DE situation

[VOR]

6.5 sacks means he was tied for 37th with 5 other guys.

 

The Bills as a team were 29th best in sacks.

And what about 2006? What was the difference?

[Pyrite Gal]

And what about 2006? What was the difference?

In 2007 because of the lack of a pass rush, opposing teams keyed their blocking designs and play selection to minimize the effectiveness of the one Pro Bowler on the Bills DL.

 

It really shows a lack of understanding of the game for folks to blame the anemic sack numbers on Schoebel because he suffered such a huge drop off in the number of sacks he logged in 2007. Actually, it was the lack of a consistent pass rush from since cut Triplett, the failure to acquire sackmaster Walker (why do folks think Jauron Fewell wanted him so badly) and the on again off again performance of Hargrove which allowed opposing offense to slide their protection schemes Schobel's way.

 

If folks are so certain he disappeared and play so badly then why did the coaches go out of their way to put him on the Pro Bowl team as a reserve even though the sack numbers clearly did not attract much support Schoebel's way in the voting.

 

Folks who seem so stone cold certain he disappeared simply do not seem to get it.

[San-O]

In 2007 because of the lack of a pass rush, opposing teams keyed their blocking designs and play selection to minimize the effectiveness of the one Pro Bowler on the Bills DL.

 

It really shows a lack of understanding of the game for folks to blame the anemic sack numbers on Schoebel because he suffered such a huge drop off in the number of sacks he logged in 2007. Actually, it was the lack of a consistent pass rush from since cut Triplett, the failure to acquire sackmaster Walker (why do folks think Jauron Fewell wanted him so badly) and the on again off again performance of Hargrove which allowed opposing offense to slide their protection schemes Schobel's way.

 

If folks are so certain he disappeared and play so badly then why did the coaches go out of their way to put him on the Pro Bowl team as a reserve even though the sack numbers clearly did not attract much support Schoebel's way in the voting.

 

Folks who seem so stone cold certain he disappeared simply do not seem to get it.

 

 

I have a very hard time believing D-coordinators are staying up at night designing blocking schemes to stop Schobel.

 

The several games I did watch, didn't see him getting double teamed.

 

Also, 2006 ended up being a contract year for him. He seems to me like an average player on a below average line.

 

Triplett was just as bad in '06 as '07.

[WellDressed]

Cotton was IN that crowd, clappin' and chantin, hootin and hollerin! Those are Ole' Cotton's kinda people!

 

Wow, I never knew Elton was part of the who. That song is horrible.

[Pyrite Gal]

I have a very hard time believing D-coordinators are staying up at night designing blocking schemes to stop Schobel.

 

The several games I did watch, didn't see him getting double teamed.

 

Also, 2006 ended up being a contract year for him. He seems to me like an average player on a below average line.

 

Triplett was just as bad in '06 as '07.

Actually there are a number of statements which one can disagree with or not which points toward the points you make not being correct. I feel that.

 

1. OCs (it is the offensive coordinators who prepare the blocking schemes Schoebel will face and not the DCs btw) stay up all night (or as many hours as they can muster and still walk) preparing schemes and implementations to beat that week's opponent which might include the Bills.

 

2. In terms of stopping the Bills from getting sacks in 2007, the opposing OC likely devoted his time various Bills sack threats . Of the 40 Bills sacks that year, 14 were Schobels which actually outpaced the #2 and #3 (Kelsay and Denney) when combined. The good OC is staying up the maximum number of hours he can developing blocking schemes for his team and quite frankly he would be a fool not to spend most of that time figuring out a way to exploit the guy who got the vast majority of the sacks.

 

3. How does the OC actually win this battle to exploit the Bills.

 

A. He chooses what he wants to do and forces the Bills to adjust to him rather than curtailing what he does well to acomodate the Bills. In this case, though I would be a fool not to focus on neutralizing one player in terms of sack threats because if I beat him I have taken away over 1/3 of their sack total the previous year.

 

B. The way I do this is on passing plays I dt their major sack threat (as always depending upon the quality of my individual players I will go 1-on-1 when I can but I would be foolish not to exploit their major sack threat with my major effort). However, in addition to dt's this player I can do other things like slant my players and play in how they implement their assignments to maximize the traffic around their major sack threat. This selection and game planning about how to implement my blocking schemes produces a result which is difficult to see on TV but really impacts the play.

 

C. I am particularly helped against the Bills as not only does their DL not present the rushing threat across the board they would have presented if they had gotten Walker to sign, if Triplett played well enough to force me to slant the protection toward covering the middle of the OL, or if designated pass rusher Hargrove were not missing all the time, but the LBs are young and injured so I do not have to worry as much about employment of zone blitzes which Schobel has already shown effectiveness at doing the past few year.

 

Scheming for the Bills pass rush is all about scheming for Schoebel because statistically they have few other weapons.

[Beerball]

I have a very hard time believing D-coordinators are staying up at night designing blocking schemes to stop Schobel.

 

The several games I did watch, didn't see him getting double teamed.

 

Also, 2006 ended up being a contract year for him. He seems to me like an average player on a below average line.

 

Triplett was just as bad in '06 as '07.

I'm as skeptical as you SoCal. I've been told repeatedly that better DT play will help Schobel and I'm hopeful but by no means convinced.

[marauderswr80]

I still think is Stroud can play to his full ability ALL DL will flurish off it. This includes our DL.......

 

Although, id take Taylor on my team.

[keepthefaith]

Actually there are a number of statements which one can disagree with or not which points toward the points you make not being correct. I feel that.

 

1. OCs (it is the offensive coordinators who prepare the blocking schemes Schoebel will face and not the DCs btw) stay up all night (or as many hours as they can muster and still walk) preparing schemes and implementations to beat that week's opponent which might include the Bills.

 

2. In terms of stopping the Bills from getting sacks in 2007, the opposing OC likely devoted his time various Bills sack threats . Of the 40 Bills sacks that year, 14 were Schobels which actually outpaced the #2 and #3 (Kelsay and Denney) when combined. The good OC is staying up the maximum number of hours he can developing blocking schemes for his team and quite frankly he would be a fool not to spend most of that time figuring out a way to exploit the guy who got the vast majority of the sacks.

 

3. How does the OC actually win this battle to exploit the Bills.

 

A. He chooses what he wants to do and forces the Bills to adjust to him rather than curtailing what he does well to acomodate the Bills. In this case, though I would be a fool not to focus on neutralizing one player in terms of sack threats because if I beat him I have taken away over 1/3 of their sack total the previous year.

 

B. The way I do this is on passing plays I dt their major sack threat (as always depending upon the quality of my individual players I will go 1-on-1 when I can but I would be foolish not to exploit their major sack threat with my major effort). However, in addition to dt's this player I can do other things like slant my players and play in how they implement their assignments to maximize the traffic around their major sack threat. This selection and game planning about how to implement my blocking schemes produces a result which is difficult to see on TV but really impacts the play.

 

C. I am particularly helped against the Bills as not only does their DL not present the rushing threat across the board they would have presented if they had gotten Walker to sign, if Triplett played well enough to force me to slant the protection toward covering the middle of the OL, or if designated pass rusher Hargrove were not missing all the time, but the LBs are young and injured so I do not have to worry as much about employment of zone blitzes which Schobel has already shown effectiveness at doing the past few year.

 

Scheming for the Bills pass rush is all about scheming for Schoebel because statistically they have few other weapons.

 

Not only do they have few pass rush weapons, but the mindset of this head coach is not to use (very often) LBs or DBs to join the rush. The defense really counts on the front 4 getting pressure which they didn't do as often as you'd like them to. Personally I don't like the approach. Better to make it tougher for the opposing QB if you can. Sure, Brady oftens burns the blitz but if you let him stand back there and go through his reads he'll kill you even more.

[Sisyphean Bills]

Well, Schobel was the best player in the Bills front 7 last year. So, it wouldn't require Sherlock Holmes to figure out that opponents wanted to neutralize him. And, since his stat line took a hard nose dive compared to 2006 and 2005, they were clearly succeeding. He was more active in the running game in 2007 than 2006 but about on par with 2005. BTW, getting invites to the Pro Bowl has a large component called reputation.

 

Darwin Walker a "sack machine"? I guess so. He was tied for 229th best sack machine last year with only 120 other players, one of whom is named Larry Tripplett.

http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats;jse...mp;d-447263-p=7

[Pyrite Gal]

Well, Schobel was the best player in the Bills front 7 last year. So, it wouldn't require Sherlock Holmes to figure out that opponents wanted to neutralize him. And, since his stat line took a hard nose dive compared to 2006 and 2005, they were clearly succeeding. He was more active in the running game in 2007 than 2006 but about on par with 2005. BTW, getting invites to the Pro Bowl has a large component called reputation.

 

Darwin Walker a "sack machine"? I guess so. He was tied for 229th best sack machine last year with only 120 other players, one of whom is named Larry Tripplett.

http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats;jse...mp;d-447263-p=7

You are right that it would not take a Holmesean level on intellect for other teams to key on the player who by far was the team's sack leader and arguably the best player not only of the front 7 but of the D as a whole.

 

Yet, the response from apparently football focused is to find our lack of sack production to be the fault of the team's leading defensive producer (if one disagrees we are all entitled to our views, but the view of Schobel as the best defender on this team is not only shared by the coaching staff, but he has been selected as one of the league's outstanding DEs two years in a row).

 

Schobel's sack production went way down in 07 compared to the impressive total in 06. Perhaps those who said they rarely saw him dt'ed and that he disappeared when facing better competition are right. However, what seems more logical is that the folks who made this observation simply were doing bad analysis as it seems far more likely that opponents would take the obvious step of neutralizing Schobel by sliding the protection his way, devoting a dt too him which at least was a harder to notice chip block rather than having two players engage him as though he were Bruce Smith.

 

The view which focuses on a pass protection scheme they did not see actually ignores the true measures of Schobel's skills and utility to the team in that he is an athletic and mobile player who can do the Cover 2 DE role of outside containment well and actually staying at home to allow the hoped for penetration we never got consistently from our DTs.

 

If fault finders had some more specific accusations against Schobel for doing bad things they could point too or sins of commission rather than sends of omission then these indictments would be a lot more credible.

[LynchMob23]

Well, Schobel was the best player in the Bills front 7 last year. So, it wouldn't require Sherlock Holmes to figure out that opponents wanted to neutralize him. And, since his stat line took a hard nose dive compared to 2006 and 2005, they were clearly succeeding. He was more active in the running game in 2007 than 2006 but about on par with 2005. BTW, getting invites to the Pro Bowl has a large component called reputation.

 

Darwin Walker a "sack machine"? I guess so. He was tied for 229th best sack machine last year with only 120 other players, one of whom is named Larry Tripplett.

http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats;jse...mp;d-447263-p=7

 

 

Check his stats pre-last year. He had 25.5 Sacks or so from 2002 to 2006, in which he had 6. So yes, as a DT, Walker was considered a sack machine. Now, if you want to debate the fact that he was in a system that is built for someone to get the sack and he was the beneficiary, there ya go. But PR is right in that assertion of Walker.

 

One thing I disagree with is the blitzing. Now, within the system when everyone was upright, look at the usage of Ko Simpson, Crowell and Spikes - especially in Fewell's first game vs the Pats (first ever as Bills DC, not last year). A good bit of blitzing...In fact if you look at a playbook of a team that uses the Tampa 2 model, there's a ton of zone blitz and blitzes in general available as arsenal. Only the Johnson-inspired Eagles and Giants defenses have more exotic types of blitzes.

[Tim Anderson's Lunch Pail]

Cotton was IN that crowd, clappin' and chantin, hootin and hollerin! Those are Ole' Cotton's kinda people!

 

So you pretty much let a crummy song from the 70s define you? Come on man, over twenty years have passed

[stinky finger]

Wow, I never knew Elton was part of the who. That song is horrible.

Hey.....this Cotton Fitzsimmons is no Al Attles.

[Wagon Circler]

And note that last season, due to the lack of push from Triplett and Williams up the middle, Schobel got a LOT of double teams and still managed to get 6.5 sacks. Not a lot, but with the number of double teams he was facing, that's not absolutely terrible. Also, teams typically moved their TE over to help when he face a team's LT. Whoever suggests that Schobel is not double-teamed on every play has no idea how blocking schemes are executed and how you deal with a player who is the only legitimate pass rusher from the outside.

Who are you kidding? Schobel was invisible last season as a rusher. Kelsey is invisible every season. The return of Denney and the kid from VT give me hope though.

[Beerball]

Who are you kidding? Schobel was invisible last season as a rusher. Kelsey is invisible every season. The return of Denney and the kid from VT give me hope though.

First time through I read 'invincible' for both Schobel & Kelsey. Must get more coffee.

[Sisyphean Bills]

Check his stats pre-last year. He had 25.5 Sacks or so from 2002 to 2006, in which he had 6. So yes, as a DT, Walker was considered a sack machine. Now, if you want to debate the fact that he was in a system that is built for someone to get the sack and he was the beneficiary, there ya go. But PR is right in that assertion of Walker.

Actually, that was exactly my point. Darwin Walker's 1st and only year in a "Tampa 2" defense (one with more talent than Buffalo's last year), he was hugely ineffective, benched and ultimately cut. It's hard to see how not having him in Buffalo was a major reason for the Bills Tampa 2 lack of success when he did nothing in the same system in Chicago. Sure, he had some good years for a DT with the Eagles, who run a different system and are routinely in the top 10 in the NFL in sack totals. On the other hand, DTs that are primarily "sack machines" are also notoriously weak in other areas of their games -- like stopping the run. (Then again, maybe we don't care about stopping the run.) Not having Darwin Walker as a starting DT is more comparable to the "huge loss" of having Jason "Toast" Webster go down to yet another season ending injury.

[LynchMob23]

Actually, that was exactly my point. Darwin Walker's 1st and only year in a "Tampa 2" defense (one with more talent than Buffalo's last year), he was hugely ineffective, benched and ultimately cut. It's hard to see how not having him in Buffalo was a major reason for the Bills Tampa 2 lack of success when he did nothing in the same system in Chicago. Sure, he had some good years for a DT with the Eagles, who run a different system and are routinely in the top 10 in the NFL in sack totals. On the other hand, DTs that are primarily "sack machines" are also notoriously weak in other areas of their games -- like stopping the run. (Then again, maybe we don't care about stopping the run.) Not having Darwin Walker as a starting DT is more comparable to the "huge loss" of having Jason "Toast" Webster go down to yet another season ending injury.

 

 

That's a really good point. Was it his injuries that led to this or his ineffectiveness outside of a blitzing 4-6 scheme?

 

Personally, I think you are correct. Kudos.