Pass Rush?

[Rey]

Originally Posted by infantrycak

Which sounds good except even moving into a different position Mario was being more effective this season as well.

Plus, while I think Smith is playing very well he has disappeared since Mario left - 4.5 sacks in 5 games with Mario, 0 in 8 games without.

This. I think Mario would have been doing really well if he had stayed around and I think it would help out others like Antonio, too.

[dream_team]

Originally Posted by Texecutioner

We haven't missed Mario this entire season. And you're logic is flawed because it doesn't matter really what team we play as far as whether we'd be missing him or not, it matters who would be blocking him or who would be on the other side making Mario their assignment on any given team. We could be playing a great team that has a poor blocker or lineman and we could also be playing a really poor team that happens to have great protection where Mario would be coming from on his blitz. The mulitple guys we have had coming in and out this year has been far more effective as far as a pass rush goes than any season we had Mario out there.

We haven't missed Mario, I agree with you there. Since he's been out, we haven't lost a game and became the #1 defense.

But would we be even better with Mario? There isn't a doubt in my mind.

[TexCanada]

Originally Posted by dream_team

We haven't missed Mario, I agree with you there. Since he's been out, we haven't lost a game and became the #1 defense.

But would we be even better with Mario? There isn't a doubt in my mind.

Exactly. I'm open to arguments saying that he makes too much $, or the guys who stepped in are just as good as him, but imagine how good we would be with one extra top-notch pass rush option. Mario would make this D even better.

[TexanBacker93]

Originally Posted by Ktexan68

Anyone else a little bit concerned about the lack of pass rush the last 2 weeks?

We didn't get a sack against Atlanta, but the pass rush was all over Ryan. Its not always about the sack. Force poor passes, force turnovers, make them change their gameplan.

[Speedy]

Originally Posted by Ktexan68

I know it's been great all year but there has been a drop off in the last two games.

Does anybody watch the games? They were all over Ryan, double digit hits, Dalton was throwing the ball at the recievers feet, forcing him out of the pocket and throwing it away, etc.

Just because there aren't sacks doesn't mean they are not getting pressure.

[mussop]

Originally Posted by infantrycak

Plus, while I think Smith is playing very well he has disappeared since Mario left - 4.5 sacks in 5 games with Mario, 0 in 8 games without.

There are so many other factors other than Mario that have contributed to Smith's drop off in sacks. First and foremost he has been playing with a bad shoulder since the fith or sixth game. Think about it, if the only reason he was getting to the QB was because teams feared the OLB's pass rush then why hasn't he been getting any sacks lately? Combat Barwin and Reed are playing lights out right now and it's not contributing to smiths sack total.

3 of the first 4 teams we played had serious OL issues is the more likely reason a healthy Smith was able to rack up his sack totals as well as Mario.

And yes Mario did start to look more At ease at OLB but he was still lacking in technique, pass rush moves, non stop relentlesness and initial burst off the ball when he went down. All traits Barwin and Reed seemed to have picked up rather well.

[infantrycak]

Originally Posted by mussop

3 of the first 4 teams we played had serious OL issues is the more likely reason a healthy Smith was able to rack up his sack totals as well as Mario.

By ranking on sacks allowed:

Colts 14th
Miami 31st
Saints 7th
Steelers 25th
Oakland 5th

Looks to me like 3 0f the first 5 (not sure why you omitted the 5th game after which is when Mario left) contained a top 5, a top 10 and a top half team. Not the slackers row you were making out.

And yes Mario did start to look more At ease at OLB but he was still lacking in technique, pass rush moves, non stop relentlesness and initial burst off the ball when he went down. All traits Barwin and Reed seemed to have picked up rather well.

Wow and yet for all that suckitude Mario was on pace for 16 sacks and wonder boy Barwin (who I love as a player) with his tool kit of skills Mario doesn't possess is on pace for 12.

[mussop]

Originally Posted by infantrycak

By ranking on sacks allowed:

Colts 14th
Miami 31st
Saints 7th
Steelers 25th
Oakland 5th

Looks to me like 3 0f the first 5 (not sure why you omitted the 5th game after which is when Mario left) contained a top 5, a top 10 and a top half team. Not the slackers row you were making out.

Way to spin things to fit your view. I left out Oakland because he didn't play but 1 quarter(?). And I dont care what they finished the year ranked, The Colts OL was trash the first few weeks as was Miami's and the Steelers. That is three out the first four just like I said.

Originally Posted by infantrycak

Wow and yet for all that suckitude Mario was on pace for 16 sacks and wonder boy Barwin (who I love as a player) with his tool kit of skills Mario doesn't possess is on pace for 12.

Again, nice spin. Like I said 3 of the first 4 teams we played were having OL issues. He had 2 sacks and 2 tackles against the Colts who were starting a new QB that barely new the playbook, 2 tackles and 0 sacks against Miami who started off the year sucking bad, 1 tackle 0 sacks against a good NO team and 5 tackles and 2 sacks against Pittsburgh who I believe was starting a rookie at LT in the game.

That isn't exactly blowing it up even if you don't consider the opposition. And your logic is flawed in comparing what Barwin and Mario were on pace to do. You are allowing Mario to have 16 games to tally his total and giving Barwin less than 12 full games. Surely you see the difference in what was required of the two positions when Mario was playing. Therefore Barwin wasn't allotted the opportunities to register sacks that Mario was. On top of that since Reed has been starting the two are interchangeable allowing them to send either at any given time.

Look Im not saying Mario sucks. I'm saying he isn't a great football player. He is a great athlete for his size. Which is why he and the team would be better served with him inside at end. He wasn't the reason the defense was turning it around early in the year even though the Mario lovers and the national media fell in love with the thought of a 290 pound OLB. That should be obvious considering what they have accomplished since he went down.

I'm all for keeping Mario on the team. He can play multiple positions, he's a great athlete so obviously he makes the rotation and the team better. But let's not blow his performance at OLB out of proportion.

[Grid]

I havent read the whole thread so im not sure if these points have already been made.. but..

Things to keep in mind:

1) In the last two games we have had a rookie QB who.. while doing a great job for a rookie QB.. is still a rookie. Because of this our scoring has not been what it was in previous weeks. We had been winning games by striking fast and getting ahead of our opponent..forcing them to play aggressive on offense and try to move the ball down field to catch up. This of course forced them into passing situations which in turn allowed our defense to pick up more sacks.

2) Because we have not been able to score as many points, we have not had that cushion that allows us to take a chance and play balls to the walls on defense. You cant afford to give up the big play when you are within 3 points of the opposing team. So instead of playing as aggressive as we would like.. we are forced to only play as aggressively as we can afford to without leaving ourselves wide open for the big play.

3) The drop in offensive production has also kept our defense on the field for longer. The defense having to work harder to keep the game close means that they have less energy to expend owning the opposing QB.

4) I did see that some have also pointed out that the last two weeks we have played two of the most talented opponents we have been up against this year. It is not surprising that these teams gave us fewer opportunities to sack their QB.

5) Despite all this our defense has come through for us when it counts. I have no complaints. Just the opposite..I have nothing but praise for their efforts. I have no doubt in my mind that if our offense can step up their game, and yates continue to grow as a QB.. we will start seeing more of those sexy sack totals in the coming weeks.

[infantrycak]

Originally Posted by mussop

Way to spin things to fit your view. I left out Oakland because he didn't play but 1 quarter(?).

LOL, let's go with that. That means projected over the season Mario was on pace for 19 sacks. Yeah buddy. Sure was me spinning that one my way by observing you left out the top 5 D.

[ObsiWan]

Originally Posted by Texecutioner

We haven't missed Mario this entire season. And you're logic is flawed because it doesn't matter really what team we play as far as whether we'd be missing him or not, it matters who would be blocking him or who would be on the other side making Mario their assignment on any given team. We could be playing a great team that has a poor blocker or lineman and we could also be playing a really poor team that happens to have great protection where Mario would be coming from on his blitz. The mulitple guys we have had coming in and out this year has been far more effective as far as a pass rush goes than any season we had Mario out there.

We hadn't had Wade running the defense before either. Hell, Mario had 4.5 sacks while simultaneously learning a new position under Wade and while Wade was still figuring out just what Mario's strengths were.

From Wade's intro presser...

(on what he was able to do in Buffalo to help DE Bruce Smith transition from the 4-3 to 3-4) “I told him to ‘sic ‘em’. You know? ‘Go get ‘em Bruce.’ Your real good players, that’s what you do with them. It’s not as easy to do as it sounds, but actually you’ve got to let them go. You’ve got to let them use their ability, give them opportunities to go and make plays where somebody else has to cover for them in some cases. Your best players, you have to feature them and you have to try and put them in situations to succeed. That’s part of the chess game I guess and part of how you set it up. When you have a great one, you try to utilize their ability. Bruce was a special, special player. I’ve had two of them. (DE) Reggie White and Bruce Smith, who were by far better than any of the guys I had coached before or after, but I’m hoping to coach one here.”

If Wade can produce a quality pass rush without Mario, I sure would have liked to have seen what he could have done with him.

If Wade thought Mario could be "special" that's good enough for me.

[mussop]

Originally Posted by ObsiWan

We hadn't had Wade running the defense before either. Hell, Mario had 4.5 sacks while simultaneously learning a new position under Wade and while Wade was still figuring out just what Mario's strengths were.

From Wade's intro presser...


If Wade can produce a quality pass rush without Mario, I sure would have liked to have seen what he could have done with him.

If Wade thought Mario could be "special" that's good enough for me.

Notice the two players he used as reference were DE's? He could of said Ware and Merriman. I hope we do resign Mario for a reasonable contract and he goes back to DE where he belongs. He can always get a few reps here and there at LB.

[Rey]

Originally Posted by mussop

Notice the two players he used as reference were DE's? He could of said Ware and Merriman. I hope we do resign Mario for a reasonable contract and he goes back to DE where he belongs. He can always get a few reps here and there at LB.

The question that was asked was about Bruce smith.

Wade said that your best players you have to let them go.

The fact that he's comparing him to smith in the sense of his talent level and "letting him go" should tell you something.

I believe once it was made official that he was going to Olb, the ware comparisons started.

[Rey]

Originally Posted by mussop

Way to spin things to fit your view. I left out Oakland because he didn't play but 1 quarter(?). And I dont care what they finished the year ranked, The Colts OL was trash the first few weeks as was Miami's and the Steelers. That is three out the first four just like I said.





Again, nice spin. Like I said 3 of the first 4 teams we played were having OL issues. He had 2 sacks and 2 tackles against the Colts who were starting a new QB that barely new the playbook, 2 tackles and 0 sacks against Miami who started off the year sucking bad, 1 tackle 0 sacks against a good NO team and 5 tackles and 2 sacks against Pittsburgh who I believe was starting a rookie at LT in the game.

That isn't exactly blowing it up even if you don't consider the opposition. And your logic is flawed in comparing what Barwin and Mario were on pace to do. You are allowing Mario to have 16 games to tally his total and giving Barwin less than 12 full games. Surely you see the difference in what was required of the two positions when Mario was playing. Therefore Barwin wasn't allotted the opportunities to register sacks that Mario was. On top of that since Reed has been starting the two are interchangeable allowing them to send either at any given time.

Look Im not saying Mario sucks. I'm saying he isn't a great football player. He is a great athlete for his size. Which is why he and the team would be better served with him inside at end. He wasn't the reason the defense was turning it around early in the year even though the Mario lovers and the national media fell in love with the thought of a 290 pound OLB. That should be obvious considering what they have accomplished since he went down.

I'm all for keeping Mario on the team. He can play multiple positions, he's a great athlete so obviously he makes the rotation and the team better. But let's not blow his performance at OLB out of proportion.

You do realize everyone else was playing the same teams too right?

You gonna discredit everyones production against those teams or just mario's?

[thunderkyss]

Originally Posted by Ktexan68

Anyone else a little bit concerned about the lack of pass rush the last 2 weeks?

It depends on what you call a pass rush.

We didn't rack up a bunch of sacks, but we disrupted both those offenses enough that they were not able to run their game plan.

Antonio Smith is looking better as well. Still not finishing (like he was when he played next to Mario) but he's in the game, making a difference.

Don't expect too many against Tennessee either. They're #2 in the league in giving up sacks (17 this year). Cincinnati is 3rd (21). Houston is 8th (24). & Atlanta is 11th with 25

[thunderkyss]

Originally Posted by TexanBacker93

We didn't get a sack against Atlanta, but the pass rush was all over Ryan. Its not always about the sack. Force poor passes, force turnovers, make them change their gameplan.

It's not about the sacks, but if you're getting sacks, you're getting pressure & you're finishing the play. The more sacks you got, the more pressures, hurries, & hits you'll have.

[thunderkyss]

Originally Posted by mussop

There are so many other factors other than Mario that have contributed to Smith's drop off in sacks. First and foremost he has been playing with a bad shoulder since the fith or sixth game. Think about it, if the only reason he was getting to the QB was because teams feared the OLB's pass rush then why hasn't he been getting any sacks lately? Combat Barwin and Reed are playing lights out right now and it's not contributing to smiths sack total.

3 of the first 4 teams we played had serious OL issues is the more likely reason a healthy Smith was able to rack up his sack totals as well as Mario.

And yes Mario did start to look more At ease at OLB but he was still lacking in technique, pass rush moves, non stop relentlesness and initial burst off the ball when he went down. All traits Barwin and Reed seemed to have picked up rather well.

I doubt any of our remaining OLBs will get Roethlisberger on the ground by himself.

[mussop]

Originally Posted by Rey

You do realize everyone else was playing the same teams too right?

You gonna discredit everyones production against those teams or just mario's?

Uh I believe I said "3 of the first 4 teams we played had serious OL issues is the more likely reason a healthy Smith was able to rack up his sack totals as well as Mario.".

[Rey]

Originally Posted by mussop

Uh I believe I said "3 of the first 4 teams we played had serious OL issues is the more likely reason a healthy Smith was able to rack up his sack totals as well as Mario.".

So what was everyone elses excuse? Why weren't they wreaking havoc against these terrible o lines?

Not sure how you think that makes any sense.

[thunderkyss]

Originally Posted by Rey

So what was everyone elses excuse? Why weren't they wreaking havoc against these terrible o lines?

Not sure how you think that makes any sense.

Last year, when we played the Giants, our DEs had trouble disrupting Eli's game. At halftime, we adjusted & set Brian Cushing after him. Eli was rattled from then on. The commentators (or it may have been the playbook guys) attributed this to Cushing's higher athleticism & speed, Mario, Antonio, Okoye, & Cody couldn't change directions as fast as Eli, once he got out of their grasp, he was able to make plays on the outside.

Hopefully, Connor & Reed will offer the same kind of advantage against Carolina & Cam Newton.

I know this has absolutely nothing to do with what you just said, I'm trying to change the subject.