that way and reduce the risk of losing the game due to turnovers. With Dallas, it's different because Dallas scores a lot of points. We are basically keeping the opponent off the field so they don't even get the opportunity to throw that much.




YR

 

[MichaelWinicki]

And when you look at the # of pass attempts against the defense per game it's quite low. The other teams that have a lower pass attempts per game are not good and have lousy run defenses and low scoring offenses. So for opponents, they tend to run against those teams because they can score points that way and reduce the risk of losing the game due to turnovers. With Dallas, it's different because Dallas scores a lot of points. We are basically keeping the opponent off the field so they don't even get the opportunity to throw that much.




YR

Exactly.

And while the Cowboys sack number is very low, actually their % of QB hits and pressures isn't bad.

 

[Redball Express]

Our sack leader has 1.5 sacks up until this point. I think this as well our lack of defensive turnovers may hurt us down the stretch.

I agree.

Lack of a pass rush is going to really show up as the season gets longer.

Once we have to play that stretch of games in December when the weather turns lousy..

not being able to attack the QB will begin to change games.

Right now..

Marinelli is doing it with smoke and mirrors and schemes.

Not by talent.

It may have to wait until next year before we get more pass rush help.

But so far..

I can live with the short comings.

 

[kramskoi]

There is a lot of talk of how all Denver needed was to make their defense tough and that they are now set.

Their problem wasn't defense in Super Bowl. It was their offense folding like a house of cards.

I want Manning and broncos in Super Bowl.

Getting sacks won't matter vs them. He gets the ball out too quick. We can force him into mistakes. This defense is becoming more and more opportunistic!

I can certainly agree...many times, like the Saints, they will make themselves one-dimensional. Lets be honest though, considering what happened in Dallas last year, their defense was pretty porous. If the current Dallas team had played them, they would have gotten whacked...straight up!

The combination of Miller and Ware, if they can both avoid wearing down toward the end (real possibility), gives them an edge that they did not have last year. The destruction of the injury-depleted 49ers was rather foreboding for the future, even considering the circumstances...Manning was playing pitch and catch...it could have been much worse.

Finally, it was Seattle's vaunted secondary that had a hand in said collapse of the Denver offense. It happened again this year in Seattle. Dallas simply does not have a secondary that is comparable. Yes, they play hard, disciplined and inspired football, but they will need to become MUCH better for a possible meeting with Denver. Eli had 3 TD's and was largely unfettered last week...that should be concerning because the older Manning has an even sharper knife. Dallas can certainly play keep away, but I don't know if that would be enough...I really just don't know.

I would also add that the Giants defenses of 2007 and 2011 (SBowl years) each had around 50 sacks for the season (52/48 respectively)...they were that disruptive and it was the biggest reason why they were able to derail the Patriots both times.

 

[kramskoi]

The fewest sacks registered by a Super Bowl champion since sacks became officially tracked as a statistic in 1982 is 24 by the 2006 Colts.

The fewest sacks registered by any team in a 16 game schedule is 13 by the Colts in 1981 (who finished 2-14).

The 2014 Cowboys are on pace to register 13.7 sacks for the season.

History would dictate that improving that number is critical to success in the playoffs.

The Colts did not need much pressure because Grossman had the propensity to crap the bed all by himself, without any help...he had 2 INT's in that Superbowl and threw for only 165 yds...special teams and defense was really all they had.

 

[guag]

But this team hasn't seen a high powered offense yet. Not the likes of GB or Den.

I disagree. Doesn't our defense practice against our own high powered offense?

 

[FLcowboy]

Our sack leader has 1.5 sacks up until this point. I think this as well our lack of defensive turnovers may hurt us down the stretch.

Are you ready to give up on Lawrence? I'm thinking Lawrence is going to br the catylist for some good things to happen on defense.

 

[perrykemp]

Are you ready to give up on Lawrence? I'm thinking Lawrence is going to br the catylist for some good things to happen on defense.

No, but he is a rookie 2nd round pick coming off a significant injury.

 

[RoboQB]

Are you ready to give up on Lawrence? I'm thinking Lawrence is going to br the catylist for some good things to happen on defense.

I agree.

The sacks will come... we've been in a lot of games that stayed fairly close... its easy to pin your ears back and rush in games like the 42-17 beating that Denver gave SF... DWare with 3 sacks that weren't really game changing, typical... I've heard a lot of good things about this DeMarcus Lawerence kid... a close friend of mine is a Boise State fan... he said the kid is a beast... I will settle for solid pass rusher... there's still time for him to contribute 5-6 sacks and open up the middle and other DE position.

 

[waving monkey]

And that is a difference measured in light years...If it comes down to Denver vs. Dallas, the boys will face some real kryptonite. It may be that it is just Denver's year...the additions on the defensive side looks set to push them over the top. No team not named Seattle will have the secondary that can really control them...shoot-out city, so your offense better be primed and ready to produce prodigious amounts of points...or else!

our offensive line sans Free ain't bad