BALLz Posted November 24, 2008 Share Posted November 24, 2008 For those of you who don't know, the Skins D is currently ranked 3rd in the NFL, 1st in the NFC. We are only behind Baltimore and Pittsburgh. Looking through the rest of the top 10 i noticed that 8 of the other top 10 defenses were also in the top 10 in sacks with Baltimore at 15th and the Skins ranked a lowly 26th. Now time and time again we hear how necessary it is for a successful D to have an elite pass rusher. But for some reason the last 2 seasons we have not, and still have been among the best in the league. So what is it about our D that makes it so successful. If it’s the scheme, then perhaps it wouldn’t matter who we brought in, the sacks totals would remain the same. And if our D can play at this level with out an elite pass rusher, why is everyone so adamant about bringing one in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IbleedBnG83 Posted November 24, 2008 Share Posted November 24, 2008 For those of you who don't know, the Skins D is currently ranked 3rd in the NFL, 1st in the NFC. We are only behind Baltimore and Pittsburgh. Looking through the rest of the top 10 i noticed that 8 of the other top 10 defenses were also in the top 10 in sacks with Baltimore at 15th and the Skins ranked a lowly 26th. Now time and time again we hear how necessary it is for a successful D to have an elite pass rusher. But for some reason the last 2 seasons we have not, and still have been among the best in the league. So what is it about our D that makes it so successful. If it’s the scheme, then perhaps it wouldn’t matter who we brought in, the sacks totals would remain the same. And if our D can play at this level with out an elite pass rusher, why is everyone so adamant about bringing one in. Because we give up big plays downfield without one. Imagine the amount of turnovers we could create with a decent pass rush, doesn't have to be elite. We don't have any inside pressure. We allow QB's plenty of time to go deep. The longer a CB has to cover a WR, the more likely the WR will get open. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
usafskins Posted November 24, 2008 Share Posted November 24, 2008 I think our offense has a lot to do with our rankings on D. We have long drives and have very good time of possession. Thus limiting the opportunities opposing teams have for scoring. Although our offense has alot of difficulty scoring TDs in the red zone we move the ball very well between the 20's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morneblade Posted November 24, 2008 Share Posted November 24, 2008 Because, do you realize how much better that would make the D? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taylor4Life Posted November 24, 2008 Share Posted November 24, 2008 In my opinion, the most underrated players on our defense are our DTs, so running up the gut on first or second down won't amount to much yardage for most offenses. This results in a lot of 3rd and long situations. Secondly, we have a very good secondary, which I think Blache admitted is the primary area of focus in his defensive scheme. Most other top tier defenses produce a pass rush as their primary focus. Ours is a different scheme which is equally effective in the yardage category but, IMO, lacks in the turnover department. However, that could change if our DBs start holding onto the ball like they did yesterday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BALLz Posted November 24, 2008 Author Share Posted November 24, 2008 It may help the Defense, but it is definately down on the list of needs if you ask me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elkabong82 Posted November 24, 2008 Share Posted November 24, 2008 Cuz sacks are pretty. j/k. Sacks can kill a drive, demoralize a QB, etc. As the Skins are proving, you don't need a ton of them to have a good D. However, that pressure can be the difference in a close fought game, which we have plenty of. This is also the reason why people want more deep passing. We have close games, so people try to look at our weaknesses and assume if we were better at any one of them we would win more games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hunterx Posted November 24, 2008 Share Posted November 24, 2008 We are ranked 3rd in yard per game. That is just one stat. I don't think any offense in the league is as scared to face us as they are against Pittsburgh, Baltimore, or Chicago. Here's a few stats Ypg: 3rd Rypg: 7th Pypg: 5th Pts pg: 5th Here's the ugly stats: only +2 in turnover differential 17 sacks (tied at 26th with 3 teams) 10 Int's (tied at 11 with 6 teams) Forced Fumbles 7 (tied at 23 with 7 teams) If you look at those stats, you wonder how we are giving up so few yards. It's partly to do with a relatively efficient offense. When they sustain drives, they usually eat up a lot of the clock, which takes plays and yards away from opposing teams. One of the problems this defense has is that because they don't get sacks or turnovers, they are on the field a very long time. They may give up 40, 50 yards then force a team to punt around the 50 or 40 yard line. This is great for statistics, but not in the fourth quarter. We all saw how Dallas was able to pound the ball on us in the fourth quarter. It's because by then our defense was tired. Maybe not because of that game, but the entire season. Sacks, Fumbles, Interceptions is what gives a defense a surprise/random break. Whether it's a sack to disrupt 2nd and long or to stop their third down, or an interception to give the offense great field position. Sure, we are getting it down right now. But there is no harm in adding a few sacks to a game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elkabong82 Posted November 24, 2008 Share Posted November 24, 2008 Because we give up big plays downfield without one. Imagine the amount of turnovers we could create with a decent pass rush, doesn't have to be elite. We don't have any inside pressure. We allow QB's plenty of time to go deep. The longer a CB has to cover a WR, the more likely the WR will get open. Only the Steelers have given up fewer plays of 20+ yards than us, so I don't know where you're getting this "we give up big plays downfield" stuff from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slateman Posted November 24, 2008 Share Posted November 24, 2008 No, I just think its cus we've played the Lions and Browns. Honestly, our defense is not as good as it looks. We have great corners. Thats about it. Clearly we have trouble pressuring the QB. We also seem to struggle against the run Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elkabong82 Posted November 24, 2008 Share Posted November 24, 2008 I think it should also be pointed out that Philly leads the league in sacks. Of course sacks are important, and yes it definitely would help us if we had more of them. However, some overvalue sacks at the same time. Blache's scheme works for this D, so there isn't a need to change the scheme to create more sacks. I think what would help best is a personell shift on the line. Get Alexander on the line more often, keep Evans at LDE and rotate Carter and Taylor on the RDE, and rotate Taylor at OLB (which we did this past game). Monty getting back healthy will be a big help in creating pressure also, IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
superozman Posted November 24, 2008 Share Posted November 24, 2008 We give up little yards per game because the Offense is on the field for so long most of the time. The D isn't out there as much as many other teams... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sonny9TD Posted November 24, 2008 Share Posted November 24, 2008 For those of you who don't know, the Skins D is currently ranked 3rd in the NFL, 1st in the NFC. We are only behind Baltimore and Pittsburgh. Looking through the rest of the top 10 i noticed that 8 of the other top 10 defenses were also in the top 10 in sacks with Baltimore at 15th and the Skins ranked a lowly 26th. Now time and time again we hear how necessary it is for a successful D to have an elite pass rusher. But for some reason the last 2 seasons we have not, and still have been among the best in the league. So what is it about our D that makes it so successful. If it’s the scheme, then perhaps it wouldn’t matter who we brought in, the sacks totals would remain the same. And if our D can play at this level with out an elite pass rusher, why is everyone so adamant about bringing one in. We were 1st in turnover take aways for a while and dropped passes kept us 6-2 instead of 2-6. Yes we need a pass rash. No question about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elkabong82 Posted November 24, 2008 Share Posted November 24, 2008 No, I just think its cus we've played the Lions and Browns.Honestly, our defense is not as good as it looks. We have great corners. Thats about it. Clearly we have trouble pressuring the QB. We also seem to struggle against the run We've played 11 games now, 2 games against weaker teams doesn't alter the statline as significantly as you're implying. We're 7th in rush D. Barber killed us on the edges, one of the few times he's had a good game against us, and we allowed Morris to rush a lot cuz we we're playing pass most of the first half. Morris only had 30 rush yds in 2nd half when we adjusted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NAC386 Posted November 24, 2008 Share Posted November 24, 2008 No, I just think its cus we've played the Lions and Browns.Honestly, our defense is not as good as it looks. We have great corners. Thats about it. Clearly we have trouble pressuring the QB. We also seem to struggle against the run Every team plays bad teams, that's a pretty dumb argument. We definitely do not struggle against the run, we are ranked in the top 10 in the nfl against the run. We've played the Cardinals, the Eagles, the Cowboys, the Saints, the Steelers, the Giants. I'd say those are some pretty good offenses and we are still ranked 3rd. Our fans are so spoiled it's rediculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TerpSkin Posted November 24, 2008 Share Posted November 24, 2008 I think our defense is great... and I also agree that our offense has contributed greatly to the YPG ranking that our defense has. The big problem with consistently not being a very good defense in terms of sacks, forced fumbles, and INTs is that our defense does not give the offense a lot of short fields. Our offense consistently has to go 70 to 90 yards to score a TD. Everybody is always harping on our offensive woes in not scoring TDs, but we also have the defense that is consistently one of the worst in the league at creating short fields for the offense. That fact artificially deflates our offense's red zone efficiency in comparison to the rest of the league. The reason we need to have more of a pass rush is not because our defense struggles in limiting opponents' yards and points, but because we need to score more points on offense (as strange as that may sound). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IbleedBnG83 Posted November 24, 2008 Share Posted November 24, 2008 Only the Steelers have given up fewer plays of 20+ yards than us, so I don't know where you're getting this "we give up big plays downfield" stuff from. Not necearrily many, but they have been costly. See Donnie Avery. When we go prevent, we certainly do not get pressure and allow teams to get significant yards. Mabye not 20+ yards but 15+ yards are still deadly in this league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NAC386 Posted November 24, 2008 Share Posted November 24, 2008 We were 1st in turnover take aways for a while and dropped passes kept us 6-2 instead of 2-6. Yes we need a pass rash. No question about it. Dropped passes accounted for 4 wins this year? Come on man... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taylor4Life Posted November 24, 2008 Share Posted November 24, 2008 We give up little yards per game because the Offense is on the field for so long most of the time. The D isn't out there as much as many other teams... Seen this a few times... this theory is way overblown. We average about 32 minutes of TOP per game, which is not even in the top five in the league. Having four more minutes of possession per game than our oppenents cannot POSSIBLY be the primary reason we are number 3 in yards allowed per game. Is it a contributing factor? Perhaps. I may be wrong, but I've never seen any football expert say "it's the number three defense in the league, but hey, that's only because the offense holds onto the ball 32 minutes a game..." LOL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaxBuddy21 Posted November 24, 2008 Share Posted November 24, 2008 Yea, we are the number 3 ranked defense but where do you think we would be with a pass rush? Because of our secondary and our run stopping ability, if we could rush the passer and get sacks, we would easily be the best defense in football. Look at the teams ahead of us. They both get sacks and can pressure the QB but neither of them have the secondary that we have. Our secondary can hold coverage for a long time and that causes incompletes or short dumpoffs that we pounce on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ffxdrummer Posted November 24, 2008 Share Posted November 24, 2008 Seen this a few times... this theory is way overblown.We average about 32 minutes of TOP per game, which is not even in the top five in the league. Having four more minutes of possession per game than our oppenents cannot POSSIBLY be the primary reason we are number 3 in yards allowed per game. I may be wrong, but I've never seen any football expert attribute a top 5 defense to an offense that has a high average TOP. Looking over the stats on nfl.com, one that jumped out at me is that our D has played a league-LOW 617 plays from scrimmage. So yes, our O helps our D by staying on the field, but our D is putting our O back out onto the field in the fewest plays as well. To put that in perspective, our O has played 712 plays from scrimmage, 5th in the league. We're doing great with TOP and getting the opponents off the field, we just need to turn all of this into POINTS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaxBuddy21 Posted November 24, 2008 Share Posted November 24, 2008 Not necearrily many, but they have been costly. See Donnie Avery. When we go prevent, we certainly do not get pressure and allow teams to get significant yards. Mabye not 20+ yards but 15+ yards are still deadly in this league. Ok that was just a dumb statement. What big play is not costly? They usually lead to scores of some kind. The field is only 100 yards and teams start on average on the 30 or so. One big play of 20+ yards and you are on the other half of the field and probably at least get 3 points. And if these big plays were costing us so much, how are we holding teams to so few points? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taylor4Life Posted November 24, 2008 Share Posted November 24, 2008 Looking over the stats on nfl.com, one that jumped out at me is that our D has played a league-LOW 617 plays from scrimmage. So yes, our O helps our D by staying on the field, but our D is putting our O back out onto the field in the fewest plays as well. You're overlooking the other probable cause of your stat. Playing less plays from scrimmage on defense may also be an indication that the defense can hold opposing offenses to short drives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ffxdrummer Posted November 24, 2008 Share Posted November 24, 2008 You're overlooking the other probable cause of your stat. Playing less plays from scrimmage on defense may also be an indication that the defense can hold opposing offenses to short drives. I had kinda thought of that as a given, but yes, you're right, thanks for pointing that out. Our defense definitely deserves as much credit as it's gotten, and maybe more. We wouldn't be anywhere near 7-4 without the D that we have. They give our Offense more than enough chances to score. If they only gave them "enough", it wouldn't be enough, if you know what I mean. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingjames Posted November 24, 2008 Share Posted November 24, 2008 we cant stop the run outside of the tackles. that is the only thing that worries me about this D. this is 2 weeks in a row where we have been ran all over because our DE's cant contain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.