Job of OLB's changing

[warfelg]

 

As I've been saying.

[August4th]

find it interesting how we have been at or near the top in sacks in the last 2 years but it does't feel like it? so is this new way of playing outside linebackers working?

[warfelg]

Considering that's what the article says....

 

I mean yes, Tomlin is looking at them more as a 'blitz' tool than as a every down rush tool.  And if that's the case we are playing more of a 4-3 with 4 LB's on the field.

[VigilantZombie]

Might I suggest that this is in part due to how bad our secondary has been in recent years as well as the influx of receiving RBs as primary running backs/receiving targets.

[3rivers]

2 hours ago, August4th said:

find it interesting how we have been at or near the top in sacks in the last 2 years but it does't feel like it? so is this new way of playing outside linebackers working?

you are referring to a weak schedule. How were the stats vs good teams or good OL's?  Our OLB's can't rush the passer other than Watt anyways.

[CKSteeler]

I just don't know if the numbers really bear this out. I mean, the team would presumably have better track of this than any fan, but when I looked at this in 2005 or 2006, the LB's were dropping into coverage about 30-40% of the time. Dupree last year dropped into coverage just about the same percentage. And in terms of blitzing versus pure rushing, the Steelers from say at least 2004 to 2007 or '08 tried to avoid having their OLB's match up on tackles. They tried to create favorable match-ups with more creative blitzes based on the talent they had. Harrison and Woodley were game changers in that they were the first pair that could and often did take on tackles more often (and win).

So, there was always a degree of variation in how they rushed these guys. But the amount they rush? Doesn't seem that different. If the Steelers want their interior guys getting more pressure, that's all well and good. Maybe they want other guys finishing the job. There was nothing revolutionary about the Steelers defense last year, though. I mean, what was Tomlin/Butler's great plan - riding their CB blitzes to a Super Bowl? CB blitzes weren't new. It was integral to the zone blitz when Lebeau used it in Cinci and used quite frequently up until about 2008. The Steelers last year didn't break new ground so much as they revisited the past. The past was just pre-Tomlin.

But you spent two first round picks on these OLB's. Then a third on Jarvis Jones. So maybe the braintrust here needs to reevaluate their own priorities then if the scheme is really so different.

Harrison/Woodley were such talents on the edges who could set the edge and rush that they used them that way. Joey Porter, by contrast, was more of a blitzer who could cover ground. So Porter would be asked to drop pretty deep at times and probably never got his due as a coverage guy. But no matter what, if you are spending premium picks on these players you expect them to:

1. Be down in and down out consistently good football players. Dupree certainly isn't. Watt wasn't last year, either.

2. They need to make plays. If not rushing the passer, then in other ways.

3. They still need these guys to set the edge. And they aren't doing that well enough.

Summary - Whatever their plan is, it doesn't seem like a good one to me. Or really all that new.

[mwalker]

The one thing I am sure of is that in today's game, we need a varied arsenal of linebackers vs clones that fit a specific positions.

Right now, and without Shazier, we've got guys who are just too similar. We could use speed in the middle. We could use a hybrid

type that plays later downs or against certain match ups - and it might be hard to find that in one player. We also need depth on the edge,

and I'd argue some explosion vs the typical 6'4 260 type we get to set the edge. It'll be interesting to see if in this draft we actually draft a variety of types

or if we just stick to what we typically gravitate to. 

 

[Armsteeld2]

Your starting OLBs suck at rushing the passer so may as well try to slow the QBs down by dropping more into coverage.  Just because they're rushing less doesn't mean that they have the ability to be productive pass rushers.  This flawed philosophy is why the team needs to switch to a 43 scheme.  Always put your best the best players on the field.

[Chieferific]

1 hour ago, Armsteeld2 said:

Your starting OLBs suck at rushing the passer so may as well try to slow the QBs down by dropping more into coverage.  Just because they're rushing less doesn't mean that they have the ability to be productive pass rushers.  This flawed philosophy is why the team needs to switch to a 43 scheme.  Always put your best the best players on the field.

Indeed. If at least 1 of your OLBs aren't rushing a switch needs to made. A scheme of 3 DL rushing and 1 OLB or 1 DB "blitzing" from time to time has gotta be the dumbest scheme I've ever heard of.  

[warfelg]

So, as much as I respect a lot of you guys......your all talking out your backend here and don't comprehend what Tomlin is talking about (or didn't read it and took my 2 sec crib sheet to heart).

 

A few things:

We brought 4+ rushers on ~80% of downs the lest 3 years.

Outside the DL the highest percent of plays rushed by a non-down linemen the last 3 years? 70% by Harrison.  Next highest? 55% by Dupree.

 

What is Tomlin really talking about?

Having 4 linebackers that can cover, play the run, and rush the passer from any of the 4 linebacker spots.  It's bringing back the the unpredictability.  This isn't about considering anything but the down lineman rushing being called a blitzer.  It's about getting away from those Harrison years where he was a dedicated rusher, and getting more back to what the Zone-Blitz was about and bringing the 4th rusher from multiple places.  It's why Harrison was so marginalized the last 2 years.  All he could do is rush, he couldn't play zone anymore and he couldn't man cover so he wasn't as valuable to the defense.

And I would argue....it's working.

Like someone said: This year we were 1st in total sacks in the regular season. In 2016 we were T-9th.

This year we had 6 players with at least 4 sacks.  15 players with sacks.  Guess what.....that was best in the NFL with sack distribution.  That means we had the most players contribute to making plays behind the LOS.   We also had the most players with at least 1 sack, and 1 INT (5).  Guess what....add in forced fumbles and we were again tops (3).

2016, we didn't have a huge number of players with 4+ sacks (3), however we did again have the most players with at lest 1 sack.  Again we lead with the most players with 1 sack and 1 INT (6).  Again add forced fumbles and it was the same thing (4).

That's a sign that what we're doing is working!  The pass rush is less predictable than it was before.  All we complained about in the past was that our defense was too predictable because we know where the rusher was coming from.  But now we make it less predictable, that means the sacks are less "condensed" with players and more spread out.

Comparison:

#2 in sacks this year had 4 guys with 4+ sacks.  1 less player with a sack than us.  They only had 2 guys record a sack and an INT. 1 player with a sack, int, FF.  9 guys with less than 2 sacks out of their 14 with sacks.  Means a majority of their pass rush came from 5 guys.

Only 5 of our guys had less than 2 sacks.  That means a majority of our pass rush came from 10 guys.

Want to add in the number of players with 2 sacks to that total?

Jacksonville got 42.5 of their 55 sacks from 4 guys.  Predictable as to who is coming.

We got 47 sacks out of 56 sacks from 8 guys.  Completely unpredictable.

I know there's some that would disagree with Tomlin no matter what and put it down because we don't have one guy with ~15 sacks....but Tomlin is right here.  Our defense is improving.  We're bringing 4 rushers with less predictable rushers.  We're getting more sacks.  We're getting improved pass defense.  This is why I literally just have to sit here and laugh about it.  Things are improving but because it's not showing up in a 3 sec defensive stat search you are unhappy.  So what.  It's working.  

And Tomlin is right.  In order to run this less predictable front 7, where the 4th rusher can come from anywhere, you need to have 4 LB's who can do a bit of everything, instead of a dedicated rusher, and a dedicated coverage from OLB.  

[VigilantZombie]

I really hope we do get back to being unpredictable defensively is what made us great and made us capable of winning Super Bowls. I really believe if we get someone like Rashaan Evans or even Esch , and Dupree can actually progress we could bring that predictability back if Dupree cannot crabgrass I would say he's at least worth keeping as a backup but not worth giving started money to but it doesn't change the fact that means that he was a bust. But I think basically we need more guys like TJ Watt.

[warfelg]

7 minutes ago, wwhickok said:

I really hope we do get back to being unpredictable defensively is what made us great and made us capable of winning Super Bowls. I really believe if we get someone like Rashaan Evans or even Esch , and Dupree can actually progress we could bring that predictability back if Dupree cannot crabgrass I would say he's at least worth keeping as a backup but not worth giving started money to but it doesn't change the fact that means that he was a bust. But I think basically we need more guys like TJ Watt.

We are back to being unpredictable.  Defensive rankings and stat distribution show that.  And this is why I say Dupree is better than most make him out to be.

We make a big deal of Watt having a 40-7-1-1 stat line.....He dropped into coverage lass than Dupree, and Dupree still dropped a 40-6 line.  Dupree just didn't have the INT or FF, and part of it was because Dupree was actually targeted far less than Watt.

IIRC on twitter, TJ Watt was one of the few players this season with a minimum of 35 tackles, 5 sacks, 1 int, 1 ff.  If Dupree got the INT and FF I think that we were the only team in NFL history to have both OLB's have that stat line.

I talk a lot about how sometimes we're 'too close' to the situation to really look at it properly, and Dupree is one of those situations.

 

I give you an interesting stat line to consider here:

Jadeveon Clowney the last two years: 81 tackles, 15.5 sacks, 3 FF, 30 games started.  Per game: 2.7 tkl, 0.5 sack, 0.1 FF

Bud Dupree in the last two years: 50 tackles, 10.5 sacks, 1 FF, 19 games started.  Per game: 2.6 tkl, 0.6 sack. 0.05 FF

Yet I would bet most consider Clowney a stud while Dupree is a bust.

For a comparison point, here's a stud rusher the last two years:

113 Tackles, 23.5 sacks, 5 FF, 32 games started.  Per game: 3.5 tkl, 0.7 sack, 0.2 FF.

What would Dupree's line look like if he started 32 games the last 2 years?

84 tackles, 19.5 sacks, 2 FF.

Just something to think about.

[Armsteeld2]

@warfelg you’re a stats guy so I’m asking you how many tipped passes did Dupree make?  How many interceptions?  Dropping for the sake of dropping is pointless!  Some of Dupree’s sacks were flush sacks where another player forced QB into him or he was unblocked.  No one in their right mind watching the Steelers defense would think that was a Top 10 defense ?  **** what Tomlin is saying because his LBs are garbage!  Scheme can cover against bad QBs and less than talented teams but eventually a mad dog must be placed into that core who intimidates through production.

[skywlker32]

51 minutes ago, warfelg said:

We are back to being unpredictable.  Defensive rankings and stat distribution show that.  And this is why I say Dupree is better than most make him out to be.

We make a big deal of Watt having a 40-7-1-1 stat line.....He dropped into coverage lass than Dupree, and Dupree still dropped a 40-6 line.  Dupree just didn't have the INT or FF, and part of it was because Dupree was actually targeted far less than Watt.

IIRC on twitter, TJ Watt was one of the few players this season with a minimum of 35 tackles, 5 sacks, 1 int, 1 ff.  If Dupree got the INT and FF I think that we were the only team in NFL history to have both OLB's have that stat line.

I talk a lot about how sometimes we're 'too close' to the situation to really look at it properly, and Dupree is one of those situations.

 

I give you an interesting stat line to consider here:

Jadeveon Clowney the last two years: 81 tackles, 15.5 sacks, 3 FF, 30 games started.  Per game: 2.7 tkl, 0.5 sack, 0.1 FF

Bud Dupree in the last two years: 50 tackles, 10.5 sacks, 1 FF, 19 games started.  Per game: 2.6 tkl, 0.6 sack. 0.05 FF

Yet I would bet most consider Clowney a stud while Dupree is a bust.

For a comparison point, here's a stud rusher the last two years:

113 Tackles, 23.5 sacks, 5 FF, 32 games started.  Per game: 3.5 tkl, 0.7 sack, 0.2 FF.

What would Dupree's line look like if he started 32 games the last 2 years?

84 tackles, 19.5 sacks, 2 FF.

Just something to think about.

I'd be curious to see his stats on pressures, qb hits, etc. compared to other pass rushers. Sacks tell a very small part of the story.

[warfelg]

5 minutes ago, skywlker32 said:

I'd be curious to see his stats on pressures, qb hits, etc. compared to other pass rushers. Sacks tell a very small part of the story.

I'll try to find that.  I can tell you Clowney was rushing about 84% of his snaps and Dupree was rushing closer to only 50% of his snaps.