RSS Feed
NOW ON SALE
Click here to buy PDF version
.Click here to buy printed copy.
STILL AVAILABLE
Click here to buy PDF version
.Click here to buy printed copy.
06 Nov 2009
Sacks By Rusher Number
J.J. Cooper at Fanhouse has an updated look at every sack from this year, and how many rushers it took to generate those sacks.
(Thanks for reminding us to check it out, Mr. Bassett).
12 comments, Last at 09 Nov 2009, 12:35pm by C
Most Recent FO Features
» 2004 NFL Draft: Six Years Later
The 2004 NFL Draft was supposed to be one of the deepest and best ever. Six years later, how does it look? Sean McCormick breaks down the draft, position by position.
Most Recent Extra Points
Comments
Re: Sacks By Rusher Number
Some interesting stuff here(the Saints get a quarter of all their sacks on seven man rushes?) but, as he mentions, it really needs the game-charting numbers to put it in context.
Also the percentages can be somewhat misleading - the Falcons have gotten 14% of their sacks with only a 3 man rush, which sounds cool, but then you realize they've only gotten 14 sacks total. Similar effect with the Buccaneers getting 82% of their sacks on 4 man rushes - it sounds like they are getting pressure with only a few rushers, but then you realize they only have 11 sacks all year and they aren't getting any pressure at all - it's just that when they've managed to get a sack they have only been bringing 4.
Re: Sacks By Rusher Number
Agreed, the raw numbers at the bottom or much more interesting than the percentages.
Greg Williams has been good at keeping opponents confused as to when he's blitzing. It's an old trick, but the Saints have used the ploy of alternating all out blitzes with plays he drops 7 into coverage. Many of the Saints big plays have come on plays after the big blitz; with the QBs timing disrupted, they either throw too quickly into coverage for an INT, or they hold on the ball too long and get sacked by a 4 man rush. When they start to get comfortable again, the blitz comes back.
Re: Sacks By Rusher Number
That's the idea.
Blitz a guy, create pressure, make him speed up his internal clock...
Then once he's used to not having time, even when he does have time ( and you have 7 back in coverage) he will rush and make more mistakes than other wise.
That's when a DC get's into a great spot. When the QB is so used to being pressured, that he imagines pressure even when it's not there. You get psychology on your side.
Re: Sacks By Rusher Number
It would be really nice to see how often each team brought each # of rushers, to compare.
Re: Sacks By Rusher Number
Cooper seems to have some understanding of the right idea, but is essentially throwing out worthless numbers because he doesn't have the good numbers yet. What % of their sacks (and even number of sacks) that occur with a given number or rushers is useless without knowing how many times they rushed that many, and in what situations it occurred.
The 49ers have 16 sacks with 4 and 5 rushers, 0 sacks with 3, 6, 7, and 8 rushers. Does that mean they're good at rushing 4 and 5 and have huge coverage holes when they rush more, or does that mean they don't rush 6 and 7 men enough? Maybe they rarely rush 3, and would do better dropping that extra guy into coverage.
Cooper needed a column. He threw rarely used numbers, and made his editor happy. Other than a plug of FO, its a complete waste of space.
Re: Sacks By Rusher Number
I'd be curious for an indepth look at those 6 and 7 man rushes. The intent wouldn't seem to be a sack (or I hope not since they are so rare), but rather to get force an incomplete pass on 3rd down, say.
Re: Sacks By Rusher Number
I also know the whole idea behind the Eagles blitzes is to bring the house on 3rd and long, show coverage that dictates a certain shorter hot-read and then jump on the play to make the tackle short of the first down.
Re: Sacks By Rusher Number
It's nice to see the Eagles have more sacks from a normal rush (13) than through blitzes (10).
Re: Sacks By Rusher Number
Yeah, but I wonder how many of those 4 rusher sacks are from a "normal" rush and not the various zone blitzes McDermott has been calling so frequently this year where a d-lineman drops back? I feel like I've seen Trent Cole and Chris Clemons in coverage on every other play. I also swear I saw Bunkley in coverage one time, but he may have just hustled to follow the play after getting stood up on the LOS...
Re: Sacks By Rusher Number
He sent Dixon, who is bigger than Bunkley in coverage too.
Good remark about 4 blitzers being different than "4 man rush" in this Eagles defense.
Re: Sacks By Rusher Number
When i saw the title of this post I thought it mean the players number (i.e. 55 would be Junior Seau and John Abraham).
Would that be worth an article?
Re: Sacks By Rusher Number
That was my thought to. I was like, 'What a strange article.' But this makes more sense.
Post new comment