NFC South: Land without pass-rushers

[scpanther22]

Once upon a time, quarterbacks couldn’t blink against an NFC South defense. Next season, they might be able to take a nap out there.

To borrow a phrase from an old friend, “Who scares you out there, bub?’’

Almost nobody in the NFC South. When it comes to pass-rushers, they seem on the verge of extinction in the division.

http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcsouth/post/_/id/8445/nfc-south-land-without-pass-rushers

[Swarly]

they forgot about:

[Bodybag]

Low yardage and sacks sure are nice, but I think there's more money in turnovers for an offensive league.

[Brokenbad]

Low yardage and sacks sure are nice, but I think there's more money in turnovers for an offensive league.

This. The NFC South has some of the best secondaries. Forced fumbles and interceptions are what these defenses are known for. The pass rushes are there, interception beats sack anyday in my opinion.

[Wither]

This. The NFC South has some of the best secondaries. Forced fumbles and interceptions are what these defenses are known for. The pass rushes are there, interception beats sack anyday in my opinion.

I'd like to see some comparisons. It would be interesting.

How many sacks lead to punts (or even FG's) versus how many interceptions lead to FG's or TD's, etc.

[Brokenbad]

I'd like to see some comparisons. It would be interesting.

How many sacks lead to punts (or even FG's) versus how many interceptions lead to FG's or TD's, etc.

Considering we are not including fumbles in sacks, a sack merely gives a loss of yards and downs. In some cases it gives loss of momentum or loss of set of downs if suffered on fourth down. Sacks to me are overrated. They are a just loss of downs and yards. A team can get sacked on any down (minus fourth) and get a first down,score three points off of a field goal or even make a touchdown on the very next play.

An interception gives the defending team the football no matter what down it is. IMO interception owns sack any day. Has anyone ever been sacked for a touchdown? A two point safety at best right?

[Leeroy Jenkins PhD]

lets not forget it is the defensive pressure on the QB that leads to interceptions

[Leeroy Jenkins PhD]

Unless your Jake......

[Brokenbad]

lets not forget it is the defensive pressure on the QB that leads to interceptions

True, so this equals less sacks....and more interceptions...

[Brooklyn Bully]

Way to try and spin it!

[JuliusP_90]

Considering we are not including fumbles in sacks, a sack merely gives a loss of yards and downs. In some cases it gives loss of momentum or loss of set of downs if suffered on fourth down. Sacks to me are overrated. They are a just loss of downs and yards. A team can get sacked on any down (minus fourth) and get a first down,score three points off of a field goal or even make a touchdown on the very next play.

An interception gives the defending team the football no matter what down it is. IMO interception owns sack any day. Has anyone ever been sacked for a touchdown? A two point safety at best right?

Sacks may not lead to touchdowns but they do lead to wins. And sacks isn't what you expect to get all the time. It's the pass rush that's truly important.

Heavy pressure on an ill advised 1st down throw, solid defense on 2nd down, and heavy pressure again on 3rd and long and you come up with a sack and a 3-5 yard loss consistently. It's the pass rush that you get on a consistent basis that generates sacks. Looking at sacks as just a stat will simply give you a rough estimate of how that team is doing on the d-line.

With that being said, if Everette Brown turns out to be a half-way decent player then I think we'll be fine if we play our FA cards right. The way I see it, we're locked up on d-tackles and we have some good players at DE; with a potential game changer on the roster, all we would need is a veteran DE that doesn't break the bank leaving us with room to snag someone else!!!!

in a perfect world...for now, I'll settle for picks and big hits from Chris Harris

[pstall]

all about 3rd down conversions and stops and red zone effiiciency conversions and stops. Everything else is for fantasy football.

[JuliusP_90]

I still feel good about our D tackles though. We have good depth which hopefully means we'll have fresh legs in on as many downs as possible. And they're some big boys too IIRC. They'll be huge in the redzone.

Come to think of it there are some pretty good DT's in the NFC South.

[Frizzy350]

all about 3rd down conversions and stops and red zone effiiciency conversions and stops. Everything else is for fantasy football.

^^ this

a 3 and out is a turnover, whether u get a sack or not. if its third and ten i don't give a damn if its 4th and 3 or 4th and 15 the next down, i just want em to punt. proof sacks are over rated: they are logically equivalent to a tackle for loss, but nobody, and i mean NOBODY, seems to care about a tackle for loss, even though it's loss of yards and a down. in fact it might even be more impressive than a sack considering a run is safer to net positive yardage.