Remember Sacks?

[bills44]

Oh, wait. I looked it up:

 

youtube.com/watch?v=gte5RPziaIU

 

Those kind of sacks! Now I remember!!!!

 

that sack at the :50 mark was in the '88 AFC Championship Game, IIRC. Bruce had been dominating Munoz to that point, but they called a phantom 15-yd facemask on that play (replays clearly showed no facemask....one of many terrible calls that day....!@#$ Collinsworth), and Bruce later hurt his groin...it was downhill from there.

[Dan]

Oh, wait. I looked it up:

 

youtube.com/watch?v=gte5RPziaIU

 

Those kind of sacks! Now I remember!!!!

Makes you wonder... how many of those sacks would result in penalties in today's game? How many times did he "launch" himself, hit the QBs head, or throw him to the ground?

[truth on hold]

I can't remember the last time I cheered a sack on a meaningful play.

now its more like watching a bunch of nut sacks

[billsintaiwan]

that sack at the :50 mark was in the '88 AFC Championship Game, IIRC. Bruce had been dominating Munoz to that point, but they called a phantom 15-yd facemask on that play (replays clearly showed no facemask....one of many terrible calls that day....!@#$ Collinsworth), and Bruce later hurt his groin...it was downhill from there.

 

 

i remember that face-mask call. the ref (or umpire?) was completely out of position. all he saw was bruce doing the the tomahawk and esiason's head snapping down. he was behind bruce and esiason. horrid call, changed the game.

Edited October 17, 2010 by billsintaiwan

[truth on hold]

i remember that face-mask call. the ref (or umpire?) was completely out of position. all he saw was bruce doing the the tomahawk and esiason's head snapping down. he was behind bruce and esiason. horrid call, changed the game.

Yeap, even Theisman when doing a different game on ESPN later in the day said officials ruined what could have been one of the best defensive performances ever.

[Thurman#1]

Bruce Smith was a complete freak, the exception that proved the rule. So if I'm so wrong, name me another two 3 - 4 DEs who are famous sack artists. I'll be waiting ...

 

... a very long time. It matters a lot where you play. So again, two other 3 - 4 DE sack artists ...

 

 

I think it may matter who you play next to.

 

 

 

Well, surely SOMEBODY other than Bruce Smith must have played beside somebody good enough to be an all-time sack artist. And if nobody has, then ... seriously .... shouldn't that tell you something?

 

Well, how about the Steelers DEs, for instance? Keisel plays the Bruce Smith spot in that defense, RDE. He's playing next to one of the best NTs in football, Hampton. He's got a guy to the outside, at ROLB, Harrison, who is an absolute sack monster. Teams have to concentrate on Harrison because he's gotten 8.5, 16 and 10 sacks in the last three years respectively and is on a pace (3.0 sacks in 4 games so far) to get 12 this year. There can't be many guys in the league in a better position to get sacks as a 3 - 4 DE than Keisel. How many does he have? 14.5 total in the last five years and one so far this year. And how many guys play in a better situation?

 

Come on, fellas. If you can't name anyone but Bruce Smith (and I've been trumpeting this challenge in various threads for weeks every time someone criticized our DEs for not getting sacks, and nobody has come up with one guy yet), that ought to tell you something.

Edited October 17, 2010 by Thurman#1

[Jim in Anchorage]

Well, surely SOMEBODY other than Bruce Smith must have played beside somebody good enough to be an all-time sack artist. And if nobody has, then ... seriously .... shouldn't that tell you something?

 

Well, how about the Steelers DEs, for instance? Keisel plays the Bruce Smith spot in that defense, RDE. He's playing next to one of the best NTs in football, Hampton. He's got a guy to the outside, at ROLB, Harrison, who is an absolute sack monster. Teams have to concentrate on Harrison because he's gotten 8.5, 16 and 10 sacks in the last three years respectively and is on a pace (3.0 sacks in 4 games so far) to get 12 this year. There can't be many guys in the league in a better position to get sacks as a 3 - 4 DE than Keisel. How many does he have? 14.5 total in the last five years and one so far this year. And how many guys play in a better situation?

 

Come on, fellas. If you can't name anyone but Bruce Smith (and I've been trumpeting this challenge in various threads for weeks every time someone criticized our DEs for not getting sacks, and nobody has come up with one guy yet), that ought to tell you something.

Reggie White did OK.

[Thurman#1]

Reggie White did OK.

 

 

 

Yeah, he did. In a 4 - 3.

 

Again, I certainly agree that there are a lot of 4 - 3 DEs who are great sack artists. That's the point, actually. The sack artists in the 4 - 3 are the DEs, and the sack artists in the 3 - 4 are the OLBs.

 

That's what I'm trying to say (and most people know this, I'm not alone, but some few don't) and that's why I'm yet again trying to get somebody to come up with two more great sack artists who were DEs in the 3 - 4 system. The only one I know of is Bruce Smith. Nobody else has been able to come up with one either, and I've been challenging people for weeks.

[mike22nc]

Yeah, he did. In a 4 - 3.

 

Again, I certainly agree that there are a lot of 4 - 3 DEs who are great sack artists. That's the point, actually. The sack artists in the 4 - 3 are the DEs, and the sack artists in the 3 - 4 are the OLBs.

 

That's what I'm trying to say (and most people know this, I'm not alone, but some few don't) and that's why I'm yet again trying to get somebody to come up with two more great sack artists who were DEs in the 3 - 4 system. The only one I know of is Bruce Smith. Nobody else has been able to come up with one either, and I've been challenging people for weeks.

 

Your point that 3-4 DEs generally aren't "sack artists" is true. Mario Williams is a 3-4 DE who has 44.5 career sacks at the age of 25, I'd say he qualifies.

[Thurman#1]

Your point that 3-4 DEs generally aren't "sack artists" is true. Mario Williams is a 3-4 DE who has 44.5 career sacks at the age of 25, I'd say he qualifies.

 

 

 

Mario Williams is a DE that I would call a real sack artist.

 

He plays in a 4 - 3, though, and has through almost all of his career.

 

http://www.houstontexans.com/team/depth-chart.html

 

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/401440-fab-five-best-4-3-des-in-the-nfl#page/5

 

http://www.nfl.com/kickoff/story/09000d5d8124eb61/article/teams-incorporating-34-defense-to-add-pressure-on-quarterbacks

Edited October 17, 2010 by Thurman#1

[mike22nc]

Mario Williams is a DE that I would call a real sack artist.

 

He plays in a 4 - 3, though, and has through almost all of his career.

 

http://www.houstontexans.com/team/depth-chart.html

 

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/401440-fab-five-best-4-3-des-in-the-nfl#page/5

 

http://www.nfl.com/kickoff/story/09000d5d8124eb61/article/teams-incorporating-34-defense-to-add-pressure-on-quarterbacks

 

For some reason I thought the Texans were still a 3-4, but it looks like they've been 4-3 ever since Kubiak got hired, which is also when Williams arrived. We will have to see how Peppers finishes the season in Chicago. I think only the elite of the elite are able to wreak havoc rushing the passer from the DE position in the 3-4.

[Thurman#1]

For some reason I thought the Texans were still a 3-4, but it looks like they've been 4-3 ever since Kubiak got hired, which is also when Williams arrived. We will have to see how Peppers finishes the season in Chicago. I think only the elite of the elite are able to wreak havoc rushing the passer from the DE position in the 3-4.

 

 

 

The Bears also run a 4 - 3, a good Tampa Two, unless they've changed things this year.

 

For all the rest of you folks, I'm still waiting for anyone who can name another DE in a 3 - 4 scheme who is a great sack artist.

 

Yeah, there's Bruce Smith. But after him, name two. Heck, name one.

[Punch]

The Bears also run a 4 - 3, a good Tampa Two, unless they've changed things this year.

 

For all the rest of you folks, I'm still waiting for anyone who can name another DE in a 3 - 4 scheme who is a great sack artist.

 

Yeah, there's Bruce Smith. But after him, name two. Heck, name one.

 

This is one of my favorite points in regards to how great Bruce truly was--- Leonard Marshall had some terrific sack totals for the Giants after they converted to a primarily 3-4 front (including 15.5 in 1985 and 12 in 1986), but he was surrounded by Hall of Fame linebackers. When Lawrence Taylor is lining up to your immediate right you're bound to benefit from the lack of available blockers get to the QB.

 

But that was an all-time great defense in the era where the every down 3-4 was just coming into it's own and certainly a rarity nonetheless. Bruce did it for 15 years, regardless of the changing personnel accompanying him.

 

(Although, after thinking it over for a few minutes more, Neil Smith of the Kansas City Chiefs comes to mind, who had a dominant stretch in the early to mid '90s, although he also benefited from lining up next to a Hall of Fame ROLB in Derrick Thomas and the Chiefs sort of ran a hybrid 3-4/4-3 at times.)

Edited October 17, 2010 by Punch

[1B4IDie]

This is one of my favorite points in regards to how great Bruce truly was--- Leonard Marshall had some terrific sack totals for the Giants after they converted to a primarily 3-4 front (including 15.5 in 1985 and 12 in 1986), but he was surrounded by Hall of Fame linebackers. When Lawrence Taylor is lining up to your immediate right you're bound to benefit from the lack of available blockers get to the QB.

 

But that was an all-time great defense in the era where the every down 3-4 was just coming into it's own and certainly a rarity nonetheless. Bruce did it for 15 years, regardless of the changing personnel accompanying him.

 

(Although, after thinking it over for a few minutes more, Neil Smith of the Kansas City Chiefs comes to mind, who had a dominant stretch in the early to mid '90s, although he also benefited from lining up next to a Hall of Fame ROLB in Derrick Thomas and the Chiefs sort of ran a hybrid 3-4/4-3 at times.)

The point of Punch's post is Thurman is right, if the #2 3-4 DE is Neil Smith or Leonard Marshall then there really isn't a #2 significant 3-4 DE after Bruuuuuuuuuuce.

[bills44]

I'd love to see a home/road split of Neil Smith's and Derrick Thomas's sacks. They seemed to terrorize opposing QBs at Arrowhead, and disappeared on the road.

[Thurman#1]

This is one of my favorite points in regards to how great Bruce truly was--- Leonard Marshall had some terrific sack totals for the Giants after they converted to a primarily 3-4 front (including 15.5 in 1985 and 12 in 1986), but he was surrounded by Hall of Fame linebackers. When Lawrence Taylor is lining up to your immediate right you're bound to benefit from the lack of available blockers get to the QB.

 

But that was an all-time great defense in the era where the every down 3-4 was just coming into it's own and certainly a rarity nonetheless. Bruce did it for 15 years, regardless of the changing personnel accompanying him.

 

(Although, after thinking it over for a few minutes more, Neil Smith of the Kansas City Chiefs comes to mind, who had a dominant stretch in the early to mid '90s, although he also benefited from lining up next to a Hall of Fame ROLB in Derrick Thomas and the Chiefs sort of ran a hybrid 3-4/4-3 at times.)

 

 

 

Great post!! You put me up to a lot of research, and it was fascinating. Thanks.

 

As you said, Neil Smith had a sensational 4 year stretch from '92 to '95, and it could be said to also include '90 (9.5), '91 (8.0, borderline), and '97 (8.5, borderline). During that four-year stretch, they went from switching back and forth, a hybrid, in '92, to mostly 3 - 4 in '93 and '94, back to mostly a 4 - 3 in '95. Interesting stuff. My notes:

 

Smith was listed as a DE throughout his career, never an OLB.

KC 88 NT Maas and 4 LBs, so a 3 - 4. Smith 2.5 sacks.

KC 89 NTs Maas and Saleaumua and 4 LBs Smith 6.5 sacks

KC 90 NT Saleaumua and 4 LBs, Smith 9.5 sacks

KC 91 NT Saleaumua and 4 LBs, Smith 9 sacks

KC 92 Saleaumua listed as both NT and RDT and Joe Phillips listed as LDT , starting in 19 games, linebackers listed as MLB (Simien), but also as LILB and RILB (Randle and Simien). Clearly they switched between 3 - 4 and 4 - 3 that year. Smith 14.5 sacks.

KC 93 NT Joe Phillips only, and 4 LBs. Back to the 3 - 4, obviously. Smith 15 sacks.

KC 94 NT Joe Phillips only, and 4 LBs. 3 - 4. Smith 15 sacks.

KC 95 LDT Joe Phillips and RDT Saleaumua. No NT listed and only 3 LBs. Back to the 4 - 3. Smith 12 sacks.

KC 96 LDT and RDT listed. Three LBs. So a 4 - 3. Smith 6 sacks.

KC 97 NT Phillips and 4 LBs, so back to the 3-4. Smith had been traded to Denver.

 

DEN 97 LDT Traylor and RDT Michael Dean Perry and Maa Tanuvasa and 3 LBs. A 4 - 3. Smith had 8.5 sacks. Super Bowl champs.

DEN 98 LDT and RDT and three LBs listed. A 4 - 3. Smith 4 sacks. Super Bowl champs again.

DEN 99 LDT and RDT and 3 LBs. Smith 6.5 sacks.

 

Didn't have time for a full workup of Marshall. He had, as you said, three great years for sacks, '85 (15.5), '86 (12.0), and '91 (11.9), and maybe three other fine years in '87, '88, and '89 (8, 8 and 9.5, borderline great). Nothing else over 6.5 in his excellent 12 year career. 83.5 sacks total. Is he a great sack artist? I don't know, maybe not. But for those three years he was. I remember that defense as a 3 - 4 which operated as a bit of a hybrid. All three of the great years, though, they list one NT only and 4 LBs.

 

His two terrific years, '85 and '86, were Belichick's first two as DC. I suspect some Belichick magic might have helped him a lot. Belichick was DC for five years, but his first two were Marshall's best. Did teams catch on? His other great year, '91, was after Belichick moved on. Was there some change that was crucial?

 

One interesting thing to me is that out of all three of these guys, Bruce, Marshall and Smith, only Marshall looked like a modern 3 - 4 DE. He weighed in at 288, which is acceptable for a 3 - 4 DE these days. Bruce came out of college above 300, but played most of his career at 260 or so after he became a fitness fanatic. Neil Smith came out of college at 260 and developed to 270 later. You don't get 3 - 4 DEs that small anymore. Guys that small can't stop the run these days the way they need to.

 

Stroud's fairly typical, having lost weight from around 312 or so to 295 this year to play DE. Guys that size aren't generally quick enough to be sack artists. Marshall, for those very few years, was an exception.

 

Anyway, thanks for the great post.

Edited October 18, 2010 by Thurman#1

[Thurman#1]

I'd love to see a home/road split of Neil Smith's and Derrick Thomas's sacks. They seemed to terrorize opposing QBs at Arrowhead, and disappeared on the road.

 

 

 

Smith had almost no difference between home and away: http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/S/SmitNe00/splits/

 

Thomas had 1.625 sacks/game at home and 1.135 sacks per game away. I thought at first it was much more, because he had 84.5 sacks at home and 42 sacks away, but for whatever reason, he played 52 home games and only 37 away games. Significantly better at home.

 

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/T/ThomDe01/splits/

[offsides#76FredSmerlas]

This is one of my favorite points in regards to how great Bruce truly was--- Leonard Marshall had some terrific sack totals for the Giants after they converted to a primarily 3-4 front (including 15.5 in 1985 and 12 in 1986), but he was surrounded by Hall of Fame linebackers. When Lawrence Taylor is lining up to your immediate right you're bound to benefit from the lack of available blockers get to the QB.

 

But that was an all-time great defense in the era where the every down 3-4 was just coming into it's own and certainly a rarity nonetheless. Bruce did it for 15 years, regardless of the changing personnel accompanying him.

 

(Although, after thinking it over for a few minutes more, Neil Smith of the Kansas City Chiefs comes to mind, who had a dominant stretch in the early to mid '90s, although he also benefited from lining up next to a Hall of Fame ROLB in Derrick Thomas and the Chiefs sort of ran a hybrid 3-4/4-3 at times.)

Mark Gastineau had a couple of solid seasons in the 3-4 but most of his career was spent in a 4-3.

[Punch]

Mark Gastineau had a couple of solid seasons in the 3-4 but most of his career was spent in a 4-3.

 

He had 13.5 in 1986 (down from the "record" 22 in '85), the first year the Jets employed the 3-4, but his numbers dropped off the face of the earth after that (he did have a string of injury problems, though). It's pretty difficult to figure out exactly what effect the 3-4 had on these guys because without the benefit of gamefilm it's virtually unknowable what defensive set they were in when they accrued sacks. We know, without a doubt, however, that Bruce Smith spent the vast majority of his career in a base 3-4 D. Certainly, some of his sacks came in 4 man fronts in Nickel, Dime, and Quarter packages--- but to spend 15 seasons primarily as a base 3-4 DE it's absolutely amazing that he was able to consistently beat double and triple teams and penetrate into the backfield, not only to sack the QB but also chase down RBs behind the line of scrimmage. I think a strong argument can be made that Bruce is the most dominant defensive player in the history of pro football.

 

Thurman#1---- if you're as interested in sacks and statistics as I am then maybe you've read about the work of John Turney, a fan who has spent countless hours studying play by play sheets and gamefilm in an attempt to (as accurately as possible) determine the correct pre-1982 NFL sack figures. His work is widely quoted by sports writers, although he himself admits that the numbers he came up with cannot truly be considered official due to the inconsistent nature of record keeping over the years--- though it's a good gauge for what might have been.

 

His revamped "All-Time Sack" list still has Bruce at #1, though guys like Deacon Jones (who famously asked: "Since when does 'all-time' begin in 1982?") played most or all of their career in 14 game schedules.

 

TURNEY SACK LIST

Rk. Player Sacks

1. Bruce Smith 200

2. Reggie White 198

3. Deacon Jones 173½

4. Kevin Greene 160

5. Jack Youngblood 151½

6. Chris Doleman 150½

7. Alan Page 148½

8. Lawrence Taylor 142

9. Michael Strahan 141½

10. Richard Dent 137½

10. John Randle 137½

12. Rickey Jackson 136

13. Carl Eller 133

14. Leslie O'Neal 132½

15. Coy Bacon 130

 

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/spt/columnists/rgosselin/stories/083009dnspogoosecenter.2ff71d7.html

 

It's interesting that names like Coy Bacon and "Bubba" Baker are all but forgotten because sacks were not kept as official statistics during the 1970s. The great 1964 Buffalo Bills' defense, for instance (incidentally the 1st pro team to employ a 3-4) are unofficially credited with 50 QB sacks (in only 14 games).

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=weinreb/081006

 

Turney's season by season breakdown of sack leaders from 1961-81:

 

1961 Gene Lipscomb 17.5 or 18 (not 100% sure, still checking it out, it's either one or the other)

1962 Jim Katcacage 16

1963 Jim katcavage 20

1964 Deacon Jones 22

1965 Deacon Jones 18

1966 George Andrie 18.5

1967 Deacon Jones 21

1968 Deacon Jones 22

1969 Steve Delong 15.5

1970 Tony Cline 17.5

1971 Cedric Hardman 18

1972 Jack Gregory 18.5

1973 Bill Stanfill 18.5

1974 Jack Youngblood 15, Dryer 15

1975 John Dutton 17

1976 Coy Bacon 21.5 (small issue of scoring may be 22)

1977 Harvery Martin 20

1978 Bubba Baker 23

1979 Jack Youngbood 18

1980 Gary Johnson 17.5 (Baker had 17, there was a game where a could half-sacks went as full sacks)

1981 Joe Klecko 20.5

Edited October 18, 2010 by Punch

[offsides#76FredSmerlas]

He had 13.5 in 1986 (down from the "record" 22 in '85), the first year the Jets employed the 3-4, but his numbers dropped off the face of the earth after that (he did have a string of injury problems, though). It's pretty difficult to figure out exactly what effect the 3-4 had on these guys because without the benefit of gamefilm it's virtually unknowable what defensive set they were in when they accrued sacks. We know, without a doubt, however, that Bruce Smith spent the vast majority of his career in a base 3-4 D. Certainly, some of his sacks came in 4 man fronts in Nickel, Dime, and Quarter packages--- but to spend 15 seasons primarily as a base 3-4 DE it's absolutely amazing that he was able to consistently beat double and triple teams and penetrate into the backfield, not only to sack the QB but also chase down RBs behind the line of scrimmage. I think a strong argument can be made that Bruce is the most dominant defensive player in the history of pro football.

 

Thurman#1---- if you're as interested in sacks and statistics as I am then maybe you've read about the work of John Turney, a fan who has spent countless hours studying play by play sheets and gamefilm in an attempt to (as accurately as possible) determine the correct pre-1982 NFL sack figures. His work is widely quoted by sports writers, although he himself admits that the numbers he came up with cannot truly be considered official due to the inconsistent nature of record keeping over the years--- though it's a good gauge for what might have been.

 

His revamped "All-Time Sack" list still has Bruce at #1, though guys like Deacon Jones (who famously asked: "Since when does 'all-time' begin in 1982?") played most or all of their career in 14 game schedules.

 

TURNEY SACK LIST

Rk. Player Sacks

1. Bruce Smith 200

2. Reggie White 198

3. Deacon Jones 173½

4. Kevin Greene 160

5. Jack Youngblood 151½

6. Chris Doleman 150½

7. Alan Page 148½

8. Lawrence Taylor 142

9. Michael Strahan 141½

10. Richard Dent 137½

10. John Randle 137½

12. Rickey Jackson 136

13. Carl Eller 133

14. Leslie O'Neal 132½

15. Coy Bacon 130

 

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/spt/columnists/rgosselin/stories/083009dnspogoosecenter.2ff71d7.html

 

It's interesting that names like Coy Bacon and "Bubba" Baker are all but forgotten because sacks were not kept as official statistics during the 1970s. The great 1964 Buffalo Bills' defense, for instance (incidentally the 1st pro team to employ a 3-4) are unofficially credited with 50 QB sacks (in only 14 games).

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=weinreb/081006

 

Turney's season by season breakdown of sack leaders from 1961-81:

 

1961 Gene Lipscomb 17.5 or 18 (not 100% sure, still checking it out, it's either one or the other)

1962 Jim Katcacage 16

1963 Jim katcavage 20

1964 Deacon Jones 22

1965 Deacon Jones 18

1966 George Andrie 18.5

1967 Deacon Jones 21

1968 Deacon Jones 22

1969 Steve Delong 15.5

1970 Tony Cline 17.5

1971 Cedric Hardman 18

1972 Jack Gregory 18.5

1973 Bill Stanfill 18.5

1974 Jack Youngblood 15, Dryer 15

1975 John Dutton 17

1976 Coy Bacon 21.5 (small issue of scoring may be 22)

1977 Harvery Martin 20

1978 Bubba Baker 23

1979 Jack Youngbood 18

1980 Gary Johnson 17.5 (Baker had 17, there was a game where a could half-sacks went as full sacks)

1981 Joe Klecko 20.5

Punch & Thurman I usually am not astounded by what to many people on the chat board say but you have really made me think about this idea and now I have to admit that Bruce was even more dominant than I gave him credit for. I always thought Bruce was a terd as an individual and I have several reasons why but as a player he was no doubt a beast. To go off what you wrote about Deacon Jones and him playing 14 games. OJ Simpson never gets credit for running 2,000 yards in 14 games which I think is remarkable. They just put him in the catagory of the 2,000 runners, but try doing it 14 games. When the NFL goes to an 18 game season it's really going to screw the record books up.

Edited October 18, 2010 by offsides#76FredSmerlas