Jump to content

How many sacks


apl2g
 Share

Recommended Posts

Since a lot of people here seem to think that we are all set with the players that we have here's a question for you.. How many sacks do you think our D-line will need to produce this year for us to be a real contender?

I think if we are talking just D-linemen they need to produce at least 32-35. Then add in the rest of the D and I think we need to have at least 40-45.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since a lot of people here seem to think that we are all set with the players that we have here's a question for you.. How many sacks do you think our D-line will need to produce this year for us to be a real contender?

I think if we are talking just D-linemen they need to produce at least 32-35. Then add in the rest of the D and I think we need to have at least 40-45.

Can't argue with those numbers. I think you're spot on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you think the players we have now can produce those numbers?

It's all about Abe IMO. If he is freed up due to the presence of PJ, Babs and Peters in steady rotation then WATCH OUT ! Kroy breaking out wit double diget sacks will be crucial as well. Sidbury is the million dollar question....what do we get from him in year 2? My opinion....he does well and in turn helps us possibly go over the top with the numbers you projected.

But to answer your question....YES!

Edited by Goal Line D
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Atleast 55 sacks! Abraham, Perry, and atleast one other player will get 10-15, and then I think between the other guys we can get another 15-20....

Wow that may be a little high! 3 players with double digit sacks?? hmmmmm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no magical number of sacks needed to be a contender. We need to get sacks in critical moments to help change game momentum, cause turnovers and stop drives. We need enough sacks to help us win games, whether that number is 20 or 50 sacks is not really relevant. What we need is more pressure from the pass rush to prevent the completion of so many big plays. Period.

Last year you had to go down to the 13th place to get one SB team - Saints with 35 sacks for the year and down to the 16th place to get the other SB team - Colts with 34 on the year.

All those teams in front of them had more sacks but did not get to the superbowl.

Vikings - 48 sacks (NFC Championship game - Lost)

Steelers - 47 sacks (didn't make the playoffs)

Dolphins - 44 sacks (didn't make the playoffs)

Eagles - 44 sacks (WC Playoffs - 1 and done)

49ers - 44 sacks (didn't make the playoffs)

Cardinals - 43 sacks (WC Playoffs - won 1 - lost Div playoff)

Cowboys - 42 sacks (WC Playoffs - won 1 - lost Div playoff)

Browns - 40 sacks (didn't make the playoffs)

Redskins - 40 sacks (didn't make the playoffs)

Broncos - 39 sacks (didn't make the playoffs)

Packers - 37 sacks (WC Playoffs - 1 and done)

Raiders - 37 sacks (didn't make the playoffs)

Bears - 35 sacks (didn't make the playoffs)

SAINTS - 35 sacks (Won SB)

Chargers - 35 sacks (lost Div playoff - 1 and done)

Bengals - 34 sacks (WC Playoffs - 1 and done)

COLTS - 34 sacks (Lost SB)

So in this ranking based on number of sacks in the regular season last year - 8 teams did better than the SB players but did not even make the playoffs. There were a total of 13 teams with better sack statistics than the SB teams.

The other 2 playoff teams - Patriots - came in at 23rd in sacks with 31 and Ravens came in 18th with 32.

Bottom line - it's not quantity - it's quality.

As Al Davis said once - Just Win, Baby!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you think the players we have now can produce those numbers?

Yes, I think we do have the players, & I too agree with your initial #s. I like how you wrote them up in general & not by person.

We have too many "ifs" to focus on a person. But we have a bunch of interchangable & serviceable parts. The reality is the guys up the middle are all similar in frame (about 6'2" & 305#s). The guys on the edge all have some quickness to put on pressure. We have a bunch of guys with another year of experience in the system, & honing their specific skill sets.

The D-line is going to let the other 2 levels do their thing without having to help up front as much as they have been. LBs are gonna be freed up to pursue & attack. They are not going to have to help cover the gaps as much as before. The DBs are not going to have to cover as long as in the past. They are not gonna have to deal with as many down-field blockers getting in their way. When the DBs blitz, they are gonna be freed up to attack the ball unmolested & make plays.

I think the speed & agility of this D is going to show-up this year. They are gonna be fun to watch. Not as much slow robotics as we've seen in the past. A bunch of guys who know theirs jobs & roles, flying around making plays is what we are gonna have this year. I'm excited.

Go Falcons !!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I think we do have the players, & I too agree with your initial #s. I like how you wrote them up in general & not by person.

We have too many "ifs" to focus on a person. But we have a bunch of interchangable & serviceable parts. The reality is the guys up the middle are all similar in frame (about 6'2" & 305#s). The guys on the edge all have some quickness to put on pressure. We have a bunch of guys with another year of experience in the system, & honing their specific skill sets.

The D-line is going to let the other 2 levels do their thing without having to help up front as much as they have been. LBs are gonna be freed up to pursue & attack. They are not going to have to help cover the gaps as much as before. The DBs are not going to have to cover as long as in the past. They are not gonna have to deal with as many down-field blockers getting in their way. When the DBs blitz, they are gonna be freed up to attack the ball unmolested & make plays.

I think the speed & agility of this D is going to show-up this year. They are gonna be fun to watch. Not as much slow robotics as we've seen in the past. A bunch of guys who know theirs jobs & roles, flying around making plays is what we are gonna have this year. I'm excited.

Go Falcons !!!

Im excited too. Still a little worried about the D but still very excited!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be honest i would be happy with two to three starters with double digit sacks and the rest with something like 5 or more with constant pressure would be fine with me ( we have the pressure part down we just need some sacks)

Edited by hunchie00
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be honest i would be happy with two to three starters with double digit sacks and the rest with something like 5 or more with constant pressure would be fine with me ( we have the pressure part down we just need some sacks)

Exactly.. we need to get the qb down and end the play!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hopefully the front office drafted the parts we needed to bring him(other teams qbs) down and not just hurry or pressure him but i guess we have to wait and see but like i said i will stick to my answer you have to take steps show some sign of improvement

Edited by hunchie00
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How are people even giving Anderson a projected ONE sack, much less 4??? Seriously? Where have you been the past few seasons to see what he hasn't done? Nothings changed. I still feel like a tool for giving him a "guesstimate" of 10 sacks his rookie season... we see what happened there <_<

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no magical number of sacks needed to be a contender.

thats where your wrong. in 1997, the falcons had 55 sacks as a team, that was the funnest and most majical defense to watch. they sacked the QB every time we needed a big play which was pretty often because our OL gave up over 50 sacks annually. the saints and colts have league leading offenses to go along with those 35 sacks. so while you assume that this thread suggests we must have a certain # of sacks to win the SB focusing on that statistic alone for NFL teams, you must not let this discussion give you tunnel vision and remember that this is a team sport. our offense is in need of taking a step forward as well. a SB winner is a well rounded team. you can get away with good enough on one side of the ball as long as you are great on the other.

i dont think 55 sacks alone will again get us to the super bowl, i just remember how much fun it was to watch, and if the offense does its part, a 50+ sack D cant hurt. to complete your study, take the top D's in sacks, look up where their offense was, combine the two, and then see if you can make any rhyme or reason out of that.

Edited by peter griffin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How many sacks do you think our D-line will need to produce this year for us to be a real contender?

based on recent research, studies show that 35 sacks paired with a top 3 offense will produce a SUPER BOWL TEAM.

to merely be a contender, ie, make the playoffs and atleast have a chance at the SB, you still need to play good D. oh wait, you're asking what each individual person thinks. "you" in general, i get it now. while what each one of us thinks, or what our opinion IS, is debatable, it is a little off subject. my answer to that question is 50+(overall), with over 40 by the DL, but that is not because i think our offense is so annemic that our D will have to be the #1 overall D in the league to be a contender, i just want us to have a D that is as much fun, if not more, to watch as the offense.

Edited by peter griffin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

peterson-1

nicholas-3

decoud-2

biermann-5

babinaux-6

abraham-5.5

jackson-1

anderson-0.5

davis-1

johnson-2

sidbury-1

we registered 28 sacks as a team while the OL surrendered 27.

21 from the DL

7 from the rest.

i atleast want to be a lot better than that.

yea we need to be at least 10 to 15 better than last year IMO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...