TPS Posted May 23, 2019 Author Posted May 23, 2019 33 minutes ago, DaBillsFanSince1973 said: funny how a JA thread turned into defense and sacks? JA is only one part of the discussion in the interview. They got into a discussion about pass rush vs coverage, and what is more important. Simms said something like, 10 years ago I would've said pass rush, but he's now on the side of coverage. Another interesting tidbit was related to the year he worked for the Pats, saying how it is football 24-7. He had a funny line about Belichick being so focused on football. He was in town doing a piece on JA, which he said will come out next week most likely. I'd recommend a listen if you haven't already.
Buftex Posted May 23, 2019 Posted May 23, 2019 2 hours ago, KD in CA said: Sacks are obviously better than non-sacks, but agree that consistency is the key. If you are getting consistent pressure, the sack numbers will come. If not sacks, causing QB's to make bad/rushed decisions can be pretty damn effective too. 3
Lv-Bills Posted May 23, 2019 Posted May 23, 2019 Of course sacks matter. They matter the most. If the ball doesn't leave the QB's hand, it has no chance to be completed downfield and everything that could then result negatively from that completion. It's also a negative play for the offense. There's nothing better than that. Especially in key spots, or on key downs. The next thing, of course, is consistent pressure. Both are great to have. But the actual sack is the abrupt end to a play with zero damage inflicted by the offense. Franchise QB's can deal with, and still beat, consistent pressure. They can't beat laying on their backs with the ball still in their hands.
MJS Posted May 23, 2019 Posted May 23, 2019 He also mentioned that there were a lot of teams interested in Josh Allen and had him as their #1 or #2 QB on the board. Not sure if I completely believe that, but he claimed the Giants would have taken him if not Barkley, he claimed he was the #2 QB for the Browns. Arizona preferred Josh Allen. The idea was that he was high on everyone's board and much more favored than the national media realized. 1 2
C.Biscuit97 Posted May 23, 2019 Posted May 23, 2019 3 hours ago, JoshAllenHasBigHands said: I wouldn't had occurred to me if Hughes had 15 sacks, that is probably true. But now that it has, I really think I am on to something. It reminds me of the year we had Pettine and got all those awesome sack numbers-our defense still sucked. Or Mario, even when he had those 10+ sack years, he was invisible on every other play. It never sat well with me, but I couldn't articulate the problem. If Hughes had 15 sacks and half the pressures, I would say he is not worth the money. With Schwartz, we arguably had the best d line in the nfl and had a defense that shut down prime Aaron Rodgers and Peyton Manning. We weren’t taking about pressures then. Again, I like Hughes. But it seems like Bills fans just settle. Basically everywhere, a sack is better than a pressure. It’s like trying to pretend like 52% completion rate isn’t terrible. It’s ok to want an $11 million dollar DE to get average more 5 sacks in his last four years, especially when he is turning 31. It’s ok to have a qb complete more than 60% of his passes (and hopefully he will). And im not meaning this directly at you. It’s just a frustration as Bills fans that we just act like it’s ok to not want more. We should have high standards because we are the best fans on the plant. 2 1
JoshAllenHasBigHands Posted May 23, 2019 Posted May 23, 2019 (edited) 13 minutes ago, C.Biscuit97 said: With Schwartz, we arguably had the best d line in the nfl and had a defense that shut down prime Aaron Rodgers and Peyton Manning. We weren’t taking about pressures then. Again, I like Hughes. But it seems like Bills fans just settle. Basically everywhere, a sack is better than a pressure. It’s like trying to pretend like 52% completion rate isn’t terrible. It’s ok to want an $11 million dollar DE to get average more 5 sacks in his last four years, especially when he is turning 31. It’s ok to have a qb complete more than 60% of his passes (and hopefully he will). And im not meaning this directly at you. It’s just a frustration as Bills fans that we just act like it’s ok to not want more. We should have high standards because we are the best fans on the plant. Yeah, I get it, and I won't fight you on your opinion. I am all about learning more about analytics. Not to be confused with stats (60% is a stat, not an analytic). The point is the more we learn the smarter we get. With that, we are learning that pressures make more of difference on the outcome of games than sacks. (To supplement the point) I look at it like this: If Jerry gets 16 sacks, he is a guaranteed pro-bowler and maybe an all-pro. Great. But what does that really mean? It means he has gotten one sack per game. Do you think that one sack made a difference on the game? Maybe, but its not likely. However, he gets pressure on 15% of snaps. Pressure means he is altering the throw--making it a shorter throw, inaccurate, or incomplete. That 15% of altered plays is more important than one sack. As far as that 60% number, it means things and it doesn't. For Allen, it means he needs to take the shorter throws that are there and not play hero ball. If he does that, he will make it in the league. If he doesn't, he will be a middling quarterback. But its because 60% is a magic number; rather, it is a symptom of his need to start taking the short throw. Edited May 23, 2019 by JoshAllenHasBigHands 2
RobbRiddick Posted May 23, 2019 Posted May 23, 2019 I'd recommend this video for anyone who hasn't seen it - Simms talking about who he thinks will be the best sophomore QBs. His thoughts are very interesting. I also like that he has his dad on the show and just keeps referring to him as 'dad'. I mean. he must have had a few comments about only being in the media because his name is Simms, so I like that he doesn't try to distance himself from Phil and is happy to share a mic with him. He's one of my favourite analysts out there. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJ0zzQVpK3o 2
fansince88 Posted May 23, 2019 Posted May 23, 2019 Didnt realize he was on the Pats coaching staff for a pinch.
Ennjay Posted May 23, 2019 Posted May 23, 2019 5 hours ago, JoshAllenHasBigHands said: I hate blanket statements, and so I think my comment is really a response to overemphasis on season sack numbers. We should always be trying to get sacks, but I don't think the number of sacks we get at the end of the year should be the metric or focus. Agreed. And QB pressures are important when they take the Offense out of plays as called.
transient Posted May 23, 2019 Posted May 23, 2019 Wolf of Wall Street... is Simms trying to say that if Belichick was in finance instead of coaching in the NFL that he'd still be a cheater? 1 1
Boca BIlls Posted May 23, 2019 Posted May 23, 2019 4 hours ago, RobbRiddick said: I'd recommend this video for anyone who hasn't seen it - Simms talking about who he thinks will be the best sophomore QBs. His thoughts are very interesting. I also like that he has his dad on the show and just keeps referring to him as 'dad'. I mean. he must have had a few comments about only being in the media because his name is Simms, so I like that he doesn't try to distance himself from Phil and is happy to share a mic with him. He's one of my favourite analysts out there. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJ0zzQVpK3o I wonder if it was Whaley that Phil Simms was talking about... sounds spot on as a description.
mykidsdad Posted May 24, 2019 Posted May 24, 2019 Good stuff. I like him so much better than his dad.
LSHMEAB Posted May 24, 2019 Posted May 24, 2019 10 hours ago, mannc said: Simms made an interesting point about the importance of pass rushers vs coverage guys. Chiefs led the league in sacks last year, but their defense was awful. Highly recommend Simms’s podcast. I would counter with the fact that the Chiefs were scoring points like nobody's business, so the sack numbers are misleading. You're gonna get a ton of opportunities to pile up sacks when teams are already down 21 in the second quarter. So while their defense was trash, I don't think the sack numbers are a great argument against the importance of getting to the QB. But Simms is a really bright guy and I appreciate his insights. 2
Paul Costa Posted May 24, 2019 Posted May 24, 2019 Phil Simms May be higher on Josh Allen than any media person ? 2
Logic Posted May 24, 2019 Posted May 24, 2019 48 minutes ago, LSHMEAB said: I would counter with the fact that the Chiefs were scoring points like nobody's business, so the sack numbers are misleading. You're gonna get a ton of opportunities to pile up sacks when teams are already down 21 in the second quarter. So while their defense was trash, I don't think the sack numbers are a great argument against the importance of getting to the QB. But Simms is a really bright guy and I appreciate his insights. Yeah. It's clear to me that you need coverage AND pressure, not just one or the other. All the pressure in the world won't matter if your corners can't cover their guys. Likewise, all the great coverage in the world won't matter if the opposing QB has an eternity to sit in the pocket and wait for someone to get open. You need pressure, you need coverage. Not sure when it became an "either/or" proposition. 1 2
Augie Posted May 24, 2019 Posted May 24, 2019 Chris Simms is a ranch guy. How terribly disappointing. Blue cheese is disgusting? Oh my......
Ol Dirty B Posted May 24, 2019 Posted May 24, 2019 8 hours ago, C.Biscuit97 said: With Schwartz, we arguably had the best d line in the nfl and had a defense that shut down prime Aaron Rodgers and Peyton Manning. We weren’t taking about pressures then. Again, I like Hughes. But it seems like Bills fans just settle. Basically everywhere, a sack is better than a pressure. It’s like trying to pretend like 52% completion rate isn’t terrible. It’s ok to want an $11 million dollar DE to get average more 5 sacks in his last four years, especially when he is turning 31. It’s ok to have a qb complete more than 60% of his passes (and hopefully he will). And im not meaning this directly at you. It’s just a frustration as Bills fans that we just act like it’s ok to not want more. We should have high standards because we are the best fans on the plant. This is exactly what I was going to say. All these people saying sacks are unimportant never mentioned the best defense in the past 10 years which I believe set a franchise record. I could be wrong on the record though. 2
TPS Posted May 24, 2019 Author Posted May 24, 2019 46 minutes ago, Augie said: Chris Simms is a ranch guy. How terribly disappointing. Blue cheese is disgusting? Oh my...... Can I withdraw this thread? Shame... 1
LSHMEAB Posted May 24, 2019 Posted May 24, 2019 43 minutes ago, Ol Dirty B said: This is exactly what I was going to say. All these people saying sacks are unimportant never mentioned the best defense in the past 10 years which I believe set a franchise record. I could be wrong on the record though. That was the one year I felt confident we could contain the top QB's. If you want to have an elite defense, you get in the QB's face all day long. That's the way I view it anyways. Of course you need a solid MLB and guys who can cover. But if I'm given the choice, I'll take an imposing front four any day of the week. 4
Recommended Posts