ADVERTISEMENT

Coach Gilmore

I would rather have consistent pressure.
Factoid: my friend Wax (real initials MK) asked me to come post on this site as it was being over run by southern cal trolls lying about the bush/mayo/southern cal investigation.....other crap. I am quite certain he would be laughing at current posters' ineptitude in refuting what I write....
Small man. We are so impressed that you know MK. Do you have him on speed dial? You are a beauty.
That didn't answer the question. It's very straight forward.
Would you rather have a "pressure" or a sack?
 
in the perfect world the sack of course as it results in a loss of down and distance. that said it's not a perfect world and a pressure is often as effective as a sack and sometimes more. a pressure often leads to a sack by a player who benefited from said pressure. a pressure can often lead to an interception. it often leads to an incompletion. as much as you like to paint the game in black and white every knowledgable football person ( and you certainly ain't one of them ) understands how intricate the game itself is. statistics rarely tell the WHOLE story. your simpleton approach to analysis is just that.

Thank you for your opening remark. I am simply responding to the following poppycock:

"Sack totals are the most irrelevant Stat in football."

I am full aware of the benefits of pressure which is why I wrote:
"We were #114 in fumbles gained.
We were #92 in int. gained.
We were #110 in total int and fumbles gained.
That's some pressure especially when you combine it with sacks...."
 
Thank you for your opening remark. I am simply responding to the following poppycock:

"Sack totals are the most irrelevant Stat in football."

I am full aware of the benefits of pressure which is why I wrote:
"We were #114 in fumbles gained.
We were #92 in int. gained.
We were #110 in total int and fumbles gained.
That's some pressure especially when you combine it with sacks...."
stats are very misleading. in a perfect world yes you would prefer a sack on every passing down. i'll take a high percentage of pressures on passing downs over sacks all day long. sacks are a byproduct of pressure. you can't get a sack without pressuring the QB. again it's not as black and white as you woefully try to portray it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pennick44
Consistent pressure.

That's called "admission by omission." Sacks are a prime indicator of successful pressure.... They are far from "irrelevant".

Again, I am full aware of the benefits of pressure which is why I wrote:
"We were #114 in fumbles gained.
We were #92 in int. gained.
We were #110 in total int and fumbles gained.
That's some pressure especially when you combine it with sacks...."
 
That's called "admission by omission." Sacks are a prime indicator of successful pressure.... They are far from "irrelevant".

Again, I am full aware of the benefits of pressure which is why I wrote:
"We were #114 in fumbles gained.
We were #92 in int. gained.
We were #110 in total int and fumbles gained.
That's some pressure especially when you combine it with sacks...."
sigh. a black and white world.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT