Bills have the highest pressure/hurry rate in the NFL??

[Ethan in Cleveland]

I’d also like to see these stats broken down by when they occur in the game. The Bills have had many blowout wins when they could rush the passer with no threat of the run. Are we getting the same win rate in the first quarter as we are the fourth quarter? 
We all saw what Indianapolis did to this defense. The truth shall be revealed in the next two games. 

[BuffaloRebound]

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/exactly-how-much-does-a-great-pass-rush-hurt-an-offense/

 

Data suggests that sacks are 4 times as important as pressures and that pressures don’t really effect the outcome of game very much.  

[Dr. Who]

7 minutes ago, Big Turk said:

 

No we allowed Henry one big run of 78 yards and did a pretty decent job otherwise...

 

They didn't have Henry against the Pats...nor anyone to throw the ball to.

And there was blatant holding on that play uncalled by the refs. They waited till our fumble prone kr had a kickoff return for td to throw a td negating flag.

[TBBills]

14 minutes ago, Ethan in Portland said:

Cmon. You don’t think that has anything to do with the QBs they have faced?  

Other teams face the same type of QB's yet its the Bills that suffer.

[JohnNord]

41 minutes ago, Billsfan1972 said:

But 24th in sacks.....  WOuld like to see that higher.

For some reason the McDermott/Frazier coaches defenses always get a lot of pressures but few sacks.   Not sure why this is….
 

In the previous 4 years, there has never been a defender with double digit sacks.  The highest was Jordan Phillips in 2019 with 9.5 sacks.  
 

The sack leaders in previous years have been very low as well:

 

2017: Hughes/Lawson 4.0 😳

2018: Hughes 7.0

2019: Phillips 9.5

2020: Addison/Klein 5.0 😳

 

Currently the leaders are Addison with 4.0 and Rosseau with 3.0.  It looks like there’s an excellent chance of another single digit sack leader.  

[GunnerBill]

3 minutes ago, BuffaloRebound said:

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/exactly-how-much-does-a-great-pass-rush-hurt-an-offense/

 

Data suggests that sacks are 4 times as important as pressures and that pressures don’t really effect the outcome of game very much.  

 

Interesting but what constitutes a "drive with pressure"? Any drive on which a single pressure is registered? Because I think comparing that to any drive where a single sack is registered is BOUND to show the sack is more impactful because one puts a team behind the sticks and the other doesn't. The question is much more if you are getting regular pressure without sacks does that affect a Quarterback over the duration of a game. 

 

As a 1 for 1 comparison a sack is more impactful than pressure. But is a game where a team gets say 10 pressures and 1 sack more impactful than 5 pressures and 3 sacks? Because you are getting in the QB's face or getting him off his spot more regularly which tends to throw him off or force short throws to get rid of the ball. 

[Big Turk]

10 minutes ago, Ethan in Portland said:

I’d also like to see these stats broken down by when they occur in the game. The Bills have had many blowout wins when they could rush the passer with no threat of the run. Are we getting the same win rate in the first quarter as we are the fourth quarter? 
We all saw what Indianapolis did to this defense. The truth shall be revealed in the next two games. 

 

They ran the ball well but Wentz had a bad day throwing the football.

16 minutes ago, Ethan in Portland said:

Cmon. You don’t think that has anything to do with the QBs they have faced?  

 

You mean like when we made Davis Mills look like a high school QB and then he went out the next week and put up 300 yards and 3 TDs on the Patriots?

 

No...not really.

Edited November 30, 2021 by Big Turk

[BuffaloRebound]

19 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Interesting but what constitutes a "drive with pressure"? Any drive on which a single pressure is registered? Because I think comparing that to any drive where a single sack is registered is BOUND to show the sack is more impactful because one puts a team behind the sticks and the other doesn't. The question is much more if you are getting regular pressure without sacks does that affect a Quarterback over the duration of a game. 

 

As a 1 for 1 comparison a sack is more impactful than pressure. But is a game where a team gets say 10 pressures and 1 sack more impactful than 5 pressures and 3 sacks? Because you are getting in the QB's face or getting him off his spot more regularly which tends to throw him off or force short throws to get rid of the ball. 

A lot to digest in those numbers.  Do pressures matter more to a team like Bills with a lot of ball hawks in the secondary?  Obviously you can’t get a pick on a sack.  And when you ‘sell out’ for a sack and miss (cough… Hughes…cough), it opens up a lot of throwing and running lanes for the QB. Most QB’s are mobile now and even the Trevor Simien’s can get outside and complete an easy pass.  I’d think a ‘collapse-the-pocket’ pressure is the best kind there is.  

[FilthyBeast]

1 hour ago, billybob71 said:

Seems kinda of like and empty stat to me, to really affect the QB, guys like Brady and Mahomes,  a sack or two early in the game seems necessary

 

It's definitely misleading especially when you look at games like the Titans or Colts where we couldn't get a stop in the passing game if our life depended on it.

 

Any chance we have of slowing down Jones and the Pats offense though is going to be getting pressure and with Tre White out the rest of the way I would expect more blitzing and taking chances or it's going to be a recipe for disaster with the likes of Dane Jackson and Wallace on the perimeter.

[Big Turk]

1 minute ago, FilthyBeast said:

 

It's definitely misleading especially when you look at games like the Titans or Colts where we couldn't get a stop in the passing game if our life depended on it.

 

Any chance we have of slowing down Jones and the Pats offense though is going to be getting pressure and with Tre White out the rest of the way I would expect more blitzing and taking chances or it's going to be a recipe for disaster with the likes of Dane Jackson and Wallace on the perimeter.

 

Uh...Wentz was like 50% with barely 100 yards...what are you talking about??

[FilthyBeast]

1 minute ago, Big Turk said:

 

Uh...Wentz was like 50% with barely 100 yards...what are you talking about??

 

The point is that overall this defense still struggles when then need to get a stop and even when you think they get a sack or big play a penalty is called for defensive holding, roughing the passer etc.

 

This has been the trend in pretty much every loss though particularly against the Titans as mentioned and a woeful steelers offense in the 2nd half.

[buffaloboyinATL]

4 hours ago, D. L. Hot-Flamethrower said:

Yeah, not a big play pass rush culminating in Sacks, but helps knocking the timing of teams passing attacks off and helps our secondary.

Agreed. Honestly, it is the main reason I am not completely panicking about losing Tre. He obviously can’t truly be replaced, but our D line will hopefully make his replacement’s job a little easier.  

[Big Turk]

4 hours ago, FilthyBeast said:

 

The point is that overall this defense still struggles when then need to get a stop and even when you think they get a sack or big play a penalty is called for defensive holding, roughing the passer etc.

 

This has been the trend in pretty much every loss though particularly against the Titans as mentioned and a woeful steelers offense in the 2nd half.

 

Teams average 16 points and under 300 yards a game... can't be struggling that much.

[GunnerBill]

4 hours ago, FilthyBeast said:

 

It's definitely misleading especially when you look at games like the Titans or Colts where we couldn't get a stop in the passing game if our life depended on it.

 

Any chance we have of slowing down Jones and the Pats offense though is going to be getting pressure and with Tre White out the rest of the way I would expect more blitzing and taking chances or it's going to be a recipe for disaster with the likes of Dane Jackson and Wallace on the perimeter.

 

So blitzing and leaving Jackson and Wallace 1v1 is a better idea?

[streetkings01]

5 hours ago, Billsfan1972 said:

But 24th in sacks.....  WOuld like to see that higher.

If the pressure results in an incompletion on 3rd or 4th down then it’s just as good as a sack. The goal is to force a turnover or punt on every offensive possession not to get sacks.

[Matt_In_NH]

They must have the lowest sack rate when pressuring in the history of the league.  We play a bunch of houdini's at QB?

[Dafan]

6 hours ago, billybob71 said:

Seems kinda of like and empty stat to me, to really affect the QB, guys like Brady and Mahomes,  a sack or two early in the game seems necessary

Or you get pressure on them and they hurry the pass...which leads to picks.   How many times did we pick off Mahommes.

[FilthyBeast]

6 hours ago, JohnNord said:

For some reason the McDermott/Frazier coaches defenses always get a lot of pressures but few sacks.   Not sure why this is….
 

In the previous 4 years, there has never been a defender with double digit sacks.  The highest was Jordan Phillips in 2019 with 9.5 sacks.  
 

The sack leaders in previous years have been very low as well:

 

2017: Hughes/Lawson 4.0 😳

2018: Hughes 7.0

2019: Phillips 9.5

2020: Addison/Klein 5.0 😳

 

Currently the leaders are Addison with 4.0 and Rosseau with 3.0.  It looks like there’s an excellent chance of another single digit sack leader.  

 

Regardless what happens with the coaching staff after this season, I think you have to move on from Eric Washington as the DL coach and not stay loyal over the Carolina connection because sacks numbers overall have dropped the past 2 years since he's been here and it makes zero sense given the amount of money and draft picks tied to the position.

 

 

[97bills]

7 hours ago, HappyDays said:

This is a function of our scheme. McDermott doesn't want his DEs playing cowboy. They set the edge and play contain and compress the pocket. On the back end they are inviting the opposing QB to funnel the ball into short passing windows where the back 7 can rally and gang tackle. So it makes sense that our pressure rate would be high without gaudy sack numbers.

Now we don’t want to sack the QB, I’m so confused 

[Generic_Bills_Fan]

I think we just got desensitized to how fast opposing qbs have to get rid of the ball against us and now we see a low sack total and complain lol

6 hours ago, FilthyBeast said:

 

The point is that overall this defense still struggles when then need to get a stop and even when you think they get a sack or big play a penalty is called for defensive holding, roughing the passer etc.

 

This has been the trend in pretty much every loss though particularly against the Titans as mentioned and a woeful steelers offense in the 2nd half.

Steelers game Ben was just lobbing the ball up there into tight coverage and his receivers made every ridiculous play possible…that loss still feels pretty flukey too me unlike the others