Stop A Sack or Create A Sack?

[Chuck Wagon]

Create a sack

 

 

You can do things scheme wise to "stop a sack", get the ball out of the QBs hands quickly, shade your protections, screens, etc. One dominant LT is pretty avoidable (ie Von Miller lines up over the RT, JJ Watt lines up all over).

 

A dominant pass rusher changes the game more, you are forcing the offense to adapt and (especially with a guy like Watt) you can move him all over to create problems.

 

 

I think a "franchise LT" is one of the most overrated spots in the NFL. Teams like the Packers / Pats / Broncos / Steelers have won super bowls without "franchise LTs" while Joe Thomas has been one of the best in the game for the last decade and the Browns have routinely looked like a pop warner offense and Tyron Smith hasn't stopped Romo from getting knocked out of multiple seasons.

[Cash]

Create a sack

 

 

You can do things scheme wise to "stop a sack", get the ball out of the QBs hands quickly, shade your protections, screens, etc. One dominant LT is pretty avoidable (ie Von Miller lines up over the RT, JJ Watt lines up all over).

 

A dominant pass rusher changes the game more, you are forcing the offense to adapt and (especially with a guy like Watt) you can move him all over to create problems.

 

 

I think a "franchise LT" is one of the most overrated spots in the NFL. Teams like the Packers / Pats / Broncos / Steelers have won super bowls without "franchise LTs" while Joe Thomas has been one of the best in the game for the last decade and the Browns have routinely looked like a pop warner offense and Tyron Smith hasn't stopped Romo from getting knocked out of multiple seasons.

 

Right. Even a hypothetical perfect LT would only be able to stop 1 defender per play. Until a player comes along who can single-handedly neutralize the entire pass rush, a player who can reliably create sacks is more valuable than a player who can reliably prevent sacks.

 

My takeaway is that preventing sacks comes down to coaching/scheme, QB awareness, cohesion/teamwork, and talent level of the weakest link. A singular bad O-lineman can kill your whole offense, but a singular great O-lineman doesn't lift it that high.

[CountDorkula]

Create - We all saw what happened when the Bills went from 51 sacks to 23 in one year.

[ALLEN1QB]

Well, if you don't have kids yet, I think you want to create a sack, because most men want a son to pass down their genetic legacy to.

 

However, if you already have a child, and it's a girl, I think you want to stop a sack, because no father wants some !@#$ banging his little girl.

 

LOL!!!

[Prickly Pete]

I look at it like this, a great O-lineman can only occupy one guy. A great pass rusher can draw 2 or even 3 guys to him.

You can line up your crappiest rusher against the great O-lineman, and his talent is wasted. With a great pass rusher there will usually be a few more options of where you can line him up.

Edited April 20, 2016 by HoF Watkins

[H2o]

Defense wins championships.

 

in 2015, with the exception of the Detroit Lions, the top ten teams in number of sacks were playoff teams.

 

The bottom ten, including the Bills at 31 - no playoff teams.

[Tenhigh]

Create - We all saw what happened when the Bills went from 51 sacks to 23 in one year.

1 less win?

[Kirby Jackson]

I look at it like this, a great O-lineman can only occupy one guy. A great pass rusher can draw 2 or even 3 guys to him.

You can line up your crappiest rusher against the great O-lineman, and his talent is wasted. With a great pass rusher there will usually be a few more options of where you can line him up.

This is an interesting take too. I never thought of it like that but totally agree.

[Prickly Pete]

This is an interesting take too. I never thought of it like that but totally agree.

 

Thanks. This line of thinking occurred to me when considering drafting a WR vs. O-lineman. Obviously, there are lots of variables, and every team has different needs, etc., but O-linemen are all pretty much limited to engaging only one other player.

Edited April 20, 2016 by HoF Watkins

[Adam]

Both protection and pass rush can be schemed. Talent on either side can skew the equation

[Prickly Pete]

Both protection and pass rush can be schemed. Talent on either side can skew the equation

 

Of course, some might consider that the most important part of the battle, skewing the equation. But regardless, an O-lineman, can only engage one other player.

[MDH]

The important part of the question is being overlooked. The question wasn't, "what is more important, an OT or a DE?" The question was if you are set at QB do you go OL or DL if you have needs at both.

 

That's an easy one. If you have quality QB then you protect that investment. He's the most important player on the field and you do everything you can to keep him upright and playing to his full potential.

[Prickly Pete]

The important part of the question is being overlooked. The question wasn't, "what is more important, an OT or a DE?" The question was if you are set at QB do you go OL or DL if you have needs at both.

 

That's an easy one. If you have quality QB then you protect that investment. He's the most important player on the field and you do everything you can to keep him upright and playing to his full potential.

 

What if you have "adequate" O-linemen? What if getting an elite WR or TE forces defenses to use another guy in coverage instead of as a rusher?

 

I think guys that pull the rush away from the QB can be as great an asset to a QB. Obviously, the O-line needs to be adequate (I think the Bills O-line is okay, and could be improved well enough, without using a 1st round pick)

 

I'm okay with drafting an O-lineman at the top of the draft, but only if the O-line is in shambles, or the LT is just terrible.

Edited April 20, 2016 by HoF Watkins

[3rdand12]

I look at it like this, a great O-lineman can only occupy one guy. A great pass rusher can draw 2 or even 3 guys to him.

You can line up your crappiest rusher against the great O-lineman, and his talent is wasted. With a great pass rusher there will usually be a few more options of where you can line him up.

I am not sure if the idea was conceptual or talking about a player. Your take is certainly solid in premise.

But as a team, i have to vote stop the sack and protect the QB to execute the play.

Interesting question really

Edited April 21, 2016 by 3rdand12

[H2o]

Put pressure on even the best QB in this league and it affects the entire game. Getting after the QB earns W's.

[Kirby Jackson]

For me it isn't even close. I want to be the team dictating and having you react.

[Prickly Pete]

I am not sure if the idea was conceptual or talking about a player. Your take is certainly solid in premise.

But as a team, i have to vote stop the sack and protect the QB to execute the play.

Interesting question really

 

It was really a tangent off the OP's question. Stopping sacks is more important than getting them, to me. But as far selecting at the top end of the draft, so much is dependent on the team's situation, but I think generally, a pass rusher is a better, more impact, single player option.

For me it isn't even close. I want to be the team dictating and having you react.

 

This is another good point. To me, football is all about "err on the side of aggression."

[Big Turk]

How did "stop a sack" work against Von Miller?

[3rdand12]

For me it isn't even close. I want to be the team dictating and having you react.

Ask Roman about that and he will tell you the same

 

Put pressure on even the best QB in this league and it affects the entire game. Getting after the QB earns W's.

So do not let them affect the QB !!

[boyst]

 

It was really a tangent off the OP's question. Stopping sacks is more important than getting them, to me. But as far selecting at the top end of the draft, so much is dependent on the team's situation, but I think generally, a pass rusher is a better, more impact, single player option.

 

This is another good point. To me, football is all about "err on the side of aggression."

yes. it's been interesting and i believe a thread should be organic.

 

but the truth of the matter is what is more important: stopping a sack or creating a sack?

 

there is no way it can be said that creating a sack is more valuable than stopping a sack. the offense gets only so many opportunities and on most teams it is a major part of their scoring system. relying on defense to score touchdowns only happens when you play the panthers in the super bowl.