Post game Packers

[DYoungJelly]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

You're beginning to embarrass yourself.

I don't think expressing the idea that there are different degrees, tiers, grades of "hurries" and "pressures" is embarrassing at all.

Further, I don't think expressing the idea that the crappiest "hurries" that fall into the crappiest tier may not relate to sacks even though they may show up on ESPN's stat sheet is embarrassing either.

I do think going straight to ad hominem attacks without mentioning, in any way, the argument with which you disagree is embarassing because it is a lazy rhetorical crutch.

I simply proposed in post #152 (for those reading along) that all "pressures" are not the same, and that some may not be a good indicator of a near sack, and some, on the other hand probably are, but there isn't necessarily a correlation, and definitely not a causation.

Scenario 1, Kerrigan pressures Andrew Luck on step 3 of a 5 step drop. The pressure gets there before Luck is expecting it and before the Offensive line drops to block for 5 steps. They are out of position because the pressure arrives to quickly. He has to throw the ball out of bounds BECAUSE Kerrigan gets there ahead of schedule.

Scenario 2, Kerrigan pressures Andrew Luck on step 7 of a 5 step drop. Luck has already gone through all of his reads, nobody is open, Kerrigan is closing in and nearly gets his hands on him, Luck is EXPECTING pressure because it is a 5 step drop and he has been holding the ball too long. He throws the ball out of bounds.

Those plays would show up in ESPN's stat column as pressures, but they are radically different in the likelihood of resulting in a sack.

In the first, Luck isn't expecting pressure and has an "oh crap" moment and isn't able to plan but has to react.

In the second, Kerrigan is just as close to Luck, but the internal clock is ticking and Luck knows he has to throw it away. Despite being just as close to a sack physically, in reality Kerrigan isn't close at all because Luck is prepared to end the play with as positive a result as the situation makes possible.

[punch it in]

Originally Posted by DYoungJelly

I don't think expressing the idea that there are different degrees, tiers, grades of "hurries" and "pressures" is embarrassing at all.



Further, I don't think expressing the idea that the crappiest "hurries" that fall into the crappiest tier may not relate to sacks even though they may show up on ESPN's stat sheet is embarrassing either.



I do think going straight to ad hominem attacks without mentioning, in any way, the argument with which you disagree is embarassing because it is a lazy rhetorical crutch.



I simply proposed in post #152 (for those reading along) that all "pressures" are not the same, and that some may not be a good indicator of a near sack, and some, on the other hand probably are, but there isn't necessarily a correlation, and definitely not a causation.



Scenario 1, Kerrigan pressures Andrew Luck on step 3 of a 5 step drop. The pressure gets there before Luck is expecting it and before the Offensive line drops to block for 5 steps. They are out of position because the pressure arrives to quickly. He has to throw the ball out of bounds BECAUSE Kerrigan gets there ahead of schedule.



Scenario 2, Kerrigan pressures Andrew Luck on step 7 of a 5 step drop. Luck has already gone through all of his reads, nobody is open, Kerrigan is closing in and nearly gets his hands on him, Luck is EXPECTING pressure because it is a 5 step drop and he has been holding the ball too long. He throws the ball out of bounds.



Those plays would show up in ESPN's stat column as pressures, but they are radically different in the likelihood of resulting in a sack.



In the first, Luck isn't expecting pressure and has an "oh crap" moment and isn't able to plan but has to react.



In the second, Kerrigan is just as close to Luck, but the internal clock is ticking and Luck knows he has to throw it away. Despite being just as close to a sack physically, in reality Kerrigan isn't close at all because Luck is prepared to end the play with as positive a result as the situation makes possible.

Your first paragraph says it all. There are absolutely unequivocally different degrees of hurry and pressure. I completely agree with you. Can you imagine if we had even one dominant edge rusher in that front 7. My God.
I do not think RK is a weakness by any means, he is definitely above average and smart. Good team player. Smith on the other hand? But neither of them strike fear in the heart of the opposing quarterback. Probably a position that we can upgrade after the year along with wr and interior o line.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by DYoungJelly

I don't think expressing the idea that there are different degrees, tiers, grades of "hurries" and "pressures" is embarrassing at all.

Further, I don't think expressing the idea that the crappiest "hurries" that fall into the crappiest tier may not relate to sacks even though they may show up on ESPN's stat sheet is embarrassing either.

I do think going straight to ad hominem attacks without mentioning, in any way, the argument with which you disagree is embarassing because it is a lazy rhetorical crutch.

I simply proposed in post #152 (for those reading along) that all "pressures" are not the same, and that some may not be a good indicator of a near sack, and some, on the other hand probably are, but there isn't necessarily a correlation, and definitely not a causation.

Scenario 1, Kerrigan pressures Andrew Luck on step 3 of a 5 step drop. The pressure gets there before Luck is expecting it and before the Offensive line drops to block for 5 steps. They are out of position because the pressure arrives to quickly. He has to throw the ball out of bounds BECAUSE Kerrigan gets there ahead of schedule.

Scenario 2, Kerrigan pressures Andrew Luck on step 7 of a 5 step drop. Luck has already gone through all of his reads, nobody is open, Kerrigan is closing in and nearly gets his hands on him, Luck is EXPECTING pressure because it is a 5 step drop and he has been holding the ball too long. He throws the ball out of bounds.

Those plays would show up in ESPN's stat column as pressures, but they are radically different in the likelihood of resulting in a sack.

In the first, Luck isn't expecting pressure and has an "oh crap" moment and isn't able to plan but has to react.

In the second, Kerrigan is just as close to Luck, but the internal clock is ticking and Luck knows he has to throw it away. Despite being just as close to a sack physically, in reality Kerrigan isn't close at all because Luck is prepared to end the play with as positive a result as the situation makes possible.

Too long, didn’t read.

I’m just going to assume it was all drivel.

[DYoungJelly]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

Too long, didn’t read.

I’m just going to assume it was all drivel.

Of course you are.

You're an insecure online bully who needs to convince all you are the smartest.

You parrot whatever theme is being put forward by various analysts as insight.

You ignore logic and reason as it applies to something indefensible you say, probably of the cuff, then defend like it is some holy doctrine.

You're response was truly perfect, in character, and predictable.



Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

[Dlyne8r]

Originally Posted by DYoungJelly

Of course you are.

You're an insecure online bully who needs to convince all you are the smartest.

You parrot whatever theme is being put forward by various analysts as insight.

You ignore logic and reason as it applies to something indefensible you say, probably of the cuff, then defend like it is some holy doctrine.

You're response was truly perfect, in character, and predictable.



Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

This. Good to know that there are others on this site that recognize this key board commando as a fraud. Unfortunately, I'm sure he, she, or whatever Schneed is will probably enjoy all the discussion about him, her, or whatever Schneed is. I fully expect a rapid response in another lame attempt to illustrate to us all just how intelligent he, she, or whatever Schneed is in 5, 4, 3, 2, 1.... Always relish meeting people like this in person as most times they are not as they seem and typically down play their elitist persona.