Chris Simms interview from OBD

[Shaw66]

3 minutes ago, ColoradoBills said:

 

 

Unless someone categories and scores every one of these plays it ends up being more of an "eye of the beholder" thing IMO.

I don't know of any site doing that for individual players or teams for that matter.

I'm also pretty sure some teams do analytics on this and do have that info but do not share it.

FWIW

 

 

McD made it sound like the Bill's keep those stats, and the pressure stat is more important to them.  

[ColoradoBills]

5 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

McD made it sound like the Bill's keep those stats, and the pressure stat is more important to them.  

 

I'm willing to bet they keep those stats too.  It would be pretty cool to see how they score those pass rushing play results.

[eball]

2 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

That's right.  McD was very interesting on the subject.  It sounds like they track and rely on QB pressures.  He likes sacks, but pressures is what he wants.  The more pressures, the more opportunities for other guys to make plays.  

 

This is falling upon deaf ears with @C.Biscuit97 and others. Sacks are all that matters and we sucker Bills fans are “settling” for Hughes on a true hometown discount contract!

 

Oh, to be a damaged Bills fan!

[Forward Progress]

2 hours ago, ColoradoBills said:

 

I look at it this way.  By definition a sack is a tackle (or force out-of-bounce) of a QB behind the LOS in attempting a pass.

So in that sense a sack cannot result in a turnover.

 

 

... except a strip sack, where a fumble is caused by a tackle on the QB behind the line of scrimmage, can lead to a turnover and still counts a sack statistically.

 

I agree with the essence of your point that QB pressure leads to several good outcomes for the defense and sacks are not the only benefit of getting at (or near) the QB.

[3rdand12]

3 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

That's right.  McD was very interesting on the subject.  It sounds like they track and rely on QB pressures.  He likes sacks, but pressures is what he wants.  The more pressures, the more opportunities for other guys to make plays.  

forced turnovers are what you want.

Back in the day Sacks often meant QBs were taking a volatile hit. The chances for a ball coming loose may have been higher. because sometimes they really freaked out when a defensive player was bearing down and going to crush them violently.

 i miss that.
seeing a QB go pee cuz he was actually scared.

 pressure comes from anywhere. if you are worried  as a qb ? That's  "advantage defense '

[ColoradoBills]

1 hour ago, Forward Progress said:

 

... except a strip sack, where a fumble is caused by a tackle on the QB behind the line of scrimmage, can lead to a turnover and still counts a sack statistically.

 

I agree with the essence of your point that QB pressure leads to several good outcomes for the defense and sacks are not the only benefit of getting at (or near) the QB.

 

You are right about both your points.

While you can't discount sacks as being highly emotional plays for the defense they are not the only way to judge a pass rush.

 

 

[Jumpsuit Jim]

We need to take these points into consideration when we form our opinion of Star L. Is he overpaid because he isn’t hitting the QB, or is he paid just right because he moves the pocket and indirectly pressures the QB? 

[Saxum]

Star is supposed to keep linemen off LBs so they can make plays and since most of our LBs are undersized that is a good thing.

 

Not sure how well it will work with an undersized DT protecting an undersized LB but we better hope Bills brain trust has solid plans.

[eball]

16 minutes ago, Limeaid said:

Star is supposed to keep linemen off LBs so they can make plays and since most of our LBs are undersized that is a good thing.

 

Not sure how well it will work with an undersized DT protecting an undersized LB but we better hope Bills brain trust has solid plans.

 

If it works it’s because said undersized DT will beat the OL to their gaps and disrupt plays before they ever get to the LBs. 

 

Oliver was not drafted to be someone who occupies blockers. Do people really not understand this?

[DC Tom]

1 hour ago, 3rdand12 said:

forced turnovers are what you want.

Back in the day Sacks often meant QBs were taking a volatile hit. The chances for a ball coming loose may have been higher. because sometimes they really freaked out when a defensive player was bearing down and going to crush them violently.

 i miss that.
seeing a QB go pee cuz he was actually scared.

 pressure comes from anywhere. if you are worried  as a qb ? That's  "advantage defense '

 

One of my favorite Bruce Smith memories is Jeff George dropping back, looking left, and clearly mouthing bug-eyed "Oh, *****!" before Smith annihilates him for the fourth time that game.

 

And one of my favorite SB XXV moments is captured in the series of stills where Leon Seals pancakes Hostetler.  

 

One of the reasons sacks aren't as important nowadays is because that level of intimidation has been taken out of the pass rush.  QBs are much more protected nowadays, so you don't see "pressures" where the QB is pancaked after the throw, or where QBs are honestly frightened at the prospect of being sacked.  Getting a QB rattled has become less about the intimidation, and more about getting inside the QBs decision cycle and forcing errors.  

 

That being said, they're not unimportant, either.  A mere "pressure" never turned a 2nd and 5 into a 3rd and 18 (intentional grounding excepted, which frankly should be tracked as a stat along with sacks) and drastically limited an offense's play calling options.

[Wnybricky]

Would be nice to see his actual interview and not just the clip 

[2020 Our Year For Sure]

6 hours ago, eball said:

 

This is falling upon deaf ears with @C.Biscuit97 and others. Sacks are all that matters and we sucker Bills fans are “settling” for Hughes on a true hometown discount contract!

 

Oh, to be a damaged Bills fan!

Dude.

[Chandler#81]

I’m pretty sure today’s the day the entire interview gets posted on Fox Sports. If you see it, please copy & link.

[Locomark]

On 5/23/2019 at 12:25 PM, MJS said:

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.

 

That made me feel better about our QB evaluation. First time I really heard anyone say that.

[billsfan_34]

On 5/23/2019 at 8:21 AM, Rocket94 said:

Simms has a good sense about players. He hits on the intangibles often overlooked by other analysts.

Super high IQ football guy. Simms is one of my favorites to listen to.

[Rocket94]

1 hour ago, billsfan_34 said:

Super high IQ football guy. Simms is one of my favorites to listen to.

Yeah...I like his out of the box thinking. Kind of like life itself! He is a former player too and he sometimes hits on underlying traits.

[billsfan_34]

1 hour ago, Rocket94 said:

Yeah...I like his out of the box thinking. Kind of like life itself! He is a former player too and he sometimes hits on underlying traits.

I have noticed that also. He is able to see the little things others dont.

[Rocket94]

10 minutes ago, billsfan_34 said:

I have noticed that also. He is able to see the little things others dont.

I know. We are seeing it more and more with the way the game is evolving. Look at Matt Milano and now possibly Vaseon Joseph.

[billsfan_34]

20 minutes ago, Rocket94 said:

I know. We are seeing it more and more with the way the game is evolving. Look at Matt Milano and now possibly Vaseon Joseph.

Seems like out LB corps is shaping up nicely. We may have a nasty D this year.

[Rocket94]

7 minutes ago, billsfan_34 said:

Seems like out LB corps is shaping up nicely. We may have a nasty D this year.

The "D" is getting there!