Participation, NAU, and the 1-5-5 defense.

[mthoopsfan]

A good pass rush is not 100% correlated to DB success. Not even close. You obviously never played in the secondary.

You’re right hoops. give the QB all the time in the world. There’s no correlation to a better pass rush helping the secondary.

Of course, there is some correlation. It is NOT 100% correlation. Please tell us you're not that stupid.

 

[mthoopsfan]

The ability to cover receivers is not dependent “solely on the pass rush”. That is total BS. While a rush is or can be helpful and is positive, technique, discipline, eyes, quickness, speed, hand technique, help from backers, help from a free safety, etc. are very important and sometimes or even often more important than a good pass rush.

If covering receivers was “solely” dependent on a good pass rush, no team would ever use prevent defensive. The NFL would never rush only 3 d-linemen at the end of halves and games.

You even admitted that a pass rush isn’t critical in certain situations.

Do you not understand that there’s a big difference between “solely” and “very important”? Your post is internally inconsistent. Anyone who says covering receivers is “solely” dependent on a pass rush doesn’t understand pass defense.

I can see why you didn’t last in coaching.

Clearly stated that I don’t understand the game like you do! Is Bobby still holding out on his contract?

Assume so. I've been at the rugby World Cup since the beginning of the season. Have you asked the athletic dept?

 

[CatsRback]

You’re right hoops. give the QB all the time in the world. There’s no correlation to a better pass rush helping the secondary.

Of course, there is some correlation. It is NOT 100% correlation. Please tell us you're not that stupid.

100% correlation means they directly impact one another. Every. Single. Play. There isn’t one play where the DL should/ could say “ok DB’s we are going to sit this one out, you guys just cover the whole time”. Better DL play inherently gives the QB less time play in and play out. That is a simple fact. It allows you to create pressures without blitzing: that means more backs in coverage, if you have to blitz you forfeit a coverage somewhere. That is also, a fact.

You are not the gatekeeper of football hoops. Even less so after the nonsense you spewed this off season about the offensive line. Take a break from calling everyone stupid.

 

[mthoopsfan]

Of course, there is some correlation. It is NOT 100% correlation. Please tell us you're not that stupid.

100% correlation means they directly impact one another. Every. Single. Play. There isn’t one play where the DL should/ could say “ok DB’s we are going to sit this one out, you guys just cover the whole time”. Better DL play inherently gives the QB less time play in and play out. That is a simple fact. It allows you to create pressures without blitzing: that means more backs in coverage, if you have to blitz you forfeit a coverage somewhere. That is also, a fact.

You are not the gatekeeper of football hoops. Even less so after the nonsense you spewed this off season about the offensive line. Take a break from calling everyone stupid.

You don't know what you are talking about. Does a good pass rush help db's with running plays? Is a good pass rush necessary for prevent defense? Many pass plays are designed to be few-step drops and quick passes. A good pass rush doesn't help in any respect. Using more defenders, like backers, to have a better pass rush can hurt db's, if the pass goes to where the backer would normally be in pass coverage.

How does a good pass rush positively impact a screen play?

Sorry, buddy, but a good pass rush does not have 100% correlation with good pass defense. It just doesn't.

A good pass rush often involves more players than just the d-line. Yes, I agree a blitz takes some players out of pass defense.

Let's discuss why the offensive line has 2 returning all-conference players plus Walker. And one pre-season first team all-conference linemen.

I have said I was the gatekeeper or tried to be the gatekeeper, but I know a heck of a lot more about football than you do.

 

[CatsRback]

100% correlation means they directly impact one another. Every. Single. Play. There isn’t one play where the DL should/ could say “ok DB’s we are going to sit this one out, you guys just cover the whole time”. Better DL play inherently gives the QB less time play in and play out. That is a simple fact. It allows you to create pressures without blitzing: that means more backs in coverage, if you have to blitz you forfeit a coverage somewhere. That is also, a fact.

You are not the gatekeeper of football hoops. Even less so after the nonsense you spewed this off season about the offensive line. Take a break from calling everyone stupid.

You don't know what you are talking about. Does a good pass rush help db's with running plays? Is a good pass rush necessary for prevent defense? Many pass plays are designed to be few-step drops and quick passes. A good pass rush doesn't help in any respect. Using more defenders, like backers, to have a better pass rush can hurt db's, if the pass goes to where the backer would normally be in pass coverage.

How does a good pass rush positively impact a screen play?

Sorry, buddy, but a good pass rush does not have 100% correlation with good pass defense. It just doesn't.

A good pass rush often involves more players than just the d-line. Yes, I agree a blitz takes some players out of pass defense.

Let's discuss why the offensive line has 2 returning all-conference players plus Walker. And one pre-season first team all-conference linemen.

I have said I was the gatekeeper or tried to be the gatekeeper, but I know a heck of a lot more about football than you do.

You’re a nimrod. You proved my point twice… in a prevent defense you offer a trade off… less pass rush for more coverage meaning you need more DB’s since you basically forfeit the rush and send 3. The second point which I’ve already stated. If you have a good pass rush and can get to the QB with 4 lineman you don’t need to send a 5th and they can help in coverage (better pass coverage). But if you have a worse pass rush, and need to blitz there is a trade off (worse pass coverage).

Where in the world did anyone begin talking about the run game? This isn’t even a talking point I have no idea what planet you’re on to bring that up. This is strictly talking about how a good pass rush 100% leads to better defensive back opportunities and success during a passing down.

https://media.tenor.com/8j2kYlZ6dogAAAAM/billymadison-godhelp.gif

 

[mthoopsfan]

You don't know what you are talking about. Does a good pass rush help db's with running plays? Is a good pass rush necessary for prevent defense? Many pass plays are designed to be few-step drops and quick passes. A good pass rush doesn't help in any respect. Using more defenders, like backers, to have a better pass rush can hurt db's, if the pass goes to where the backer would normally be in pass coverage.

How does a good pass rush positively impact a screen play?

Sorry, buddy, but a good pass rush does not have 100% correlation with good pass defense. It just doesn't.

A good pass rush often involves more players than just the d-line. Yes, I agree a blitz takes some players out of pass defense.

Let's discuss why the offensive line has 2 returning all-conference players plus Walker. And one pre-season first team all-conference linemen.

I have said I was the gatekeeper or tried to be the gatekeeper, but I know a heck of a lot more about football than you do.

You’re a nimrod. You proved my point twice… in a prevent defense you offer a trade off… less pass rush for more coverage meaning you need more DB’s since you basically forfeit the rush and send 3. The second point which I’ve already stated. If you have a good pass rush and can get to the QB with 4 lineman you don’t need to send a 5th and they can help in coverage (better pass coverage). But if you have a worse pass rush, and need to blitz there is a trade off (worse pass coverage).

Where in the world did anyone begin talking about the run game? This isn’t even a talking point I have no idea what planet you’re on to bring that up. This is strictly talking about how a good pass rush 100% leads to better defensive back opportunities and success during a passing down.

You obviously don’t understand secondary play. Covering receivers is not “solely” dependent on a good pass rush or 100% correlated to a good pass rush. It just isn’t.

You just admitted that covering receivers can be done with more db’s and a pass rush. Receivers must be covered in the run game too, as the play could turn into a pass. A pass rush almost never helps on traditional or bubble screens. In fact, it can hurt coverage.

Of course, a good pass rush often helps in covering receivers. And is important. That wasn’t the discussion. The discussion was “solely”and “100% correlation”.

If covering receivers was solely dependent on the pass rush. a team with a good pass rush could play o-linemen at cornerback.

You are another example of a poster who wants to argue with me so much that you say stupid things.

 

[CatsRback]

You’re a nimrod. You proved my point twice… in a prevent defense you offer a trade off… less pass rush for more coverage meaning you need more DB’s since you basically forfeit the rush and send 3. The second point which I’ve already stated. If you have a good pass rush and can get to the QB with 4 lineman you don’t need to send a 5th and they can help in coverage (better pass coverage). But if you have a worse pass rush, and need to blitz there is a trade off (worse pass coverage).

Where in the world did anyone begin talking about the run game? This isn’t even a talking point I have no idea what planet you’re on to bring that up. This is strictly talking about how a good pass rush 100% leads to better defensive back opportunities and success during a passing down.

You obviously don’t understand secondary play. Covering receivers is not “solely” dependent on a good pass rush or 100% correlated to a good pass rush. It just isn’t.

You just admitted that covering receivers can be done with more db’s and a pass rush. Receivers must be covered in the run game too, as the play could turn into a pass. A pass rush almost never helps on traditional or bubble screens. In fact, it can hurt coverage.

Of course, a good pass rush often helps in covering receivers. And is important. That wasn’t the discussion. The discussion was “solely”and “100% correlation”.

If covering receivers was solely dependent on the pass rush. a team with a good pass rush could play o-linemen at cornerback.

You are another example of a poster who wants to argue with me so much that you say stupid things.

0-lineman and CB? Drink your coffee… You’ve dwindled your respect on this board down to nothing. You clearly learned nothing playing the game. Move along troll.

 

[Robsnotes4u]

For some reason Hoops can't understand he is bragging up parts of a team that has an SOS of 92. this schedule was a perfect setup for a good team,

 

[PTGrizzly]

Please direct me to this discussion on the pass rush and DB success.

Here was my post: "I see what you are saying about a good pass rush, but pass defense is much more than a good pass rush. It is also good coverage, good schemes and good calls for the situation. Remember, corner was my position, and I still follow secondary play and talk to the Griz secondary coaches and some players on occasion."

Yeah I agree with you on this one. A pass rush helps DB’s a ton, but if you can’t cover anyways, it won’t make much of a difference. Still have to be a good DB.