FalcFans Forums

Compare Atlanta and Minnesota's pass defenses...

In 2010, the Falcons and Vikings were both at the top of the league in terms of having the least number of big plays (20+ yard) given up via the air. The Falcons ranked 2nd in the league, giving up big plays on only 6.8% of pass attempts, ranking only behind the Steelers (5.9%). The Vikings were 5th in the league with 7.4%, slightly ahead of the Chargers. The Bucs and Titans FYI ranked 3rd and 4th.

In 2009, both teams were near the bottom of the league by the same measure. The Falcons ranked 28th in the league in big play percentage giving, with 10.3% of pass attempts against them going for 20 or more yards. The Vikings weren't that much better ranking 24th with a rate of 9.7%.

However, what is interesting is that the Vikings ranked 2nd in the league in 2009 in sack rate, barely edged out by the Miami Dolphins who sacked opposing QBs on 8.3% of dropbacks, while the Vikings sacked them on 8.2%. The Falcons on the other hand ranked 27th in the league in sack rate, sacking opposing QBs 5% of the time.

In 2010, the Falcons pass rush showed minimal improvement, ranking 25th in the league with a sack rate of 5.2%. And the Vikings had a significant drop with a sack rate of 5.5%, ranking 20th in the league.

What also is interesting that in 2009, by most accounts Antoine Winfield, Minnesota's No. 1 corner had a subpar year. PFF credited him with giving up 6 touchdowns, tied for 4th most in the league, and he ranked 40th among corners by their coverage measure. In 2010, he gave up 0 TDs, tied with Asomugha for best in the league, although it should be noted that Winfield was targeted over 4 times as much as Nnamdi that year. And Winfield rated 9th best corner in coverage by PFF in 2010 as well.

Looking at the Falcons corners. Brent Grimes ranked 44th by PFF's coverage rankings in 2009, but jumped to 8th in 2010. The Falcons clearly upgraded over Chris Houston (ranked 41st in 2009) with Dunta Robinson (17th in 2010).

I know some of you are thinking, "Who cares about the number of big plays given up?" It's by no means and end all be all stat, but I'm using it here because it best illustrates my point. Regardless of what stat you use, most of them will indicate that the Vikings defense was in fact better in 2010 than it was in 2009, and I would argue the main reason for that is because of how much better they defended the pass. And I think the exact same applies to the Falcons.

And I use the Vikings and Falcons because by many "big picture" measures they are fairly similar from one year to the next (particularly look at their defensive rankings on Football Outsiders in both years). The only major difference seems that the Vikings pass rush was significantly better than the Falcons in 2009.

And my point here is to try and illustrate that defensive success and defending the pass isn't consistently tied to pass rush. In fact, cornerback play is a much stronger indicator of whether a team is going to defend the pass well or not.

Take for instance the rankings this year. Both the Chargers and Steelers were among the top pass rush teams in terms of sack rate, ranking 2nd & 6th, respectively in the league. But the Titans had an average pass rush (15th), and the Bucs were at the bottom of the league (30th).

Just another reason that I think justifies my belief that as the league is structured today and the game is played today, investing in good corners is a smarter decision than pass rushers.

Looking at the Falcons corners. Brent Grimes ranked 44th by PFF's coverage rankings in 2009, but jumped to 8th in 2010. The Falcons clearly upgraded over Chris Houston (ranked 41st in 2009) with Dunta Robinson (17th in 2010).
**********************************************************************************************************************
I don't agree that corner is a better position to take; because a good Defensive End lasts longer IMO than a good
corner.......

However when you show the improvement of our corner play 44 to 8th then 41 to 17 I believe that is such an improvement that
its just awesome.... I also think although you've said many of Abe's sacks came when the game was in hand; I think the Qb goes into a game
knowing he's coming with a desire to punish......

You've made your point very well, I'd just like to know what would happen if we had this kind of improvement at DE... My biggest complaint
against both ends were they had plays that should have been made in the backfield, that often weren't made and on those specific
plays they were usually drawn out enough where the opposing Qb made a "big play "

DEs and CBs have about the same span of careers, if CBs don't have slightly longer ones:

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/blog/?p=6510


One might argue, nothing would happen. At least by PFF's ratings, Abraham ranked 6th in pass rushing among 4-3 DEs in both 2009 and 2010. And Biermann improved from 24th to 17th from one year to the next.

I think you want to be good in both areas. But I would tend to prioritize corner a little bit more. Looking at their snap counts, it appears combined Chris Owens and Brian Williams played 580 snaps in the nickel last year. John Abraham and Kroy Biermann played 620 and 629 snaps last year, respectively. Brent Grimes played 987 snaps and Dunta Robinson 849. There were only 10 4-3 DEs that played more snaps than Robinson, while there were 43 corners.

Clearly, corners have more opportunities to influence games. If you figure that Brent Grimes and John Abraham are impacting the game roughly the same per snap, both are A- or B+ players, whatever grade you want to give them, Grimes is being that player 60% more, and thus getting 60% more opportunities to impact the game.

Even if we sign someone like Ray Edwards and he improves the pass rush, if Chris Owens is still getting beat like a drum, then it's not going to matter too much. We all know that corners are helped by pass rush, yet it doesn't seem to be consistently born out statistically. And I think a big reason of that is because of the "New Golden Age" of QB that we are currently in. Your pass rush becomes 10-20% less effective when you're going up against guys like Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, Drew Brees, and even Matt Ryan for that matter. They're going to figure out that your nickel corner or whomever stinks, and they are going to exploit that.

The smartest thing the Falcons could have done this off-season IMO was move up to get Patrick Peterson. IMHO, an elite corner adds more value to a football than any other position besides quarterback.

A shutdown corner tilts the field. And that can be a negative if the other cornerback isn't very good. But if you have quality on the other side of the field, and then you have a quality nickel corner, you are nearly impossible to throw on. Freeney & Mathis make it really tough for teams to throw on the Colts, but they still do it with some success, thus why the Colts have a below average pass defense.

Thats a good summation, I agree. The Bradys, Mannings and Brees pocket presence, slide steps and release points def cut down on the sacks. Ryan is working his way up the ladder to being one of these imo. With more passing that running in the league, the need isn't going away for either position. But bottom line, you're right, if an Owens is getting killed in the slot/nickel, then those qb's are gonna find that weakness most times (and a Grant or Edwards can't get there consistently enough to make up for it). The league has evolved to where you not only need a solid to good slot CB, but you also have to have more hybrid type safties with cover skills.

If the NFL was what it was in 1995, then this is a joke of an argument. DEs were far more important than cornerbacks, unless your name was Deion Sanders. But things are changing, as Greg Trippiedi points out in this article.



Edit for typo fix.

Question then is, is the turndown in INTs as well as sacks enough that neither really has changed much in relative value?Has someone like PFF or the like given us charts of DBs and DEs and some stat along the lines of WARP?

D-

Good points, and I realize it's a relatively new phenomenon which is why some might be slower to adopt and agree with me. This probably was not the case 10 years ago.

It's widely accepted conventional wisdom that the shutdown corner no longer exists in the league because of the rules. But I think that may no longer be the case.

According to PFF, Asomugha was thrown at only 29 times last year. There were 8 games he played in last year, where he was not thrown at a single time, and 3 of them came against playoff teams: Kansas City (twice) and Pittsburgh. And even when they did, QBs only had a 66 passer rating against him. Note, the league average in 2010 was 82.2. So basically, a QB loses 16 rating points, and how much can we quantify him losing from the 50-60 throws that his presence alone prevents?

Now, Asomugha might be the exception to the norm. But then you have Asante Smauel, who was only targed 41 times last year, and opposing QBs had a 31.7 rating against, by far the best in the league.

But even on the opposite end of the spectrum, Brent Grimes is the 2nd most targeted corner int he league behind Terrell Thomas, being targeted 119 times. But Grimes only gives up a 61.3 rating.

And it's not just INTs that are benefited Grimes, it's probably his PDs. The 50.4% completions against him last year, now becomes 63.8% if you assume every pass he broke up would have been caught. The Cardinals as a team only completed 50.8% of their pass attempts last year, while the Texans completed 63.6%.

So basically, Grimes ball-hawking ability is basically the difference between Derek Anderson/John Skelton/Max Hall quality and Matt Schaub quality. That's major value.

Do sacks and pass rushers add that sort of value?

If you look at opposing passer rating from a year ago, and then factor in how many sacks a team got vs. how many passes defended they go, you see a significant difference in correlation. The correlation coefficient for sacks is .394, while for PDs it is .522. And the coefficient for INTs and defensive passer rating is .538, which is obviously high because interceptions are part of the passer rating formula. And the Top 6 teams in defensive passer rating vs. the Bottom 6 seem to mesh fairly well with most perceptions about who the best/worst defenses were in the league in 2010:

Top 6: 1-Packers, 2-Steelers, 3-Bears, 4-Chargers, 5-Ravens, 6-Jets
Bottom 6: 32-Texans, 31-Jaguars, 30-Broncos, 29-Cowboys, 28-Bills, 27-Colts

I don't want to make it sound like sacks don't matter or DEs/pass rush aren't valuable. I just think in today's game, they don't seem as valuable as a ball-hawking corner.

If you add up Abe's sacks, pressure, and QB hits last year, he had 24 PPRs (positive pass rushers). If you add up Grimes PDs & INTs, he broke up 22 passes. I just think that Grimes 22 > Abe's 24 pound for pound.

And for whatever reason, it seems like teams are having more success finding players like Brent Grimes, Brandon Flowers, Asante Samuel, Tramon Williams, Antoine Cason, Aqib Talib, etc. that seem be making significant contributions, while they seem to be swinging and missing more on all these pass rushers.

You look at CBs vs. edge pass rushers drafted in the Top 100 between 2004-08, and 50% of the corners drafted in that span are currently starters in the league with 22% out of the league, while only 39% of the pass rushers are starters with 19% out of the league.

And 74% of the CBs taken in the Top 50 in that span are currently starters, with 7% out of the league. For pass rushers, it's 61% starters, with 22% out of the league.

I wouldn't necessarily mean I would take Dunta Robinson (#10 overall) over DeMarcus Ware (#11 overall), but if you look at the drafts from 2004-08, and look at all the corners taken between say pick #15 and #50, the success rate is astounding compared to DEs:

Corners
15- Tye HIll (2006)
16- Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie (2008)
16 - Jason Allen (2006)
18- Leon Hall (2007)
19- Antonio Cromartie (2006)
20- Aqib Talib (2008)
20- Aaron Ross (2007)
23 - Fabian Washington (2005)
24- Johnathan Joseph (2006)
25- Mike Jenkins (2008)
25- Ahmad Carroll (2004)
27- Antoine Cason (2008)
28- Chris Gamble (2004)
29- Marlin Jackson (2005)
31- Kelly Jennings (2006)
35- Brandon Flowers (2008)
38- Stanford Routt (2005)
40- Tracy Porter (2008)
41- Chris Houston (2007)
43- Corey Webster (2005)
48- Cedric Griffin (2006)
49 - Keiwan Ratliff (2004)
50- Ron Bartell (2005)

DEs/OLBs:
17- Jarvis Moss (2007)
18- Will Smith (2004)
18- Erasmus James (2005)
20- Tamba Hali (2006)
20- Kenechi Udeze (2006)
22- Manny Lawson (2006)
26- Anthony Spencer (2007)
27- Jason Babin (2004)
28- Lawrence Jackson (2008)
32- Mathias Kiwanuka (2006)
42- Travis LaBoy (2004)
46- LaMarr Woodley (2007)
46- Matt Roth (2005)

Teams really seem to be undervaluing 2nd/3rd tier CBs, and overvaluing 2nd/3rd tier pass rushers in the draft.

Good points, and I realize it's a relatively new phenomenon which is why some might be slower to adopt and agree with me.
***********************************************************************************************************************************
Pudge its not because its new that I don't agree with you; its because its not true. Elite is Elite!! An Elite Defensive end is so good
they kill the Qb. At the defensive end position we are calling people good who are average and I don't think their's currently an elite
Defensive end in the league. We have more good corners right now than Defensive ends.....

Hey Cyril check into the fantasy sprorts world section

You might be missing the point Cyril. In a vacuum, Elite DE vs. an Elite corner, maybe then the DE > CB, but instead of judging things in a vacuum, let's look at the reality.

I think it goes back to a point I had in another thread in that you are holding to this notion about a DE being more valuable than a CB, yet there isn't a lot of evidence to support it other than maybe a truism that existed 15-20 years ago, but may not exist today.

You say there are no elite DEs in the league today. I would argue Dwight Freeney is an elite DE. He's a HOFer in the prime of his career. If that is not an elite defensive end, I don't know what is. What about DeMarcus Ware? James Harrison? Clay Matthews? LaMarr Woodley? Hard to buy they aren't elite pass rushers as well.

I guess it comes down to a question of who adds more value to their respective team: Tamba Hali or Brandon Flowers. I think almost universally, people would say, "Oh definitely Hali," without batting an eye because he was 2nd in the league in sacks (14.5) last year and they would look at Brandon Flowers numbers and see he only had 2 picks.

But what most of those people without a premium subscription to Pro Football Focus would be unaware of is that Flowers was targeted 102 times last year, and only gave up 51% completions and 1 touchdown.

We know that INTs are more valuable than sacks. But it's debatable that a pass defended or an incomplete pass is significantly less valuable than a sack.

Using Advanced NFL Stats Win Probability Calculator is an interesting tool...

Given the scenario of Team A having the ball at Team B's 40 yard line with 9 minutes left to go in the 3rd quarter with the score tied on 2nd & 7. Why did I pick that specific scenario, no reason, it just seemed fairly mundane which I think works for our purposes.

In that situation, Team A has a 0.57 Win Probability (i.e. 57% chance of winning that game). If they are sacked for a 7-yard loss (so now it's 3rd & 14, 8:30 left, on Team B's 47 yard line), their WP decreases to 0.52. Now an incomplete pass in such a scenario lowers the WP to 0.55.

Clearly, a sack in such a scenario is more valuable than a forced incompletion. But based off last year, the chances that Tamba Hali gets a sack in such a scenario is 2.5% based off how many sacks he had on plays when he was rushing the QB. Now the chances that Flowers forces an incompletions is about 8.6% based off the number of times he dropped into coverage and forced an incompletion.

Now you can argue that maybe it's Hali's pressure that forces the incompletion. Well according to PFF, Hali had 68 pressures last year. But we also know that PFF doesn't necessarily consider a pressure to mean when it causes an incompletion. His actual number of "real" pressures may be as low as 15.

But in order for him to have the same sort of impact on that given play (8.6% success rate), he would have to have a combined 50 sacks/pressures.

Throw in the fact that Brandon Carr on the opposite side of Flowers puts up similar numbers, and what you have is the probability that their combined 38 PDs, 3 INTs, and only allowing 46.5% completions last year probably had significantly more impact on the Chiefs defensive success than Hali's 14.5 sacks and 68 pressures.

Now in Chuck Smith and Reggie White's day, an elite DE probably did have way more impact than an elite corner like Darrell Green or Rod Woodson. But that is not the case today anymore IMHO. The passing game is way more efficient nowadays than it was back then.

Teams throw a lot more now, complete at a high percentage, throw more TDs, less INTs, throw for more yardage, and take less sacks.

That has to have some impact on the game, and I think it's making pass rushers less valuable than they were before, and corners more valuable.

Interesting stats, etc. The chance of variables in all this kind of stuff is of such a great chicken/egg type it may all be somewhat moot. I have to agree with Cyril that on our team that the pass rushing DE is more important, at present. Without Abe's decent pressure I hate to think what some of those CB numbers might look like. Maybe fans of every team feel like the opposing QB has too much time to throw. Stats can be so decieving unless really examined and the comparison between the Raiders corner with so few INTs, PDs, is an example. People don't take their chances with him so a cursory look at the numbers might be less impressive seeming. But it all fits together--pass rush and pass coverage and ends up being a sdog chaising its tail discussion. I do think the rule changes have elevated the importance of the CBs. It is becoming more basketball like with each passing year (passing year!).

BTW, I'm delighted to see your old avatar go, Pudge. Not sure what that was all about. Peyton Manning's baby picture?

I don't dispute that our needs were improving the pass rush over improving our coverage. All off-season long, I stated that we needed to get a DE because it was our No. 1 need because of the probability that this is Abe's last year in Atlanta, Biermann and Anderson are also free agents, and who knows whether or not they are going to be the types of players that we are going to spend money on a year from now.

The future of the Falcons DE position looks fairly bleak, so I agree that for us, DE is more important than CB.

But I'm just making the argument that I think in today's NFL, a cornerback is more valuable than a defensive end/pass rusher, at least on a pound for pound comparison.

All things being equal, I would argue that Nnamdi Asomugha will add more value to a defense than Mario Williams. But obviously all things are rarely equal. And for the Falcons, if the options were to sign Nnamdi this off-season to a $16M/yr. deal or trade a 1st & 3rd to Houston for Mario, I would choose the latter.

Without rehashing the argument, I just think for the Falcons in the future, understanding that coverage > pass rush, should adjust the way they evaluate those positions, players, and how it affects who they sign, draft, and how they build would be very smart to reflect the "new reality" of the NFL.

While I agree with the general concept that corners are becoming more useful, I think it's more subtle and difficult than that once you get into it.

Two very good pass rushers can make it such that your defenders don't have to spend 3+ seconds in coverage. One elite rusher doesn't have a ton of value in my estimation...it's easy to neutralize one with blocking schemes...but two makes it very difficult.

Now, on the other hand, with 2 good corners and a subpar pass rush, you have (at best) what we had last year. A QB can still pick on your nickel CB, your FS, your SS or your OLBs.

Essentially, I'm saying 2 very good or better players in the front four can dramatically impact the pass rush...whereas in the back 7, you require 4 good defenders at least.

So, while the defenders may be more important (it's a legit debate), you have to have very good or better at 2 or 3 CBs, at least one safety and at least one LB.

To have a truly good pass defense, you need both (4 to 5 good back 7 defenders, and 2 good pass rushers) but if you had to choose one to be able to get to, you might choose the two pass rushers.

All that said, the game is transitioning where there's no room for a true old MLB, or a true SS...the new MLBs are going to have to look like OLBs, the new OLBs looks like old SS, and the new SS look like old FS. That's the direction that makes sense, and gives you a chance against those spread attacks.

I was thinking Ware, Harrison, and Mathews were linebackers who lined up where coaches put them and came from anywhere?

I don't disagree that 2 good pass rushers make you better. But I don't necessarily agree if with you if you are suggesting that is a better "cure-all" than 2 good corners. How then do we explain the Vikings, Cowboys, and Colts deficiencies in defending the pass in recent years?

The goal should be to be strong at all 3 levels of the defense. But if there is any area you want to emphasize over the others, it is clearly the secondary.

53% of safeties taken in the Top 100 between '04-08 are currently starters in the league, with 20.5% out of the league (i.e. busts). Of those taken in the Top 50, 67% are starters, and 17% are out of the league. And that success rate is higher than the one for edge rushers.

Which is a little better still than interior D-linemen, which have a Top 100 starter rate of 47% and bust rate of 19%. In the Top 50, it fares better with a 54% starter rate, and only a 4% bust rate.

Now I'm not suggesting that you completely neglect the edge rush and focus solely on building up the CB, S, and DT positions as well, but investing a lot of time & money in your pass rush, when all of the evidence says that it's impact is diminishing doesn't make a lot of sense does it?

From 1981 to 1990, there were 50 different defenses that had 50+ sacks in a given year. From 1991 to 2000, that number was 37. From 2001-10, it has happened 12 times. And only 6 times in the past 6 years, and zero times in the past 2 seasons. I hope I'm not the only person that is noticing how big a trend that is.

People may sometimes forget that your average pass rush is only going to sack the QB on 6% of all of his dropbacks. Even if you assume that that is only 1/5th the amount of times that your pass rush is effective at hitting/pressuring the QB enough to disrupt the play, that still leaves 70% "failure rate" for your D-linemen where the corners are going to matter more on that given play.

The only way that changes to where you pass rush is more valuable than your secondary play is essentially if your pass rush is twice as good as the NFL average. And understanding that it's much harder to get to that level as it was 10, 20, or 30 years ago as the above stats suggest, then why is it worthwhile for you to invest in beefing up your pass rush over other areas of your defense?

The best pass rush we've seen in the past 5 seasons was the '06 Ravens, which had a sack rate of 10.5%. And that's about what you are going to have to be at in order for your pass rush to matter more than your secondary on any given play.

I'm not saying that you should completely neglect your pass rush, but it's clear to me that focusing more of your investment in the back 7 is going to be more beneficial than investing in the front 4.

My point was simply one of numbers. To have a top pass rushing DL, you only need 2 very good players. To have a very good set of pass defenders, you need 4 to 5 very good players (as LB and safety are your pass defenders, too.)

You've probably noted that I've for the last several years been pushing on the DT being a premium position along with safety, and this is the reason. With the new passing attack, pressure and collapsing pockets is key, and that comes more from DT than DE. And safeties are no longer a luxury. A DeCoud is a liability. You need guys with great coverage skills back there.

So, my point was...pass rush alone may not get you there...but 2 good corners (which Atlanta had last year) doesn't get you there either. Both are inadequate.

But, any way you slice it, you need 3 very good defenders against the pass to be serviceable, and that's with a good pass rush. Without, you need about 5.

But my point is that 2 good corners will get you closer to "there" than 2 good pass rushers. And those 4 or 5 good players you need to get in the back 7 are much easier to get than the 2 good pass rushers you need up front. At least from recent drafts, it would seem that if you used your top 2 picks on a CB and S in a given draft vs. a DE and DT, the odds that both of the DBs turn into capable starters is about as twice as likely as the odds that both your D-line do.

There doesn't seem to be any contention that the Falcons pass defense was much improved from 2009 to 2010. And there doesn't seem to be any contention that improvement was facilitated by and large by the improvements the Falcons made in the secondary/back seven. DeCoud, Nicholas, and Lofton were all better in coverage in '10 than they were in '09, even if those improvements weren't huge. Robinson > Houston, Moore > Coleman, and Grimes made significant improvement as well.

And I think many people now see the Falcons pass defense as the glass being half full/empty. And they are looking towards the pass rush to be the entity that fills the remainder of the glass. But I would argue that while an improved pass rush will help add some liquid to that glass, it's not going to fill the rest of the glass.

And I would argue that improving what you have in the Back 7 is going to add more liquid to fill that glass than adding a pass rush. And I'm not saying the Falcons should ignore the pass rush, because as I've said before I thought this off-season getting better there was the No. 1 priority on defense. But as I think I've explained that has less to do with the idea of an immediate boost to the defense, rather I think a year from now we could (and probably will) be in an even more dire situation up front. And that opens you up to desperation. And everybody knows that foolish decisions are often made out of desperation.

We're in a situation where we aren't quiet desperate, but we're on the brink. Because unless Kroy turns into Kyle Vanden Bosh this year or Jerry into Fred Robbins, then we are going to be fairly screwed next year.

I understand. Each player in the secondary is easier to "hit" on than the DL's. But, let's say you need 2 DL or 5 good defenders, and there's a 60% hit rate on defenders, and a 40% hit rate on DL's...you're still more likely to get 2 good DL's in 5 picks than 4 good defenders...just from probability.

The reality is, we need both, so it doesn't matter a lot. I think nickel CB and DE are critical this year regardless. I still don't understand why we didn't get a pass defending LB. We won't really have a "top" pass defense until we get a playmaking FS and a good pass defending LB.


I guess, after this rambling...what I would say is it used to be very clear that DL was the way to go, and now it's more even. I don't think the pendulum has swung to corner, but it's swung closer. And a good back 7 is now as or more important than a good front four, and that simply didn't used to be the case.

You can no longer hide your back 7.

I don't think you're doing the math right.

In order to get those 2 good D-linemen, you have to draft 5 of them. Meaning, you are going to have 3 D-linemen that stink, in order to get 2 guys that are good.

In order to get those 5 good defenders (at other positions), if you drafted 5 of them, then the hit rate means 3 of them will be good, while 2 will stink.

Obviously, we are looking at it in a very black and white way. And it's a complicated issue.

I was reading today Dan Pompei's column on National Football Post, and in it they discussed Nnamdi's value, and how he was not as valuable as his price tag would be because of the fact that teams don't throw at him. But I think they were missing the point in that if you're throwing at Nnamdi only twice a game, when say he's covering a receiver that usually gets 8 passes thrown his way per game, those 6 less attempts are adding value to your defense, because that is 6 catches that receiver can't make. But of course, if those 6 pass attempts that go elsewhere are being completed to other players, then the added value of Nnamdi is canceled out by the poor play of other DBs.

We know on offense, if you have the right QB, he'll elevate the play of the other 10 players on offense at least somewhat. His quick release/decision making means the O-linemen don't have to block as long. His accuracy makes it easier for WRs to catch the ball, and his presence means defenses can't stack the box vs. the run, which opens up running lanes for the RBs.

I think historically that same logic has been applied to pass rushers, and that logic has mostly worked. A good pass rusher up front is going to free up opportunities for his fellow D-linemen because of the slanting of protections and drawing double teams. It means you're LBs can be more free to run around and hit stuff because that extra OL is usually going to be needed to block the D-lineman rather than getting out on the 2nd level. And it means your DBs don't have to cover as long.

And it is logically sound. But what is being forgotten here and what I've tried to illustrate in this thread and others is that these top-level D-linemen are far less effective in today's game than they were 10, 20, and 30 years before.

And I think it has a lot to do with offenses being more efficient nowadays. So in all the plays that your D-linemen aren't making (which is the majority of plays), offenses are completing more passes for bigger yardage and making far less mistakes. And thus this change IMHO is slanting the importance to the secondary to be the "rock" of your defense rather than the front four like it has been for much of the past 30+ years.

People may sometimes forget that your average pass rush is only going to sack the QB on 6% of all of his dropbacks. Even if you assume that that is only 1/5th the amount of times that your pass rush is effective at hitting/pressuring the QB enough to disrupt the play, that still leaves 70% "failure rate" for your D-linemen where the corners are going to matter more on that given play.
***********************************************************************************************************************************
Yea but how many Qbs make bad throws because of a good pass rush? If you have 2 elite pass rushers they'll hit the Qb more than 20%

No, Cyril they won't.

Take for instance Robert Mathis & Dwight Freeney. This year, according to Pro Football Focus, they combined for 36 sacks + hits, but they rushed the QB a combined 1050 times this year. That's only 3.4% of the time they were rushing the QB did they successfully get to him.

Take Woodley & Harrison, they had 55 combined sack + hits on 970 combined rushes, only 5.7% of the time.

You take instead a pair of what most consider to be poor pass rushers like Manny Lawson and Parys Haralson for the 49ers, and they hit the QB about 3.7% of the time.

Again, even if you are assuming that for every sack or hit they had, they had 4 other pressures that forced incompletions, you still are only talking about a success rate of under 30%. OTOH, a pair of corners like Flowers & Carr for the Chiefs were thrown at over 200 combined times, and allowed around 45% completions. So, we're weighing 30% success rate for elite pair of a pass rushers vs. 55% success for a good pair of corners.

Again that's still means that 70% of the time a QB drops back and throws, he's going to have the time to throw. And thus that's 70% of the time that the pressure is put on your corners and other guys in coverage to make a play in order to force an incompletion.

So if you take Woodley & Harrison's success rate and average it over 575 passes (avg. # of dropbacks per team in 2010), the difference between them and Lawson/Haralson is only about 11.5 more plays that the Steelers rush LBs make over the 49ers. That's about the same difference in the number of completions allowed between Ike Taylor and Nate Clements last year.

Now perhaps maybe all that means that Lawson/Haralson were probably better pass rushers than they were given credit for being. Which is probably true. But the perception is that they cannot cut it as the 49ers edge rushers, and that perception prompted the Niners to use their top pick on Aldon Smith this past April. Now is Smith going to make the 49ers defense better? Yeah, probably. A lot better? Maybe. But probably not. The dozen or so more plays he probably is capable of making probably won't be as huge an impact as would say a player like Patrick Peterson who if he's as good as someone like Tramon Williams last year, could mean the difference between 15-20 less completions, a touchdown or two less allowed, as well as a few more turnovers as well.

And I guess I'd just argue that the difference in value between an elite pass rusher and the average pass rusher isn't as significant as the diff. between an elite corner and the average corner.

It's not saying that pass rush is unimportant, it's just of less importance because of the way the game is played today. Peyton Manning passed out of the shotgun on 76% of his throws last year. Matt Ryan that number was 57%, and Jason Campbell it was 51%.

I'm assuming that pretty much every NFL offense is throwing out of the shotgun on 50-75% of their passing plays. That extra 0.5 or whatever seconds or whatever that it takes for a defender to cover the extra distance from LOS to QB is an eternity, especially when you realize that a QB's reaction time is something like 0.3 seconds, and it already takes them around 2.5 seconds to get the QB in the first place.

And because of that lessening importance, there needs to be an equal de-emphasis on the need to strengthen your pass rush when it comes to personnel moves.

And while the average O-line is going to allow a sack 6% of the time. For guys like Brees, Ryan, and Manning, and other elite QBs, that number drops to 3% of the time.

So essentially, Julius Peppers when he faces the Colts or the Falcons is half as effective as he would be against the Seahawks or Ravens. But how much less effective does Manning's presence make Charles Woodson? I'm certain it's not as much.

Everybody is talking about how the Patriots were foolish for not drafting an edge rusher this past April. But instead he drafted Ras-I Dowling in the 2nd round. And I'm starting to think the Belichick gets it.

I think I was listening to Rich Eisen's podcast and he had Peter King up there, and I recall King saying something about how it was a questionable move to pass on a pass rusher and take another DB, which was a head scratcher.

And if I'm in the same boat as Bill Belichick, then I probably shouldn't feel like I'm taking crazy pills with my zany theories...

You changed the conversation to its easier to get corners than good Defensive Ends........

Sure I'm fine with that, but those two pass rushers are in the Qb's head, and hitting his head....... Again you named mostly linebackers
that can change positions and take advantage of certain situations...... 2 Elite Defensive Ends are monsters....I really wish you'd have seen Claude Humphries, even in his prime I wouldn't call Abe great.........

Of course I agree the 7 back there are more important than 2 rushers, but what we call elite today is just good!!

I didn't change the conversation. The idea that good corners are easier to find than DEs has always been a key part of my "theory." It's always been corners are (pound for pound) more impactful than pass rushers, coupled with that it's easier to find good corners than it is good pass rushers, makes it so that teams should devote more resources to corners, and thus why they are more valuable to a defense.

And you just killed your entire argument Cyril. You keep saying how great having an elite pass rusher is, but admit that there are no elite pass rushers, so what's the point of pursuing 1 let alone 2 if you're not going to find any?

Pudge I didn't kill my argument; the NFL is always in an ebb and flow with certain positions including Qbs.... Many colleges are making guys who could be good at Defensive ends having them play
Offensive Tackle, and there are some good receivers who are being turned into corner backs.....

You suggest I'm set in my ways; but I know the NFL is always changing and the flavor of the year may be completely different next year.
An elite Defensive end changes games!! Pitts safety changes games too. When your Elite I think your a game changer!! I don't consider
many corners today elite Either.........End of my story, I want a pass rusher!!

You're right, there is an ebb and flow, but even when you had a down period with the talent influx of the QB positon in the late 90s/early 00s, it didn't affect whether or not the QB position was a less vital position, just that the emergence of the Trent Dilfer/Brad Johnson/Chris Chandler/Jake Delhomme/Kerry Collins "game manager" emerged as a viable option for many teams.

There may be a point in the future where there is a talent influx of DEs, but it still remains a 30+ year trend that sacks are going down in the NFL, you don't find as many dominant pass rushing teams in the league as you did decades ago.

That should not be confused with a 7-year lull, that's a 30-year trend. It's a little harder to brush that aside.

So you certainly can still consider that hitting a QB in the mouth is the best defense against him, when you factor in that he may only be getting hit in the mouth 10-20% less than he used to, something has to fill that void. And I think that void has been filled by secondary play, and thusly you have a 10-20% uptick for that area of your defense, which IMHO is enough to have it surpass the importance/value of the pass rush.

Don't construe my argument or theory to suggest that pass rush doesn't matter. It's just stating that if you take a corner of comparable skill to a pass rush of comparable skill, elite, bad, good, average, etc. the corner is going to have more value/impact to that defense than the pass rusher. That doesn't mean the pass rush lacks value/impact, just that he simply has less than the corner.

We always say the QB is the stabilizing force for any offensive unit, I think a similar thing should apply to the secondary and a defense.