Which source of sack production is better (and why if you would like to elaborate)?

[kitchen sink]

Interested in the thoughts on this topic with the details as to why folks think one source is better than another. 

Edited May 9 by kitchen sink

[Bill from NYC]

This question is impossible to answer. If one player had 21 sacks, who is to say that he would be the only player on the defense sacking the QB?

 

Will Anderson is probably the best defensive player in football. Teams must account for him and it frees up his fellow defenders to sack the QB. 

[GunnerBill]

I'm going for he first option. Because in the post season I believe elite talent matters most.

[BuffaloBillyG]

I love the thought of having an elite sack artist. Having a TJ Watt would be amazing, until the playoffs hit and he's out injured. I say give me 3 guys with 7 sacks to maintain constant pressure. 

[BarleyNY]

Building around an elite 21 sack player is far easier than building around the other options. And as @GunnerBill said, those elite players matter most in the playoffs. 

[GunnerBill]

3 minutes ago, BarleyNY said:

Building around an elite 21 sack player is far easier than building around the other options. And as @GunnerBill said, those elite players matter most in the playoffs. 

 

And this team's problem is the playoffs. If we were trying to go from 6 wins to 10 wins I might take option 2. We are trying to get from 12 wins to Championship. 

[BlueRed]

While 1 player with 21 sacks would be outstanding, I think this hypothetical also paints the picture that the rest of the team would then have zero sacks. 
 

Knowing how much teams rotate their DL’s - I think you always need pass rush “threat” on the field. I’m sure this option will lose the poll but I selected 7 players with 3 sacks for this reason. 

[BarleyNY]

10 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

And this team's problem is the playoffs. If we were trying to go from 6 wins to 10 wins I might take option 2. We are trying to get from 12 wins to Championship. 

I could not agree more. 

[Maine-iac]

If you have a couple of 7 sack guys you might have an OK scheme with OK players but you don't have a guy that's a problem.  Teams can scheme your scheme.  Sometimes there's just nothing they can do about a guy who is always a problem.  I want a guy on defense who is a problem.  If you have a guy who has 20 plus sacks it means even when accounted for he's still getting to the QB. 

[Robert Paulson]

21 is 21

[sven233]

21 from 1 player, in theory, is the best.  The reason is because it forces teams to gameplan for that 1 superstar and it changes the way you get to defend in general.  This usually makes it easier for the defense to exploit other areas that the offense has to forego in order to block that superstar and you can give more exotic looks on defense.

 

Where this becomes a major problem is if this superstar gets hurt.  Most likely, you have a lot of money tied up in this 1 player and the backups are probably not as talented as they would be if the sacks were more spread out.  But, make no mistake about it......if you have that superstar game wrecker on defense that the offense has to give more attention to on just about every play, that is what you want because it opens up so much more when you know what the offense has to do to try and slow that guy down. 

Edited May 9 by sven233

[quincy]

It is very rare that you have a player that has a high sack total and wins the Super Bowl in that said year. 

 

Looking at the stats I can see only one player that has gotten 19 or more sacks and won the Super Bowl in the same year, LT in 1986 with 20.5 sacks. 

 

Aaron Donald came very close with his 20.5 sack season, losing to NE in the 13-3 defeat in 2018. 

 

 

[hondo in seattle]

I understand the @GunnerBill argument.

 

But given the Bills' luck, that one elite talent will probably get injured in Week 10 and miss the playoffs.

 

Two pieces of wisdom my French mom taught me.

 

1)  "Never put all your eggs in one basket."

 

2)  "All sacks are equal."

 

GB's wisdom points to #1.

 

Mom's wisdom points to #3.

I make a compromise and chose #2.  

 

 

[ClosetFan]

2

[Kirby Jackson]

5 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

I'm going for he first option. Because in the post season I believe elite talent matters most.

I think this is the right answer. If you have a dominant talent like that, it changes scheme as well. It’s much harder to defend 1 Myles Garrett than it is to defend 2 AJ Epenesas. 

[BigAl2526]

I think it's better if you're getting more sacks, including outside linebackers in a 3-4 alignment than second or third line players, and it doesn't matter if they come from one player or multiple players.  In theory, that means you're linebackers and secondary are more available in pass coverage and run defense wince they don't have to do a lot of blitzing.  It's Football Defensive Strategy 101.  

 

[smward8]

We had a year where four guys had 10 or more and didn't make the playoffs.  Of course the offense was mediocre at best.   I think you want a few guys with a bunch, and bunch of guys with some.  Essentially, you want to be able to put pressure on every pass play. 

[folz]

It kind of depends. I voted for one player with 21 sacks because as others have said, that means you have a stud pass rusher. Someone who can change the game on a dime. Get that strip sack in crunch time when you most need it, etc. (like Bruce used to). And that player will draw a lot of attention, making the other rushers' jobs easier (make them better than they might be without the stud opposite them).

 

If you have three players with seven sacks each, it could be that they are all very good rushers and just splitting the wealth, or it could mean you have three slightly above average guys who may disappear in critical moments or not be able to win those one-on-ones when it most counts.

 

Three sacks from seven different players sounds like you are having to manufacture the sacks. You probably don't have any really good rushers (outside of maybe a safety or corner who you can't blitz that often).

 

 

For reference:

 

Broncos 2025: 1st in sacks with 68

Bonitto (LB): 14 sacks

Cooper (LB): 8 sacks

Franklin-Meyers (DE): 7.5 sacks

Allen (DE): 7 sacks

Strnd (LB): 4.5 sacks

Roach (DT): 4 sacks

McMillian (CB): 4 sacks

Tillman (LB): 4 sacks

Uwazurike (DE): 3.5 sacks

Jones (DT): 3 sacks

Elliss (LB): 2.5 sacks

Hufanga (S): 2 sacks

Singleton (LB): 1 sack

Moss (CB): 1 sack

Greenlaw (LB): 1 sack

2 players had a half sack each (S and LB)

 

The Broncos had 17 players get sacks last year. Their top 4 sack leaders had 36.5 sacks combined. A half sack more than the entire Bills team last year.

Not saying Leonard can duplicate what the Broncos did (68 is a huge number and we dont have their players), but I do like that distribution (even if you say take one sack away from each guy to get to a more normal Top-10 sack teams' number of around 45-50 sacks).

 

 

[GoBills808]

id be ok w either A or B

[MJS]

Having one dominant guy would take pressure off the rest of the defense and allow them to play freer and make more plays.

 

And you never have the rest of the team with zero sacks. In fact, having a dominant guy would probably increase the sack production of the other rushers.