Lack of Pass Rush - Due to corners?

[Your GFs favorite huddler]

It's like some of you just want us to be bad so you can feel special about being right on an internet forum...

[rippadonn]

And everybody is double teaming our DE's and letting every other position group get sacks instead of them.

 

[Zaximus]

This is one of the things I mentioned we'd lose when Norman wasn't here and a lot of people shrugged it off.   I feel like a lot of our sacks last year were coverage sacks.    

[KB_fan]

19 minutes ago, ShutDwn said:

Been thinking this too.

Wasn't @KB_fan saying we have the highest 3 and out % last week?

 

Actually ESPN claimed this in error in an article last week.   It's a bit more complicated.

In weeks 1 & 2, the Panthers had the highest % of drives in which the opponents did not gain a 1st down.  But in several cases that was due to turnovers and ESPN (strangely) did not exclude drives without first downs in which opponents made field goals!

Looking at % of opponents drives resulting in 3&outs and turnovers (without a 1st down), Panthers were in 3rd place in the league going in to week 3.

I haven't looked at the current standings in terms of % of stalled opponents drives since the loss to MINN.

[Jeremy Igo]

3 hours ago, stbugs said:

I'm not buying this. If this was the case, wouldn't WRs be eating us up yardage wise?

Not necessarily if they are short quick passes. I would look more at their receptions. 

[KB_fan]

By the way, our Dline still DO lead the team in sacks:

Dline has 4:  Butler, Star, Addison & L. Edwards all have 1

LBs have 2:  Luke & Shaq.

[Growl]

whoa that's so weird I thought CB play was irrelevant to the play of the defensive line and it all happened the other way around

 

or so I was told

[Matthias]

I see our d-line every Sunday struggling to get into the backfield.  Kawann Short, who I think somebody stated he wanted 17 million a year, has been a no show.  I've also said before, our defense is structured on having a great and very consistent attack on the QB because there are gaps in our secondary.  We don't play man often, we don't play bump and run, we play zone.  Any QB who is allowed to sit back in the pocket, will find holes in the zone.  It doesn't matter if they are the greatest in Tom Brady, or the least among men in Gabbert, they will find those holes.

[Zaximus]

10 minutes ago, stbugs said:

I'm not buying this. If this was the case, wouldn't WRs be eating us up yardage wise? How come Sanders and DT combine for under 100 yards against us, but have 200+ against Cincy (who has 3 1st round corners, not including the other 1st rounder from 2016 who's out this year). How can Digg have almost 300 yards in weeks 1 and 2 and have 40 against us. Bradberry's almost INT reminded me of Norman breaking on the ball. He got to the ball before Diggs.

I know we were all worried about it because Mariota/Sharpe ate us on on short outside routes. On the other hand, in live action, giving up under 50 yards to Demaryius, Sanders and Diggs and 55 to Torrey Smith (28 on a route that Boston could have broken up) in the first 3 weeks sure doesn't scream CBs are the problem.

I believe we've given up more yardage to TEs and RBs in 3 weeks than to WRs, so I am failing to understand how our CBs are causing us to have a pressure problem.

Because Rivera is playing the CB's 15 yards off the WR's like he did before last year, and we give up short passes all day.  Eventually they march down the field.   The second half last week, Bradford came out and did just that against us.

We haven't played a great offense yet, keep this mind.   We've played Minn., a clock based team with great defense, a Broncos team build on defense with a rookie QB.   Then of course, the 49ers.

The real test will be against ATL coming up.

Also because we don't have Norman, I feel our safeties are having a lot harder time having to give safety help to both sides.   Coleman can't headhunt for INTs now because he can't reliably trust Norman on his side to shut it down, etc.   This is why having a great cornerback in your system is super important and why we're missing him.   Hopefully Bradberry can pick it up but I hope we don't wait 5 years to take off the kid gloves like we did with Norman.  

[Bartin]

9 minutes ago, Zaximus said:

This is one of the things I mentioned we'd lose when Norman wasn't here and a lot of people shrugged it off.   I feel like a lot of our sacks last year were coverage sacks.    

Yep, everyone was on the "Norman is overrated, our front 7 is the only reason he's any good and we could put anyone back there and have no problems" bandwagon, but it was pretty clear that this could potentially be a major issue and it has been. So many of our sacks last year came as the result of delayed blitzes which means the secondary has to hold the coverage for an extra beat for the rush to get home.

It's not just Norman by the way. Harper has really been missed. As the SS, he was able to use his instincts to take away short, quick routes. He was liable to get absolute torched in deep coverage but he was very solid for the first few seconds. And Peanut was extremely good last year and the three of them allowed Coleman to just play as a center fielder which he excelled at. Coleman has not been great at SS.

[LinvilleGorge]

This isn't exactly new in terms of being vulnerable to quick, short routes. We've always played a bend but don't break style of defense with a fairly soft approach on the backend and an emphasis toward creating opportunities for turnovers. The pass rush isn't getting home, period. 

[Ricky Spanish]

8 minutes ago, stbugs said:

I'm not buying this. If this was the case, wouldn't WRs be eating us up yardage wise? How come Sanders and DT combine for under 100 yards against us, but have 200+ against Cincy (who has 3 1st round corners, not including the other 1st rounder from 2016 who's out this year). How can Digg have almost 300 yards in weeks 1 and 2 and have 40 against us. Bradberry's almost INT reminded me of Norman breaking on the ball. He got to the ball before Diggs.

I know we were all worried about it because Mariota/Sharpe ate us on on short outside routes. On the other hand, in live action, giving up under 50 yards to Demaryius, Sanders and Diggs and 55 to Torrey Smith (28 on a route that Boston could have broken up) in the first 3 weeks sure doesn't scream CBs are the problem.

I believe we've given up more yardage to TEs and RBs in 3 weeks than to WRs, so I am failing to understand how our CBs are causing us to have a pressure problem.

Not necessarily. I don't think this is a good thread title for what the article is implying. It's no one's "fault" that we don't have a crap ton of sacks, it's the offensive gameplans that we've been dealing with over the past three weeks. We've faced a bunch of dink and dunk offenses that require the QB to get rid of the ball quickly. While that may lead to slow matriculating drives down the field, if everyone stays at home and does their assignment big plays are limited and everything stays in front of our players preventing large chunks of yardage.

The QB's we faced so far rank 17th, 27th and 29th in "Air Yards per Attempt" (Source) meaning they are all near the bottom of the league in throws that travel the furthest distance. This means a ton of quick slants and short routes run by receivers because anything too long would result in a higher air yards per attempt. Keep in mind Siemian is only ranked that high because of the week he had last week where he went off and dropped bombs all over the field. 

So if the WRs are running a ton of quick slants that means the QB is throwing the ball quickly which means our DL doesn't have much of an opportunity to make it to the QB at all and everyone bitching about our sack numbers through three games is just a typical huddle chicken little. 

The Defense has not looked horrible through three weeks. The offense has been the problem, specifically the line and playcalling. 

 

[rippadonn]

It's a long season

[Untouchable]

1 hour ago, Jeremy Igo said:

Giving up the shorter passes by allowing more of a cushion for the young corners likely has effected the pass rush. I have definitely noticed the ball is coming out so quick against us. I suspect that once Bradberry gets more experience, his coverage will tighten up and the sacks will come as a result. 

The article is right on point.  As i growing pain I expected other teams would be able to sustain more drives against us.  I figured a lot more field goals given up or turnovers late in drives as a result as the corners don't have as much to worry about as the field shrinks closer to the end zone.  Bend but don't break and hopefully by the end of the year the young corners will be walking up on the receivers and we'll hardly be bending.