Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Sacks + QB Hits allowed, 2014


TonyN

Recommended Posts

Make of this what you will. A few teams really jump out at you as surprises though, IMHO.

 

Sacks + QB hits allowed, 2014: 

1.) Jax  189

2.) TB   176

3.) Was 171

4.) Min  147

5.) Mia  144

6.) Ten  144

7.) NYJ  143

8.) Stl     140

9.) Ind    136

10.) Det    136

11.) Sea   133

12.) KC    127

13.) Buf    124

14.) Chi    123

15.) Ari   123

16.) Atl   120

17.) SF   120

18.) SD   112

19.) NO   111

20.) Cle   109

21.) Car   109

22.) NE    108

23.) Hou  106

24.) NYG 103

25.) Phi      96

26.) Pit       95

27.) GB      94

28.) Oak    84

29.) Dal     83

30.) Bal     75

31.) Cin     71

32.) Den    59

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We were probably #1 up until Remmers, Norwell, and Turner solidified the offensive line.

 

I don't give a fug what anyone says, we had easily the worst line in the league up until that point.  That poo was embarrassing.  It messed Cam up so bad he was feeling phantom pressure for a while there even when he finally started to have time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We were probably #1 up until Remmers, Norwell, and Turner solidified the offensive line.

 

I don't give a fug what anyone says, we had easily the worst line in the league up until that point.  That poo was embarrassing.  It messed Cam up so bad he was feeling phantom pressure for a while there even when he finally started to have time.

 

Yeah I don't give a fug what the stats say, I am right!

 

Anyways, the only real excuse anyone can say is that Newton was injured or his WR corps were bad. Tannehill with a worse oline performed better than Newton. Hopefully he improves this season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course no one wants to mention Luck lol. Stafford is also interesting, worse oline but better performance.

 

Bridgewater also quietly put up very solid numbers. Terrible O Line and his "weapons" were Mike Asiata, Greg Jennings and Jarius Wright. He is going to be a very, very solid QB. Maybe better than very solid...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah I don't give a fug what the stats say, I am right!

 

Anyways, the only real excuse anyone can say is that Newton was injured or his WR corps were bad. Tannehill with a worse oline performed better than Newton. Hopefully he improves this season.

 

I think you need to go rewatch the games of our offensive line pre-Remmers, Norwell, and Turner.  I even admitted at the end that Cam was feeling phantom pressure once he finally started to get time.  Our offensive line was actually pretty solid towards the end of the year.

 

Stats need context.

 

But by all means, come in guns-a-blazing and try to stir poo up.  It is a TonyN thread after all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • He's not wrong though. You talk like a politician on here. Leaving yourself just enough wiggle room to say you never fully counted Bryce out if you need to....But we can all see it. Just say you think he is a bust outright and you will have to type a lot less. Obfuscating your opinion behind QB3 competitions etc....
    • Most EVs are in the 90+ e-MPG meaning some measurement house somewhere compares the EV to a similar ICE model and works out how much is costs to charge (on average) versus fill up as a point of comparison. Talking long term, in the hundreds of thousands of miles?  No clue.  Some early signs are that EV batteries maintain 80% charge over 400k miles.  So there's that.   The challenge and charm of an ICE vehicle is being able to park it under a tree, get your jack stands out and tinker with your engine.  There's just not that same level of complexity in an EV.  I saw someone estimate there are 200 or so moving parts in an EV, and 2000 in an ICE vehicle.  I'm not a part counter so I can't really speak to that. I think that the EV is more the future than any type of combustion engine.  Those will still be around in specific purposes, but for most people - an EV will be the superior option in terms of efficiency.  I say that as someone who loves stupid horsepower numbers out of turbo 4 bangers and inline 6s...  I am one of those tinkers when I can be. A bigger issue for EVs is going to be the ownership versus lease.  Right now, there are INSANE leases on EVs, which is great, but what do you have at the end of that lease?  Nada, maybe some equity if you're lucky.  Where as I'm almost done paying for my car, and plan to keep it until the wheels fall off (or my son wrecks it when he starts to drive).  Will EV makers do the smartphone thing and build in planned obsolesce?  Stop updating software?  I love the tech in EVs, and I think getting more cars and trucks off the road is a good thing.  But I am still just a little concerned.  Capitalism has gotten far too extractive.  
×
×
  • Create New...