Is Aron Schobel a mediocre player?

[Fake-Fat Sunny]

No.

 

There are a couple of posts below on the issue of resigning Clements which make the point in a comparison that was not the central topic of the thread that Schobel is a "mediocre" NFL player.

 

Since this claim was not the centrak topic of the thread and quite frankly is unsubstantiated by any logical evaluation I thought it was worth posting as a separate thread.

 

Look, I know folks were disappointed in Schobel's sack production after hwe signed a big contract and rightly so in terms of the lowering of his sack production, but to jump to the conclusion that he is somehow a mediocre player (a worse than average NFL player) simply is unsupported as a football opinion.

 

Consider this:

 

1. Schobel was the DE on one of the second ranked statistically D team in the league. Do you really think they achieved this lofty position and result even though they got "mediocre" play from their RDE?

 

2. If memory serves me correctly the team led the league in sacks and Scgibek easily led this team in sacks (8 to second place 5 for Adams). His personal totals disappointing for fans yes, but mediocre no.

 

3. A big part of his low sack total strikes me as the flexibility the athletic Schobel offered the Bills which allowed him to do the short zone pass coverage credibly in the run blitz so others could rush effectively.

 

4. Schobel's big problem as he developed was his being weak at the point of attack on runs and sometimes taking bad tackling angles (particularly as a rookie) however, by using him well in the run-blitz this both plays to Schobel's strengths and away from his weaknesses. he struck me as more effective and better used in 2004 than in previous years.

 

5. For me the really big deal about the job Schobel did last year was that his play and that of Kelsay and Denney allowed the Bills to carry only 3 DEs when the import of this position and the rotation the Bills use on the DL really dictated that they keep 4 DEs. Thw great play and athleticism of all three DEs led by Schobel (who strikes me as a better player than either Kelsay or Denney) allowed the Bills to devote a valuable roster spot to keeping a designated long snapper and even shop for a long snapper after Dorenbos was injured. Their play gave us the flexiibility to activate rather than lose Jason peters because we had an extra roster spot.

 

Th notion that Schobel for some reason should be judged mediocre has nothing to do with a good football judgment in my mind. By no means is he perfect and their can be great improvements in his play, but the notion that the 4th leading tackler on the #2 D in the league is a mediocre player is nothing short of laughable.

[Chilly]

Aron Schobel sucks.

 

Aaron rocks tho.

[MrLocke]

I think Aaron is a steady defensive end. Not in the same class as say Strahan or Simeon Rice or Freeney or Julius Peppers, but I think he is probably in the next class below. one of the things that maybe holding him back is the end opposite to him. Now I know Kelsay is solid but I do not think Schobel is in the same kind of situation as John Abraham and Shaun Ellis where both of these guys have a terrific end opposite them. I would love to see Kelsay step up his game next year and get into the 8-10 sack range because if he does this team will have a pair of terrific ends.

[MartyBall4Buffalo]

We didn't lead the league in sacks but where tied for 3rd with 45

 

atl- 48

phil- 47

tampa/buf/ne/ind-45

 

 

two of these teams are not like the others.

 

Atl- patrick kearny and sack master dt rod coleman Phil- Jevon Kearse tampa- simeon rice ind- dwight freeney

 

 

Those 4 teams have what many consider "elite status" de's, While Ne/Buffalo rely mostly on the run blitz and zone blitz to get pressure on and sack the quaterback.

 

 

Schobel is a good player, he's steady and definitly not a hole in our defense. Is he elite? hardly. It all depends what you're looking to get out of your defensive end.

 

If you're looking for 10-15 sacks a season, than aaron schobel isn't that guy. If you're looking for a de who will give you a solid 8 sack season, who is quick enough to drop back into coverage, and pressure the qb and lead to errant throws than schobel fits that bill.

 

Schobel is a highly underrated player, No he's not julius peppers, but he's good enough for what's asked of him. It still would be nice to have a pure pass rusher on this defense.

[34-78-83]

We didn't lead the league in sacks but where tied for 3rd with 45

 

atl- 48

phil- 47

tampa/buf/ne/ind-45

two of these teams are not like the others. 

 

Atl- patrick kearny and sack master dt rod coleman  Phil- Jevon Kearse  tampa- simeon rice  ind- dwight freeney

Those 4 teams have what many consider "elite status" de's, While Ne/Buffalo rely mostly on the run blitz and zone blitz to get pressure on and sack the quaterback.

Schobel is a good player, he's steady and definitly not a hole in our defense.  Is he elite? hardly.  It all depends what you're looking to get out of your defensive end.

 

If you're looking for 10-15 sacks a season, than aaron schobel isn't that guy.  If you're looking for a de who will give you a solid 8 sack season, who is quick enough to drop back into coverage, and  pressure the qb  and lead to errant throws than schobel fits that bill. 

 

Schobel is a highly underrated player,  No he's not julius peppers, but he's good enough for what's asked of him.  It still would be nice to have  a pure pass rusher on this defense.

369391[/snapback]

 

 

That's a fair description in my opinion.

[RJsackedagain]

I didn't know they had a Schobel brother named Aron .... who does he play for??

[MrLocke]

I didn't know they had a Schobel brother named Aron .... who does he play for??

369409[/snapback]

 

Maybe he is a couson like Bo. There is Aaron ofcourse Matt the TE for the Bengals and Bo Matt and Aaron's cousin a defensive end for the Titans.

[Bill from NYC]

No. He is a talented DE, a somewhat rare species these days.

While he is not a Julius Peppers genetic mutant, I think that many of us take his blazing speed for granted.

Yesterday, I stated that he lost approx. 10 million over the life of his contract by signing a year before he was to be a UFA. Most seemed to think that number was a tad high, which I will concede, but Grant Winstrom signed for much more money than AS as I somewhat vaguely recall. How much better is he than AS?

He also played well vs. Ogden and Pace in 04, not a small task.

In summary, I don't compare him to Bruce, Reggie, nor Richard Dent, but he was a great draft pick; is a very good player, and an even better signing (the extension) by TD.

[OBXBILLSFAN]

Schobel is a good, solid pass rushing DE. He is not an All Pro, but a good player on a very good defensive team.

[Coach Tuesday]

I think the Bills' scheme has to be considered too - I get the sense that the ends aren't asked to rush upfield as much, but that they instead often are sent in a "contain rush" whereby pressure is brought from other places (blitzing LBs, Milloy, corners, etc). What I like about Schobel is his willingness to stop the run, and IMO he has significantly improved that element of his game. Although obviously he doesn't have the athleticism of the "elite" passrushers like Freeney or Peppers, he is undoubtedly a playmaker.

 

Another thing I like about Schobel is his contract - I feel as though we got perfect value in this instance. We have him wrapped up for the duration of his Productive Years, at a very reasonable price. I'd love to do the same with Clements, but it will be much tougher.

[rockpile]

I think Schobel is a very good DE; not everyone is going to be a Reggie or Bruuuuce!

 

His biggest weakness is when he rushes the QB on an outside arc. This works if you are playing a QB who takes a 7 step drop and becomes a statue, allowing him to use his great speed to outrun the containment. It does not work if the QB can step back up into a pocket, giving the OL or FB time to just keep him outside.

 

If he could learn Bruce's inside spin move, he could be all pro.

[BuffOrange]

He's a good pass-rusher when we have a 31-10 lead on the Rams in the 4th Qtr.

If we're tied with NE in the last 3 minutes, I have zero confidence in him getting anywhere near Tom Brady.

 

He is the best DE on the team. If you made a list of the best DE for each of the 32 teams though - he's not going to be in the top 10. If that's not mediocre, then it's something between 'mediocre' and 'good'.

[OnTheRocks]

i would say he is a "nice" player. very much like Phil Hansen. Nothing more. Nothing less.

[LabattBlue]

Schobel is an okay player who was in the right place at the right time and got himself a nice contract. As stated earlier, one of the biggest flaws in his game is taking too much of an outside charge which takes him out of the play on both rushes and passes far too often. He is young enough to improve and become a better player. Let's see if the contract has made him complacent or does he have the desire to get better.

[RJsackedagain]

i would say he is a "nice" player.  very much like Phil Hansen.  Nothing more.  Nothing less.

369548[/snapback]

Great, a nice player is all fine and dandy, but the Bills need a bad @ss mother hucker on that d-line to make opposing team's QBs his B word. They haven't had one of those since that got who got his shoes sniffed by Dennis Hooper

[OnTheRocks]

Let's see if the contract has made him complacent or does he have the desire to get better.

369631[/snapback]

 

 

the one thing i learned last year by watching practices during training camp is that Jerry Gray and Tim Krumrie are so intense, i can't see them letting anyone on thier side of the ball become "complacent".

[ganesh]

He's a good pass-rusher when we have a 31-10 lead on the Rams in the 4th Qtr. 

If we're tied with NE in the last 3 minutes, I have zero confidence in him getting anywhere near Tom Brady. 

 

He is the best DE on the team.  If you made a list of the best DE for each of the 32 teams though - he's not going to be in the top 10.  If that's not mediocre, then it's something between 'mediocre' and 'good'.

369515[/snapback]

I would call someone mediocre if they are in the lower 25% of the DEs in

the league...whcih means he has be the 24th best DE in the league....

 

I think he is more in the 10-15 range....which i would call good but not great.

[ganesh]

i would say he is a "nice" player.  very much like Phil Hansen.  Nothing more.  Nothing less.

369548[/snapback]

 

Hansen I think was overrated...He had Bruce Smith on the other side to

take the double teams off....Schoebel is better than Hansen....Hansen struggled

the year Bruce Smith left the bills.

[Rubes]

2. If memory serves me correctly the team led the league in sacks and Scgibek easily led this team in sacks (8 to second place 5 for Adams).  His personal totals disappointing for fans yes, but mediocre no.

369377[/snapback]

 

Who the hell is Scgibek?

[AKC]

I like his talent but was disappointed in 2004 to see him revert back to his reliance on favoring the outside move. He was making good progress on his inside move exiting the '03 season but he seemed to lose confidence in it between seasons and took too many of those looping sprints around the OT. Some of that is by design but I'd like to see Krumrie get him back on track to become less predictable by taking an inside move with more frequency.

[Fake-Fat Sunny]

He's a good pass-rusher when we have a 31-10 lead on the Rams in the 4th Qtr. 

If we're tied with NE in the last 3 minutes, I have zero confidence in him getting anywhere near Tom Brady. 

 

He is the best DE on the team.  If you made a list of the best DE for each of the 32 teams though - he's not going to be in the top 10.  If that's not mediocre, then it's something between 'mediocre' and 'good'.

369515[/snapback]

 

A definition of mediocre is to some degree semantics put I appreciate you offering up your numeric sense of things. My sense is:

 

The top 10 DEs in the league (or top 5 RDEs if you want to restrict it to that position, though players flip sides all the time to get good match-ups and fool opponents so lumping all the DEs together reflects reality more in my view) are elit players in my view.

 

The top third (up to about the 21st of 64 DEs) are good players in my view.

 

The middle third (21-42) are average starters.

 

The lower third (42-64) are certainly mediocre starters (thogh generally I would not call them mediocre "players" because they have been judged to be better than well more than half their competition on their team who are given ST duty because they are not good enough to start).

 

Even if you want to call the lower third of DE starters mediocre, do you really judge Schobel to be 42nd or worst at his position?

 

I think not by virtually and statistical measure or the judgement of most professional observers of the game and from the my view which is that of a rank amateur. Schobel ranked 20th in the league in sacks (a list which includes others besides DEs). He was fourth on the Bills in tackles.

 

Of greatest importance the Bills D was incredibly productive and ranked second in the league statistically in total D.

 

Do you really insist that they did all this with a medicocre player at RDE?

 

Maybe you want to claim that being an average in the NFL means you are mediocre. I think this meakes little sense, When a player is average he is average. Do you really think Schobel is in the lower third of DEs in this leagie (42-63) or even RDEs 20-32.

 

I don't think he is by any staitistical measure or the judgement of anyone who has a notion of the game.

 

I have been quite critical of Schobel during his career (my repetitive recounting of his taking horrible tackling angles as a rookie against Brunell). He is not in the elite of DEs or RDEs (but he is not paid like the elites so the Bills deal with him is fine with me) but the concept that his is mediocre justy does not square with reality.

 

Do you judge him to be in the lower thrid of starters or does average mean mediocre to you? Either way this view is not realistic.

[crazyDingo]

POWER TO THE ARON NATION MY WHITE BROTHERS!

 

 

 

 

wait a minute...oh.

 

 

nevermind.

[R. Rich]

We didn't lead the league in sacks but where tied for 3rd with 45

 

atl- 48

phil- 47

tampa/buf/ne/ind-45

two of these teams are not like the others. 

 

Atl- patrick kearny and sack master dt rod coleman  Phil- Jevon Kearse  tampa- simeon rice  ind- dwight freeney

Those 4 teams have what many consider "elite status" de's, While Ne/Buffalo rely mostly on the run blitz and zone blitz to get pressure on and sack the quaterback.

Schobel is a good player, he's steady and definitly not a hole in our defense.  Is he elite? hardly.  It all depends what you're looking to get out of your defensive end.

 

If you're looking for 10-15 sacks a season, than aaron schobel isn't that guy.  If you're looking for a de who will give you a solid 8 sack season, who is quick enough to drop back into coverage, and  pressure the qb  and lead to errant throws than schobel fits that bill. 

 

Schobel is a highly underrated player,  No he's not julius peppers, but he's good enough for what's asked of him.  It still would be nice to have  a pure pass rusher on this defense.

369391[/snapback]

 

Very well said. Though I do like the workman-like efforts of Schobel, I would love to see a stud pass rusher on the edge for this defense. Who knows? Maybe Schobel will be that pass rusher; that would be nice. I'd just like someone to step up and become that rusher.

[Fake-Fat Sunny]

I like his talent but was disappointed in 2004 to see him revert back to his reliance on favoring the outside move. He was making good progress on his inside move exiting the '03 season but he seemed to lose confidence in it between seasons and took too many of those looping sprints around the OT. Some of that is by design but I'd like to see Krumrie get him back on track to become less predictable by taking an inside move with more frequency.

369731[/snapback]

It strikes me as a step back to have the Bills pursue replicating their 2003 output which saw the D play well producing a D that ranked around 5th statistically when i thought the 2004 D was a better unit seen it is producing at a level where they were 2nd in D statistics.

 

My sense of the difference in Schobel's play between 2004 and 2003 is that he increased his understanding of the run-bliz scheme and actually seemed more agile and athletic so that Gray/Krumrie were even more comfortable using him in short and even medium zone pass coverage in the run blitz.

 

What you saw as a lessening in his confidence I saw as better play by him. This was reflected actually in that though his personal sack total went down, the team sack total was up.

 

I care far more how the team does rather than any individual performance. I thought Schobel showed greater strength at the point of attack as well as being more manuverable. He does need to improve as the D failed badly in the Pitts game and he is still heading to his prime so its not a wild hope. However, I just don't see the complaints about Schobel's play and merely looking at his individual sack #s without taking into account the team's scheme and sack # increase seems to ignore the football reality.

[BuffOrange]

A definition of mediocre is to some degree semantics put I appreciate you offering up your numeric sense of things. My sense is:

 

The top 10 DEs in the league (or top 5 RDEs if you want to restrict it to that position, though players flip sides all the time to get good match-ups and fool opponents so lumping all the DEs together reflects reality more in my view) are elit players in my view.

 

The top third (up to about the 21st of 64 DEs) are good players in my view.

 

The middle third (21-42) are average starters.

 

The lower third (42-64) are certainly mediocre starters (thogh generally I would not call them mediocre "players" because they have been judged to be better than well more than half their competition on their team who are given ST duty because they are not good enough to start).

 

Even if you want to call the lower third of DE starters mediocre, do you really judge Schobel to be 42nd or worst at his position? 

 

I think not by virtually and statistical measure or the judgement of most professional observers of the game and from the my view which is that of a rank amateur.  Schobel ranked 20th in the league in sacks (a list which includes others besides DEs). He was fourth on the Bills in tackles.

 

Of greatest importance the Bills D was incredibly productive and ranked second  in the league statistically in total D.

 

Do you really insist that they did all this with a medicocre player at RDE?

 

Maybe you want to claim that being an average in the NFL means you are mediocre.  I think this meakes little sense, When a player is average he is average. Do you really think Schobel is in the lower third of DEs in this leagie (42-63) or even RDEs 20-32.

 

I don't think he is by any staitistical measure or the judgement of anyone who has a notion of the game.

 

I have been quite critical of Schobel during his career (my repetitive recounting of his taking horrible tackling angles as a rookie against Brunell). He is not in the elite of DEs or RDEs (but he is not paid like the elites so the Bills deal with him is fine with me) but the concept that his is mediocre justy does not square with reality.

 

Do you judge him to be in the lower thrid of starters or does average mean mediocre to you?  Either way this view is not realistic.

369763[/snapback]

 

As you said it's largely semantics. Yeah, in my book mediocre = average. This is of course relative, since anybody who even makes a mini-camp roster in the NFL is a tremendous player compared to the general population.

Scobel - I still say - is slightly better than an average starter in the NFL - or between mediocre and good.

I think if an average (no pun intended) GM had to rank the DE's, AS would typically fall into the upper portion of that middle 3rd group.

 

As for such a player being a starter on a top-ranked defense - yes - I believe that's possible and it's not even close. Look at the defensive roster. There are All-Pros at literally every other position. He was also a starter for the league's worst defense 2 years prior.

[AKC]

What you saw as a lessening in his confidence I saw as better play by him.

369778[/snapback]

 

 

The loss of confidence I sense is specific to his inside move- he had been working on a combo punch and swim move in the end of '03 that not only picked him up 2 sacks but made him more dangerous outside as it became harder to overplay him to the oustide and risk the inside rush that has mostly awful outcomes for a QB: Picks/Batted Balls/Fumbles and of course Sacks.

 

I'd concur with your observation that he was used more situationally last season, including an increased reliance on inside stunts along with zone coverage duties. My concerns are simply that he not lose the good work he previously had put in developing a new hand technique that makes him a far more dangerous one on one rusher, a skill he's already proven competent in.

[EndZoneCrew]

A.Schobel=P.Hansen.....and while Phil didn't get the accolades he deserved.....he was a consistent steller player!

[Marv Levy]

So far, I'd have to say YES. I am not seeing that mean streak and a force ala #78 BRUCE!!!

 

I hope I'm wrong though. Because I'd like to see him landing on the QB more this year.

[EndZoneCrew]

force ala #78 BRUCE!!!

370022[/snapback]

 

You can't compare players to the greatest individual DE in NFL history....let's be real here!

[Mickey]

No.

 

There are a couple of posts below on the issue of resigning Clements which make the point in a comparison that was not the central topic of the thread that Schobel is a "mediocre" NFL player.

 

Since this claim was not the centrak topic of the thread and quite frankly is unsubstantiated by any logical evaluation I thought it was worth posting as a separate thread.

 

Look, I know folks were disappointed in Schobel's sack production after hwe signed a big contract and rightly so in terms of the lowering of his sack production, but to jump to the conclusion that he is somehow a mediocre player (a worse than average NFL player) simply is unsupported as a football opinion.

 

Consider this:

 

1. Schobel was the DE on one of the second ranked statistically D team in the league.  Do you really think they achieved this lofty position and result even though they got "mediocre" play from their RDE? 

 

2. If memory serves me correctly the team led the league in sacks and Scgibek easily led this team in sacks (8 to second place 5 for Adams).  His personal totals disappointing for fans yes, but mediocre no.

 

3. A big part of his low sack total strikes me as the flexibility the athletic Schobel offered the Bills which allowed him to do the short zone pass coverage credibly in the run blitz so others could rush effectively.

 

4. Schobel's big problem as he developed was his being weak at the point of attack on runs and sometimes taking bad tackling angles (particularly as a rookie) however, by using him well in the run-blitz this both plays to Schobel's strengths and away from his weaknesses. he struck me as more effective and better used in 2004 than in previous years.

 

5. For me the really big deal about the job Schobel did last year was that his play and that of Kelsay and Denney allowed the Bills to carry only 3 DEs when the import of this position and the rotation the Bills use on the DL really dictated that they keep 4 DEs.  Thw great play and athleticism of all three DEs led by Schobel (who strikes me as a better player than either Kelsay or Denney) allowed the Bills to devote a valuable roster spot to keeping a designated long snapper and even shop for a long snapper after Dorenbos was injured. Their play gave us the flexiibility to activate rather than lose Jason peters because we had an extra roster spot.

 

Th notion that Schobel for some reason should be judged mediocre has nothing to do with a good football judgment in my mind.  By no means is he perfect and their can be great improvements in his play, but the notion that the 4th leading tackler on the #2 D in the league is a mediocre player is nothing short of laughable.

369377[/snapback]

I think you are reffering to my posts in that thread althought that is a little hard to tell given your distortion of what I said.

 

We apparently have a different understanding of "mediocre". I said that his play was meciocre but given his athletic ability, he was slightly better than average.

 

As for the idea that there is no logic to that opinion, you seemed to have glossed over where I point out that he had only 8 sacks, 5 of which came against the fins, bengals and browns and that he finished 25th in the league in sacks. Look, I don't care if you agree or not but to characterize my opinion as baseless, lacking in any logic is just mean spirited.

 

As for playing on the "second best defense in the league", enough already with that stat. We played a pretty laughable schedule and our vaunted defense had some serious let downs in crunch time. The Jacksonville game, the Jets on the road and the Steeler games are notable in that regard. Besides, I could turn that around easy enough. Playing on such a great defense he easily should have racked up more than 8 sacks, mostly against the lousiest teams on the schedule. Afterall, the other teams had to worry so much about Williams, Adams, Fletcher, Milloy and Spikes that they couldn't load up on Schobel.

 

Look, maybe you are happy with a DE who is maybe better than Ryan Denney and lets you hold a roster spot open for an extra long snapper. Me, I want a little more from my blind side DE than that.

 

Schobel is a little better than serviceable, that is about it. As for my main point in that thread, that you can't compare a player like him with a guy on Clements' level, it holds as well.

[Mickey]

The top third (up to about the 21st of 64 DEs) are good players in my view.

 

The middle third (21-42) are average starters.

 

369763[/snapback]

 

Exactly, Schobel was 25th in sacks and struggles against the run. He doesn't even draw many double teams which makes things harder on the rest of the line and whoever is blitzing on given play, CB, SS or a LB.

 

Mediocre: Of a middle quality; of but a moderate or low degree of excellence; indifferent; ordinary. see Schobel

[Mickey]

We didn't lead the league in sacks but where tied for 3rd with 45

 

atl- 48

phil- 47

tampa/buf/ne/ind-45

two of these teams are not like the others. 

 

Atl- patrick kearny and sack master dt rod coleman  Phil- Jevon Kearse  tampa- simeon rice  ind- dwight freeney

Those 4 teams have what many consider "elite status" de's, While Ne/Buffalo rely mostly on the run blitz and zone blitz to get pressure on and sack the quaterback.

Schobel is a good player, he's steady and definitly not a hole in our defense.  Is he elite? hardly.  It all depends what you're looking to get out of your defensive end.

 

If you're looking for 10-15 sacks a season, than aaron schobel isn't that guy.  If you're looking for a de who will give you a solid 8 sack season, who is quick enough to drop back into coverage, and  pressure the qb  and lead to errant throws than schobel fits that bill. 

 

Schobel is a highly underrated player,  No he's not julius peppers, but he's good enough for what's asked of him.  It still would be nice to have  a pure pass rusher on this defense.

369391[/snapback]

Good points but you know, there is a reason they don't ask anything more of him...its becuase he isn't capable of more. Why? Becuase he is basically ordinary. Maybe a little better, maybe a little worse, this isn't an exact science. We could do a lot worse, no question, than Schobel. I do think that this defense has room for improvement though there are more pressing needs than Schobel. Still, if the opportunity comes are way, I wouldn't let a possible stud DE go by the way side thinking that Schobel is good enough.

[AKC]

Before calling a guy who's averaged 8 sacks a season over the first 4 years of his career "mediocre", one might consider the averages over a like portion of the careers of the "best" players in the league at DE-

 

Strahan- 3.8

Kearse- 9

Kerney- 7

Simeon Rice- 10.2

 

At least based upon his ability to pressure the QB Schobel scores much closer to "best" than to "mediocre".

[Fake-Fat Sunny]

Exactly, Schobel was 25th in sacks and struggles against the run.  He doesn't even draw many double teams which makes things harder on the rest of the line and whoever is blitzing on given play, CB, SS or a LB. 

 

Mediocre: Of a middle quality; of but a moderate or low degree of excellence; indifferent; ordinary.  see Schobel 

370160[/snapback]

OK, but explain a few things to me.

 

1. Definitely Schobel was 25th in sacks to his credit and thus a good chunk of DEs got credit for more sacks than he, but is the number even a rock solid analogy to a DEs play even against simmply the pass. I say no.

 

Particularly in the run blitz scheme the Bills use, Schobel's pass duty is in the short and even the medium zone on many pass plays so sacks are of key importance but not analahous at all to measuring his effectiveness on pass plays. Unfortunately I think there is not really a good stat measuring his performance on pass plays so folks can offer whatever opinion they have reached and then give their reasons for reaching it. Why do you think Schobel is mediocre on pass plays, i will explain below why I think that last year was his best year on pass plays I have seen in his 4 years.

 

2. Why do you ay Schobel struggles against the run? He certainly did as a rookie and his first few years, but my assessment is that last year saw some of the best play in his career against the run as well.

 

3. Are there any episodes you would site where Schobel's failure to draw a double was part of the Bills problem. There were clear episodes in his career such as the horrible plays he made as a rookie letting Brunell beat him running a couple of time and a case like Schobel getting pancaked against Miami as a young player giving Fiedler a ton of time to hit a WR for the gamewinning TD which can be sited from his past, but I do not remember these clear incidents particularly as it relates to a failure to draw a double team which are the basis for the Billa D maladies. Do you even have some specific examples though they might be isolated.

 

Instead, I think this the pro-Schobel case.

 

1. Schobel was an effective player for the Bills in 2004 exactly because he did draw more attention as offenses moved to nullify him than they needed in the past. When one watches the game closely I saw this in the run blitz more than ever. In play after play last year, Schobel showed the ability to get back in pass coverage and this led to the blocker assigned to him being left dancing with the air while the Bills sent Spikes, Fletcher and even the CBs after the QB and in several cases they were unblocked while the tackle assigned to Schobel was just standing there as Schobel was backpedaling off the line in pass coverage.

 

What stat backs this up or is it merely another fact-free opinion. The stat is that the Bills finished far higher than they did in the past in number of sacks produced and if you look at who the sacks went to, it was not because of the extraordinary play of an individual like Spiks, Fletcher or Clements, the sacks in fact were divided across numerous players because Gray/Krumrie ran the run-bliytz so well.

 

Who was the Bills who got the most sacks in our sack productive D? Well it was none other than Aaron Schobel who logged 8 easily outpacing Adams who was second with 5.

 

When opposing OCs identified which Bill did they need to nullify to stop sack production there really was not a ready answer because the run blitz with Schobel's athleticism being a big part of it really allowed for one of the best pass rishes in the league. However, if there was one Bill who statistically should draw attention for stopping the sack it was Schobel.

 

I saw other teams clearly double team his position when it was the point of attack and I think the increased sacks by the team is linked to his leading the team in sack total.

 

2. i wish I knew Schobel's rookie weight because he struck me as more stout against the run than in the past. What stats either support this claim or contraindicate it. Well, if one looks at the Bills yardage given up against the run, it was pass defense where they clearly outpaced much of the league but the team finished 7th against the run and easily were in the upper third of the league. If Schobel was in fact so weak against the run this year and it was fortunate that he had a bunch of Pro Bowlers with him, one would think this would be reflected somehow in the word getting out about Schobel's weakness and opposing offenses constantly picking on him amidst a strong Bills D. I heard and saw no sign of that.

 

3. One of the best tangible indicators which I saw of Schobel having a great year last year was that he was clearly a ballhawk and around the ball a lot last year. He also had the persistence and strength to fight for it and win. Look no further than fumbel recoveries where actually few Bills even got 2 recoveries but Schobel easily led the team with 3 recoveries.

 

I really wonder what game folks were watching. Schobel is not the best DE in the league at all, but i thought he had his best year as a Bill last year and as a youngster I hope for and expect more this year from him.

[frogger]

I think I read that Aaron Schobel led the league among DE in Solo Tackles, I felt that 04' was a mojor step for him, i think he gambled a lot before and for the first time he was a DE not a pass rusher, or a run stopper, he is one of the most complete DE in the NFL-top 10 in the league in my book

[AKC]

The fact that Aaron has been a top sack artist over the first four years of his career apparetnly doesn't qualify him as a superior player. How about:

 

5 Fumbles forced, third best league-wide in 2004 among all DLinemen, along with 3 Recovered Fumbles, making him fifth league-wide in that category plus 4 passes defensed.

 

Makes you wish all our players were as "mediocre" as Aaron!

[The Jokeman]

So far, I'd have to say YES. I am not seeing that mean streak and a force ala #78 BRUCE!!!

 

I hope I'm wrong though. Because I'd like to see him landing on the QB more this year.

370022[/snapback]

Don't you understand that Bruce was a franchise (almost once in a lifetime) type DE? I think this is what Aaron's biggest "problem" is he's following in the footsteps of such a great player in Bruce. Also there's an older thread that talked about this subject that can be read here.

[Mickey]

OK, but explain a few things to me.

 

1. Definitely Schobel was 25th in sacks to his credit and thus a good chunk of DEs got credit for more sacks than he, but is the number even a rock solid analogy to a DEs play even against simmply the pass. I say no.

 

Particularly in the run blitz scheme the Bills use, Schobel's pass duty is in the short and even the medium zone on many pass plays so sacks are of key importance but not analahous at all to measuring his effectiveness on pass plays. Unfortunately I think there is not really a good stat measuring his performance on pass plays so folks can offer whatever opinion they have reached and then give their reasons for reaching it.  Why do you think Schobel is mediocre on pass plays, i will explain below why I think that last year was his best year on pass plays I have seen in his 4 years.

 

Again, only 8 sacks, mostly against lousy teams in a year where we had an awfully easy schedule just doesn't demonstrate much of an ability to pressure the passer which, in any scheme, the blind side DE needs to be able to do. 25th in sacks is a pretty generous way to state his numbers as actually, he was tied with 5 other guys at that spot so a less charitable way to state it would be 31st in sacks. He only had 28 solo tackles, ranking him 30th among defensive lineman, tied with 5 others so it is generous to say he was even ranked 30th. He was tied with a whole slew of other guys at 34th for passes defended by lineman. Basically, he is not making many solo tackles, he is not defending many passes and he is not pressuring the QB very much.

 

You are right in that our scheme may give him fewer opportunities and call upon him to instead play a bigger role in coverage. However, the reason we may be using that scheme is precisely because he isn't a good pass rusher. Are we not rushing him as much because of our scheme or are we playing that scheme because he is not such a good rusher? I also agree that it is hard to measure stats for a DE dropping into coverage. I have watched the games closely and all I can tell you is that I disagree on his coverage abilities. I don't know how many times New England especially was able to run WR screens and the like right through his short zone. He is athletic and pretty fast, for a defensive end and so I think he does perfom better in coverage than most defensive ends but that isn't saying much. The reason a DE dropping into coverage can work is because it is a surprise. The QB doesn't expect a DE to be anywhere but pushing into the backfield. When it works, it works mainly because the QB just didn't see it coming. A little nimbleness on the part of the DE and some good reads helps.

 

 

2. Why do you ay Schobel struggles against the run? He certainly did as a rookie and his first few years, but my assessment is that last year saw some of the best play in his career against the run as well.

We agree that defending the run was a problem for him, you just think he is over it, I don't. I would agree that he has improved but still, it is the weakest part of his game. He hasn't gotten much bigger or faster since his rookie year, he is just more experienced now and that helps. It is why he has improved but given where he started from against the run, that isn't saying much.

 

3. Are there any episodes you would site where Schobel's failure to draw a double was part of the Bills problem.  There were clear episodes in his career such as the horrible plays he made as a rookie letting Brunell beat him running a couple of time and a case like Schobel getting pancaked against Miami as a young player giving Fiedler a ton of time to hit a WR for the gamewinning TD which can be sited from his past, but I do not remember these clear incidents particularly as it relates to a failure to draw a double team which are the basis for the Billa D maladies. Do you even have some specific examples though they might be isolated.

 

Instead, I think this the pro-Schobel case.

The math here is pretty simple, if you have a DE who is formidable enough as a pass rusher that he draws double teams, that is one less blocker the other rushers have to deal with. You don't seem to dispute that he doesn't in fact draw many double teams so I am not sure where you are coming from here. Take the Jacksonville game. We were dying for some pressure from him on that last drive but he was not able to deliver. It was a 15 play drive with 13 passes. The Jets ran an 11 play drive which included 8 passes to beat us on their last drive and as in the Jacksonville game, Schobel just wasn't able to make a play.

 

1. Schobel was an effective player for the Bills in 2004 exactly because he did draw more attention as offenses moved to nullify him than they needed in the past.  When one watches the game closely I saw this in the run blitz more than ever.  In play after play last year, Schobel showed the ability to get back in pass coverage and this led to the blocker assigned to him being left dancing with the air while the Bills sent Spikes, Fletcher and even the CBs after the QB and in several cases they were unblocked while the tackle assigned to Schobel was just standing there as Schobel was backpedaling off the line in pass coverage.

I don't see this as an example of some sort of outstanding ability on his part. Every DE is assigned a blocker and when that DE unexpectedly drops into coverage, whether he does that well or doesn't, the blocker assigned to him has no target. That happens on every zone blitz whether your DE is a doofuss or not.

 

What stat backs this up or is it merely another fact-free opinion. The stat is that the Bills finished far higher than they did in the past in number of sacks produced and if you look at who the sacks went to, it was not because of the extraordinary play of an individual like Spiks, Fletcher or Clements, the sacks in fact were divided across numerous players because Gray/Krumrie ran the run-bliytz so well.

 

Who was the Bills who got the most sacks in our sack productive D? Well it was none other than Aaron Schobel who logged 8 easily outpacing Adams who was second with 5.

If a blind side DE can't "outpace" a run stopping interior DT in sacks, he would have to be among the very worst at his position in the league. I am not going to sing Schobel's praises for that. What our sack stats show is that we have to bring Milloy in on a SS blitz to get pressure. He had 4 sacks which is a lot for a safety. The reason we have to do that is because we are not going to get pressure with just the front four. One of the reasons for that is that Schobel just isn't able to generate much on his own. He struggles to beat one blocker let alone two which is usually the case when we are in the nickel.

 

When opposing OCs identified which Bill did they need to nullify to stop sack production there really was not a ready answer because the run blitz with Schobel's athleticism being a big part of it really allowed for one of the best pass rishes in the league. However, if there was one Bill who statistically should draw attention for stopping the sack it was Schobel.

 

I saw other teams clearly double team his position when it was the point of attack and I think the increased sacks by the team is linked to his leading the team in sack total.

I think the increased sack total is due to playing Miami twice and the Browns against whom we had 8 sacks plus 5 in the two games against the fins. We had 15 sacks against teams with winning records, 30 against the rest. Besides, we went from 38 sacks in 2003 to 45 in 2004. That is not such a big increase, only 7 more sacks over 16 games. The good fortune of playing Cleveland when we did was more than enough by itself to account for that increase.

 

2. i wish I knew Schobel's rookie weight because he struck me as more stout against the run than in the past....

I don't get it, you just said earlier in the same post that he struggled against the run in his rookie year and in "his first few years". ???

 

3. One of the best tangible indicators which I saw of Schobel having a great year last year was that he was clearly a ballhawk and around the ball a lot last year. He also had the persistence and strength to fight for it and win. Look no further than fumbel recoveries where actually few Bills even got 2 recoveries but Schobel easily led the team with 3 recoveries.

I don't disagree here that his athletic ability was a plus when it came to forcing and recovering fumbles. I just don't think it makes him all pro caliber. It why I see him as better than average at his position if only slightly so.

 

I really wonder what game folks were watching. Schobel is not the best DE in the league at all, but i thought he had his best year as a Bill last year and as a youngster I hope for and expect more this year from him.

I agree with those sentiments exactly. It is not at all my point that his is a terrible player, not even close. I think he is a little better than average with still some upside left but at this point, he really is not that much of a youngster anymore. He will be well in to his second contract this year so we should see about the best he is ever going to be able to give this year and the next. Though I don't think he is awful, I think we should not at all be shy about upgrading if the chance comes.

370239[/snapback]

[Mickey]

I think I read that Aaron Schobel led the league among DE in Solo Tackles, I felt that 04' was a mojor step for him, i think he gambled a lot before and for the first time he was a DE not a pass rusher, or a run stopper, he is one of the most complete DE in the NFL-top 10 in the league in my book

370274[/snapback]

Among defensive lineman he was tied with 5 others at 30th in the league in solo tackles with 28. That is six more than Adams had and 7 less than Williams had in 2003 when he wasn't splitting time with Banaan/Edwards.

[d_wag]

Among defensive lineman he was tied with 5 others at 30th in the league in solo tackles with 28.  That is six more than Adams had and 7 less than Williams had in 2003 when he wasn't splitting time with Banaan/Edwards.

372027[/snapback]

 

i don't see where you got 28.........according to yahoo, he had 47 solo tackles last year (a career best)

 

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/players/5493