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

    • Neither Barkley nor even a healthy CMC would move the needle much for us. Those are guys that impact teams that already have impressive overall offenses and defenses, so they can perform the complimentary roles that make them actually valuable. We should know that specifically because CMC almost never moved the needle on bad Panthers team after bad Panthers team. Ask Giants fans about that with Saquon.
    • I would generally disagree. You see a lot more load management than previously but that is because being healthy in the playoffs is such a key factor. Different philosophies in that regard than previous generations.  Baseball really doesn't matter until at least halfway through the season. I am not gonna say they don't play hard but the physical demands are infinitesimal in the MLB in comparison to basically any other major pro sport.  People dislike all the shooting these days but that's a direct correlation with how much the overall skill level of the average NBA player has drastically risen over the past 15ish years. There are other aggravating factors, certainly, but that is the biggest one in terms of playing style differences. So many of the guys from the 80's and 90's wouldn't even be able to play in the modern NBA at all. The biggest problem the NBA has with the American market(they are the only US sport that has any real international appeal or interest, minus the NHL) is that they are so steadily corrupt and fix the systems against the small market teams. Well, you eventually lose a big chunk of the league viewership/potential viewership in the process. Take the very obviously fixed NBA draft lotteries. Superstar and upper tier star players rarely want to play for small market teams, nor can they usually afford to pay them. So how do you expect them to possibly compete in that environment?
    • The Tsar awaits...
×
×
  • Create New...