Did the Titans D look familiar last night?

[Pedro]

....When is the last time the 'Skins had four sacks in one game? We are not talking pre-season either...real gametime. That is why there is no way that the Titans D can remind us of our Defense, it's a terrible comparision to say the least.

..... We sacked Steeler QBs 5 times and picked them off once (should have been twice, but Carlos dropped a sure TD) last year without Haynesworth. What is your point?

EDIT: Making the Steeler OL look bad isn't hard. Doesn't mean your DL is actually any good at getting pressure in the other 15 games of the season.

[WhoRUSupposed2Be]

While I understand your point, the Titan still did record 4 sacks last night, which would put them on pace for 64 on the season. Obviously an unreasonable total, but still, the Skins didn't get much pressure at all last year, while the Titans are still getting it even without Haynesworth. They just run a more agressive scheme.

Take into account that if Big Ben had not been chasing his own tail, then those sacks would've been easily unaccounted for.

[ACW]

One cool thing: Either Michaels or Cris mentioned how there was a wide gap that Haynesworth would've clogged; he'll be doing that for us now

[KingGibbs]

On a side note. I love watching Big Ben make things happen. He must really frustrate the hell out of the defenders trying to pressure him and failing. It didn't matter if the Titans were stuffing the run. Big Ben put the team on his shoulders and led them to victory.

He might not appease the FF players, but the guy just wins.

[SellersHappens]

While I understand your point, the Titan still did record 4 sacks last night, which would put them on pace for 64 on the season. Obviously an unreasonable total, but still, the Skins didn't get much pressure at all last year, while the Titans are still getting it even without Haynesworth. They just run a more agressive scheme.

From the two sacks that I saw, it looked like those sacks came from the Steelers O-line continuing to be inept at picking up the blitz. When the Titans rushed their 4 down linemen, Ben had plenty of time.

[Thirtyfive2seven]

big ben is crazy. the guy is joe mediocre for 3.9 quarters of football, then all the sudden with the game on the line, he ALWAYS comes through. its seriously insane. he led the drive where ward screwed them, then came back in OT and did it AGAIN. i mean its insane.

hes gotta be the most clutch QB in sports. yes moreso than brady or manning. both guys are better than he is throughout a game, but if youre down and need points or a comeback, big ben is king.

Ew, I hate him. Does that mean he sucks? It does in my mind. Pittsburgh did not look good to me last night. They looked so average and beatable (is that a word?).

To me, Tenn lost the game with their 2 horrible field goal attempts. The first kick was awful and the 2nd was too low so I'm pinning both of those on the kicker.

[DGREENHULK]

that bend dont break zone that ten was playing at the end of the game was a joke. roflsburger ate it up and then some.

big ben is crazy. the guy is joe mediocre for 3.9 quarters of football, then all the sudden with the game on the line, he ALWAYS comes through. its seriously insane. he led the drive where ward screwed them, then came back in OT and did it AGAIN. i mean its insane.

hes gotta be the most clutch QB in sports. yes moreso than brady or manning. both guys are better than he is throughout a game, but if youre down and need points or a comeback, big ben is king.

Yeah it looked like TN played the same D that ARZ tried in the Superbowl to keep PIT out of scoring range. Big Ben gets the job done no doubt about it.

[GURU]

Good point. Those sacks didn't equate to wins by either the Skins or the Titans last night.

Sack stats, by themselves, aren't necessarily very good indicators of how good a defense is. Sure, the Giants won the Super Bowl when leading the league in sacks. And those great Bears defenses in the '80s got to the QB a crazy number of times. But it's not the best measure of defense.

The historically good 2000 Ravens racked up a paltry 35 sacks -- barely 2 per game. The '90 Giants Super Bowl Champs had only 30 sacks and just shut down the 49ers in the playoffs. The 2006 Super Bowl champ Colts racked up only 24 sacks in the regular season, with a defensive system designed to rush the quarterback first.

Points allowed are the most important stat on defense. Period. In that sense, those were two pretty good defenses we saw last night.

[Art]

So I'm watching the opener last night, and its late in the game. Tennessee decides to only rush four for the majority of the second half, deciding to drop 7 back and defend the pass. Every time the ball was snapped (with the exception of when the Titans blitzed), Big Ben casually stood back in the pocket, and had 5-6 seconds to find an open receiver, and pick apart the Titans secondary. Why? His pocket never collapsed, cause the Titans had no Haynesworth destroying the middle of the OLine.

Strong DBs, pretty good LBs, and pass-rushing DEs, and no push up the middle to collapse the pocket. It was like I was watching the Redskins last year, total de-ja-vu. Anyone else get the same feeling?

This is what Haynesworth brings to our defense. This is what we can expect this season, for as long as Big Al is on the field (furiously knocking on wood). Ladies and gentlemen, we're going to see a LOT of QBs on their backs this season, and its going to be fantastic.

You wildly overstate what we were last year. We actually did generate good pressure last year on the whole. Every team, in every game, will have 10 or so throws where they generate no significant pressure. The image you portray is impossible for a team that finished tied for sixth in the league in completion percentage against. And we were fifth in average passing yards per pass. We were in the top 10 of nearly every significant defensive passing statistic EXCEPT interceptions and sacks.

You need to allow yourself to appreciate there is more to the game than those two stats and that the other stats count too and the other stats are not possible if the pressure is quite as lacking as your faulty memory imagines.

Will Haynesworth help us? You betcha, but, don't be surprised if it's not exactly as obvious as you think if Blache doesn't let certain things happen as well.

[iMeast]

The Tennessee Titans got a push sometimes, but not as often as they did last year against a subpar Steelers offensive line. Albert Haynesworth is missed whether they want to admit it or not.

HTTR

[jrockster21]

Uhhh...I'd love to agree with you, but you are WAY OFF! The Titans had 4 sacks last night. Count them...FOUR SACKS! When is the last time the 'Skins had four sacks in one game? We are not talking pre-season either...real gametime. That is why there is no way that the Titans D can remind us of our Defense, it's a terrible comparision to say the least.

Hopefully, after this season we can have the success of putting consistent pressure on QB's because only good stuff will come from it.

We sacked Steeler QBs 5 times and picked them off once (should have been twice, but Carlos dropped a sure TD) last year without Haynesworth. What is your point?

From the two sacks that I saw, it looked like those sacks came from the Steelers O-line continuing to be inept at picking up the blitz. When the Titans rushed their 4 down linemen, Ben had plenty of time.

I saw the same thing - when rushing with their 4-down linemen, Ben just stood in the pocket for forever.

[jrockster21]

You need to allow yourself to appreciate there is more to the game than those two stats and that the other stats count too and the other stats are not possible if the pressure is quite as lacking as your faulty memory imagines.

I greatly appreciate that there is more to defense than sacks and interceptions. However I also greatly appreciate the stat that says if you win the turnover battle, you usually win the game.

And no, the Skins did not generate much pressure on the QB last year with 4-down linemen rushing, which is the point of this thread. It doesn't take a rocket surgeon to understand that a team that can generate consistent pressure with the DLine, will do better than a team that can't. Show me someone who says the Skins did that consistently last year, and I'll show you someone who didn't watch the games.

[Art]

I greatly appreciate that there is more to defense than sacks and interceptions. However I also greatly appreciate the stat that says if you win the turnover battle, you usually win the game.

And no, the Skins did not generate much pressure on the QB last year with 4-down linemen rushing, which is the point of this thread. It doesn't take a rocket surgeon to understand that a team that can generate consistent pressure with the DLine, will do better than a team that can't. Show me someone who says the Skins did that consistently last year, and I'll show you someone who didn't watch the games.

The Redskins did generate consistent pressure last year with their down linemen. But, it was pressure of the sort Blache wants, not that you want. Whether Blache is correct or not is irrelvant. He teaches something very specific and focused. And he got it by in large last season. He has linemen target specific spots in the pocket as they make the QB uncomfortable. This worked well given the extremely tight coverage we had, especially early. QBs got uncomfortable and often went to checks we had anticipated.

Only against Pittsburgh did he go balls out blitzing, where he blitzed, I believe, on like 50 defensive plays or something crazy. Blache was a surprise to me that he was so adaptive to the opponent. The line got a little dinged and was unable to maintain early season performance all season, which is why it's improved now. But what you describe did not exist.

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

The Redskins did generate consistent pressure last year with their down linemen. But, it was pressure of the sort Blache wants, not that you want. Whether Blache is correct or not is irrelvant.

if the pressure that he wants is not causing sacks or turnovers, how can you say him being correct or not is irrelevant? his so called "pressure he wants" obviously does not generate what our defense sorely lacks.

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

Ew, I hate him. Does that mean he sucks? It does in my mind. Pittsburgh did not look good to me last night. They looked so average and beatable (is that a word?).

To me, Tenn lost the game with their 2 horrible field goal attempts. The first kick was awful and the 2nd was too low so I'm pinning both of those on the kicker.

thats what pitt always looks like dude. garbage offense for most of the game, and then its time to turn it up to get that game winning score. did you see the stat that they posted about the steelers 4th quarter comebacks/victories? 17 (now 18) 4th quarter or overtime comebacks. thats insane. ben has been here for 5 years, thats over 3 come from behind wins per season in the 4th quarter. thats just clutch as all hell.

hes the only guy where stats dont count. when you can do that, it doesnt matter what else you do. 18 come from behind victories. thats beyond ridiculous.

[Hooper]

Who knows? The titans were gassed at the end -- Big Al would have been gassed too.

But here's the thing: a lot of the pressure the Titans did get in the game was because Big Ben holds on to the ball forever. Plus, the Steelers aren't going to run on anybody this year.

[wvtbred]

ben completed 33 passess ...that has to be close to an nfl record.

Ben is a beast and anyone who doesn't think so doesn't know a thing about football.

[ntotoro]

Difference is they SACKED Roethlisberger 4 times, and had 2 Int's WITHOUT Haynesworth, that one game would have represented a significant amount of our seasonal total. But I do believe Albert will make an undeniable positive impact

We sacked him five times (IIRC) last year. Getting sacked is nothing new to Big Ben.

Damn if he isn't clutch, though.

[Warhead36]

I said it in the ATN thread. The Titans pulled a Redskins. Play great D for 3 quarters, collapse down the stretch due to playing "prevent" D(which as we all know by now prevents you from winning).

[Art]

if the pressure that he wants is not causing sacks or turnovers, how can you say him being correct or not is irrelevant? his so called "pressure he wants" obviously does not generate what our defense sorely lacks.

If causing sacks and turnovers means falling out of the Top 10 in all the other categories it would be a sign of him knowing what our defense needs, versus what you think it lacks. I am not a huge fan of Blache's overall thoughts in this area as I prefer a bigger risk/reward style defense. Without overwhelming player talent advantages Blache won't get that type without a significant change in how he uses his linemen on attack. You saw the first week Haynesworth was here how he spoke of not being the type of player Blache typically likes and how Blache said he'd do something that fits Albert. We'll see.

The bottom line is our pass defense was THE LEAST of our concerns last year. Fixation over a lack of sacks or turnovers while ignoring all the positive is pure idiocy.

[SilkyDiamonds]

ntotoro: Im in FULL AGREEMENT, that dude is CLUTCH! I dont care what defense he sees, he WILLS his team to win, they aint got stats for that

[DCskinFAN]

EXACTLY WHAT I WAS THINKING... It seemed like the coaches really expected the front four to get pressure...

I hope BIG AL can make that type of difference for us.

[LaxBuddy21]

If causing sacks and turnovers means falling out of the Top 10 in all the other categories it would be a sign of him knowing what our defense needs, versus what you think it lacks. I am not a huge fan of Blache's overall thoughts in this area as I prefer a bigger risk/reward style defense. Without overwhelming player talent advantages Blache won't get that type without a significant change in how he uses his linemen on attack. You saw the first week Haynesworth was here how he spoke of not being the type of player Blache typically likes and how Blache said he'd do something that fits Albert. We'll see.

The bottom line is our pass defense was THE LEAST of our concerns last year. Fixation over a lack of sacks or turnovers while ignoring all the positive is pure idiocy.

I think what you are failing to realize is that no one is trying to say sacks and turnovers are better than those other categories but they should be included with those other categories to make us a complete defense. Sacks and turnovers added to what we already have turns a good defense into a great defense that is feared by the league.

[Haynesworth_Mancrush]

While I understand your point, the Titan still did record 4 sacks last night, which would put them on pace for 64 on the season. Obviously an unreasonable total, but still, the Skins didn't get much pressure at all last year, while the Titans are still getting it even without Haynesworth. They just run a more agressive scheme.

Let's not forget that the Squealers O-line gave up the 4th most sacks last season. They didn't do a whole lot to address that in the offseason.

[jrockster21]

The Redskins did generate consistent pressure last year with their down linemen. But, it was pressure of the sort Blache wants, not that you want.

Art, there is only one type of QB pressure. There isn't several different types, as you seem to imply.

Well, scratch that - there is pressure from the edges, from which a good QB can easily step forward and avoid, and a good OT can simply ride on out of the play, and there is collapsing the pocket, which causes the QB to hurry his throw, tuck the ball and run, or step into a sack, of which the Skins had very little last year. I honestly don't remember one collapsed pocket all season.

If the QB has all day to throw the ball, its not good.

Plus, our passing defense numbers were inflated by games against some of the worst passing offenses in the league last season. Seattle, Cincinnati and Cleveland were 29th, 30th and 31st in the league last year. Awful. St. Louis was 26th. Here's a zany prediction: the Raiders were 32nd in the league last year - I bet we do well against their passing attack last season too!

The bottom line is our pass defense was THE LEAST of our concerns last year. Fixation over a lack of sacks or turnovers while ignoring all the positive is pure idiocy.

Lack of turnovers is a huge problem. I think only once in history has a team that had a negative turnover differential reached the playoffs, but I could be incorrect on that. Pure idiocy is ignoring the glaring lack of turnovers. Sacks and QB pressures lead to turnovers - its simple fact.