Zero2Cool
15 years ago
Source Link 

If Aaron Rodgers continues his current sack pace, hell hold a prominent place in a club he doesnt want to join.[img_r]http://cdn.picapp.com/ftp/Images/4/7/c/1/18.JPG?adImageId=4469041&imageId=2531803[/img_r]

The Green Bay Packers quarterback has been sacked 31 times in the first seven games, which puts him on pace for 71 for the season. That would rank as the third-most sacks a quarterback has taken in NFL history, behind only Houstons David Carr (76 in 2002) and Philadelphias Randall Cunningham (72 in 05).

There are obvious reasons Rodgers doesnt want to rank high on that list: Sacks kill drives and expose quarterbacks to injuries.

But theres another reason. There are few good quarterbacks high on the list, and the first Pro Football Hall of Famer doesnt pop until John Elway in a tie for No. 72 overall (46 sacks in 1994).

Several factors go into sacks: pass protection, scheme and the quarterbacks ability to make quick decisions and throws. But in a nutshell, you can make a good argument that the best NFL quarterbacks generally compensate for bad offensive lines and can keep even relatively high sack numbers from getting out of hand.

Were talking about an athletic quarterback that makes a lot of plays with his feet, coach Mike McCarthy said this week when asked about Rodgers sacks. He ultimately also acknowledged: Thats the one area that has a red line under it, theres no question about it.

The biggest reason Rodgers leads the league in sacks Kansas Citys Matt Cassell is second (24) and Oaklands JaMarcus Russell is third (23) is the offensive line. Anyone who has watched the Packers knows its been a borderline disaster.

That said, according to the study of game replays by the Green Bay Press-Gazettes Tom Pelissero, Rodgers bears at least partial responsibility for 12 of those 31 sacks, and its hard to believe, as bad as this line has been, that it ranks among the handful of the worst since the NFL started keeping track of sacks in 1963 (the league didnt begin tracking sacks by individual defenders until 1982).

So while the protection problems probably will persist as the season goes on, its in Rodgers hands to mitigate the damage.

Another way to look at it is: How many of the 50 most-sacked quarterbacks in a season would the Packers be happy to have Rodgers be as good as?

Only a few.

Among that group, the best probably is the New York Giants Phil Simms, who is on it twice (55 sacks in 1984, 53 in 1988). Simms was an 11-year starter who finished his career with a 95-64 record and won a Super Bowl.

After him, its probably Cunningham, who is the surprise of the group because he rates along with Michael Vick as the best running quarterbacks in the modern NFL. Cunningham, who along with Reggie White revived the Eagles franchise in the mid-80s through early 90s, shows up four times in the top 50. His highest total came as a 23-year-old in 1986, when he shared the quarterback job with Ron Jaworski. The Eagles finished that season 5-10-1. In Cunninghams other three seasons among the top 50 all-time sack totals (1987, 92 and 90), the Eagles were a combined 27-16 in games he started. He also never went to a Super Bowl.

Following them are Mark Brunell (tied for No. 11 with 57 sacks in 01), Ron Jaworski (No. 23 with 53 in 1983) and Rich Gannon (tied for No. 41 with 49 in 1999), who was the ultimate late bloomer.

The rest of the list consists of quarterbacks who, while good enough to start in the league, are a mix of one-hit wonders and journeymen. Which in turn suggests their inability to avoid sacks was indication they lacked a key ingredient to succeed in the NFL.

The top 50 of the group, which is quarterbacks sacked at least 49 times, includes Carr, Ken OBrien, Neil Lomax, Tony Eason, Tim Couch, Jeff George, Jon Kitna, Steve Beuerlein, Tony Eason, Drew Bledsoe, Dave Krieg, Hugh Millen, Paul McDonald, Steve Bartkowski, Jake Plummer, Trent Green, Marc Bulger, Eric Hipple, Aaron Brooks and Rob Johnson.

If Rodgers finishes the season with at least 49 sacks, it doesnt mean his career is doomed. Simms, after all, is in the top 50 twice, and Cunningham is No. 2 overall. But it would raise a red flag.

Rodgers will need his sack rate to drop a little more than half in the last nine games to keep him under the 50-sack mark. Thats attainable. Sacks werent a problem in his first season as a starter (34 in 16 games last year), and hes mobile and a quick-twitch athlete. The Packers dont play Minnesota again the Vikings have 14 of Rodgers 31 sacks. And perhaps the return of Chad Clifton at left tackle and Mark Tauscher at right tackle will make a difference.

However, the Packers also have four games remaining against teams that rush the passer well and rank in the top half of the league in sacks percentage: Dallas (No. 16), Baltimore (No. 13), Pittsburgh (No. 9) and Seattle (No. 11). Dallas (DeMarcus Ware), Baltimore (Terrell Suggs) and Pittsburgh (James Harrison) all feature premier pass rushers.

When shown the list of single-season sack leaders, Rodgers said he didnt make much of it without knowing the teams records in those seasons, the quarterbacks passer ratings and interceptions.

Were they bad teams or protection issues? Rodgers said. Or were they Randall Cunningham, where hes an athletic guy, the second all-time single-season rushing yards for a quarterback? Was he trying to make plays, or was it schematic? We dont want to get sacked. Im trying to make a conscious effort, but trying to play at the same time the way Ive always played.

Rodgers also argued that sacks are better than interceptions, so quarterbacks who reduce sacks at the cost of more interceptions hurt their team. He has a point. Hes thrown only two interceptions, so hes not giving away points. In 2005, Brett Favre took only 24 sacks playing behind the Packers declining offensive line but also threw 29 interceptions.

And Rodgers argues there are times a sack has minimal cost, namely, on third downs if it doesnt take the team out of field-goal range. Last week against Minnesota, two of his sacks came on third downs, one before a made field goal, the other before a punt from five yards further back than if hed thrown the ball away.

You dont want to take sacks, Rodgers said. But do those hurt you in those situations? Id say no.

The one active quarterback who completely defies the numbers and is a consistent winner despite getting sacked frequently is Pittsburghs Ben Roethlisberger. In the past three seasons, hes been sacked 46, 47 and 46 times, yet the Steelers are 30-18 with one Super Bowl win over that time. Roethlisberger is notorious for holding the ball a long time, but at 6-foot-5 and 241 pounds his ability to shrug off potential sacks and make key plays compensates for the times hes unable to escape.

For the most part, the best NFL quarterbacks find a way to stay under 50 sacks, and the elite quarterbacks all have done it. Favres career-high in sacks was 40 in 1996, the year the Packers won the Super Bowl; Tom Brady, 41 in 2001; Elway, 46 in 1994; Steve Young, 48 in 1998; Troy Aikman, 39 in 1990; Joe Montana, 35 in 1985; and Peyton Manning, 23 in 2002.

So the balls in Rodgers hands, though McCarthy will be a factor as well.

Jim Hanifan, who was an assistant or head coach in the NFL for 41 years, was St. Louis head coach when his quarterback, Lomax, was sacked 61 times, which is good for seventh-most in league history. He was an offensive line coach by trade and says there are ways a play caller can help a quarterback even if there isnt much of a run game to help.

What you try to do is move the pocket for one thing, just dont be sitting back there, Hanifan said. Youre going to have some three-step drops and some five-step drops. I wouldnt even think about seven-step drops. Then Id do any way to get Aaron out of the pocket, that means sprint outs, bootlegs, all that stuff, get those screen passes going. Try to take the pressure off him.


UserPostedImage
longtimefan
15 years ago
At the game there were a few times I was screaming just run it!

Being in row 60 and off to the side you can really see a lot more of the field...so it was easy to see how wide open some running lanes were for him and he decided NOT to run...

I am okay with him not throwing it away (why?? I really do not know ) but when there is a running lane he needs to take it....that is what frustrates me the most.

What is odd is that he wasnt really like this last year..He has some times that he would hold onto it to long, but as the article states, his sacks were not that bad..


How long was it before Brett started to throw the ball out of bounds and the fans would cheer? 2 years?

Will it come to him? Or will he always be one to take the sack
RedSoxExcel
15 years ago
Wow, well researched and written article.

To me, I'd just like to see him throw it away more often when there is nothing. Like that 3rd down play, yeah it was third down but he was outside of the pocket by the side line and saw defender coming at him. Just throw it away, your not out of FG position but field position is important.

Its not a huge deal but that right there is one less sack for statistics AND your body. If he threw it away, sure it would hurt the all important QB rating but I'd rather have him with a QB rating of 104 or whatever instead of 110 but not take 7-8 yard losses.

But his ability to run with the ball should not be underestimated. He is a great athlete overall.
blank
agopackgo4
15 years ago
exactly, why hold onto it on a play where there is nothing and lose yards!? You will not throw a INT if you jack it 15 yards out of bounds. obviously
WhiskeySam
15 years ago
His attitude that there's nothing wrong with taking a sack really bothers me. He's lost 200 yards in sacks this season. Understanding when to throw the ball away and save your team field position is part of knowing how to manage a game. Every time he stands there holding the ball is one more time he can get hit and fumble or be injured more than he already is.
Nemo me impune lacessit
Stevetarded
15 years ago

His attitude that there's nothing wrong with taking a sack really bothers me. He's lost 200 yards in sacks this season. Understanding when to throw the ball away and save your team field position is part of knowing how to manage a game. Every time he stands there holding the ball is one more time he can get hit and fumble or be injured more than he already is.

"WhiskeySam" wrote:



That isn't his attitude so you don't have to be bothered.
blank
Zero2Cool
15 years ago

exactly, why hold onto it on a play where there is nothing and lose yards!? You will not throw a INT if you jack it 15 yards out of bounds. obviously

"agopackgo4" wrote:




It's that easy huh?

How about you go throw a football sometime and then tell us 😛


In theory, its easy. However there's intentional grounding that throws a wrench into the mix so you have to throw the ball near someone. While locating someone to throw the ball, that half second could get a defender close to you where he hits you, balls flies up, pick.

Or the ball jus slips out of your hand.

Or the ball gets caught in the wind an flies back into the field.


There's a lot more to throwing the ball away than just hitting a button that automatically throws it away.
UserPostedImage
WhiskeySam
15 years ago

His attitude that there's nothing wrong with taking a sack really bothers me. He's lost 200 yards in sacks this season. Understanding when to throw the ball away and save your team field position is part of knowing how to manage a game. Every time he stands there holding the ball is one more time he can get hit and fumble or be injured more than he already is.

"Stevetarded" wrote:



That isn't his attitude so you don't have to be bothered.

"WhiskeySam" wrote:



You might want to read this line again: You dont want to take sacks, Rodgers said. But do those hurt you in those situations? Id say no.

If your only option is taking a sack or throw the ball up for grabs, then yes take the sack. Too many times this year, Rodgers has had other options that hurt the team less and doesn't take them.

I haven't even touched on the fact he wanted to know about passer ratings which goes back to the point RedSox has been making in multiple threads about QBs needing to sacrifice their ratings for the benefit of the team.
Nemo me impune lacessit
Zero2Cool
15 years ago
Who wanted to know about passer ratings and when was this?
UserPostedImage
WhiskeySam
15 years ago

exactly, why hold onto it on a play where there is nothing and lose yards!? You will not throw a INT if you jack it 15 yards out of bounds. obviously

"Zero2Cool" wrote:




It's that easy huh?

How about you go throw a football sometime and then tell us 😛


In theory, its easy. However there's intentional grounding that throws a wrench into the mix so you have to throw the ball near someone. While locating someone to throw the ball, that half second could get a defender close to you where he hits you, balls flies up, pick.

Or the ball jus slips out of your hand.

Or the ball gets caught in the wind an flies back into the field.


There's a lot more to throwing the ball away than just hitting a button that automatically throws it away.

"agopackgo4" wrote:



That's only in the pocket. Out of the pocket, he can chuck it straight up the field out of bounds. And that's been the problem area. He's rolling out or stepping up in the pocket then not getting rid of the football.
Nemo me impune lacessit
Fan Shout
dfosterf (1h) : Nobody coming up with a keep, but at x amount
dfosterf (1h) : Trade, cut or keep
dfosterf (2h) : that from Jaire
dfosterf (2h) : My guess is the Packers floated the concept of a reworked contract via his agent and agent got a f'
Zero2Cool (2h) : Yes, and that is why I think Rob worded it how he did. Rather than say "agent"
dfosterf (2h) : Same laws apply. Agent must present such an offer to Jaire. Cannot accept or reject without presenting it
Zero2Cool (2h) : I'm thinking that is why Rob worded it how he did.
dfosterf (2h) : The Packers can certainly still make the offer to the agent
dfosterf (2h) : Laws of agency and definition of fiduciary responsibility
dfosterf (2h) : Jaire is open to a reduced contract without Jaire's permission
dfosterf (2h) : The agent would arguably violate the law if he were to tell the Packers
Zero2Cool (2h) : That someone ... likely the agent.
Zero2Cool (2h) : So, Jaire has not been offered nor rejected a pay reduction, but someone says he'd decline.
Zero2Cool (2h) : Demovksy says t was direct communication with someone familiar with Jaire’s line of thinking at that moment.
Zero2Cool (3h) : Demovsky just replied to me a bit ago. Jaire hasn't said it.
dfosterf (4h) : Of course, that depends on the definition of "we"
dfosterf (4h) : We have been told that they haven't because he wouldn't accept it. I submit we don't know that
dfosterf (4h) : What is the downside in making a calculated reduced offer to Jaire?
Zero2Cool (20h) : Packers are receiving interest in Jaire Alexander but a trade is not imminent
Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Jalen Ramsey wants to be traded. He's never happy is he?
Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : two 1sts in 2022 and two 2nd's in 2023 and 2024
Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Packers had fortunate last three drafts.
dfosterf (15-Apr) : I may have to move
dfosterf (15-Apr) : My wife just told the ancient Japanese sushi dude not enough rice under his fish
Zero2Cool (14-Apr) : I think a dozen is what I need
dfosterf (14-Apr) : Go fund me for this purpose just might work. A dozen nurses show up at 1265 to provide mental health assistance.
dfosterf (14-Apr) : Maybe send a crew of Angels to the Packers draft room on draft day.
Zero2Cool (14-Apr) : I am the Angel that gets visited.
dfosterf (14-Apr) : Visiting Angels has a pretty good reputation
Zero2Cool (14-Apr) : what
Martha Careful (14-Apr) : WINNING IT, not someone else losing it. The best victory though was re-uniting with his wife
Martha Careful (14-Apr) : The manner in which he won it was just amazing and wonderful. First blowing the lead then getting back, then blowing it. But ultimately
Zero2Cool (12-Apr) : I'm guessing since the thumb was broken, he wasn't feeling it.
dfosterf (10-Apr) : Looking for guidance. Not feeling the thumb.
Mucky Tundra (10-Apr) : If they knew about it or not
Mucky Tundra (10-Apr) : I don't recall that he did which is why I asked.
Zero2Cool (10-Apr) : Guessing they probably knew. Did he have cast or something on?
Mucky Tundra (10-Apr) : Did they know that at the time or was that something the realized afterwards?
Zero2Cool (9-Apr) : Van Ness played most of season with broken thumb
wpr (9-Apr) : yay
Zero2Cool (9-Apr) : Mark Murphy says Steelers likely to protect Packers game. Meaning, no Ireland
Zero2Cool (8-Apr) : Struggling to figure out what text editor options are needed and which are 'nice to have'
Mucky Tundra (8-Apr) : *CHOMP CHOMP CHOMP*
Zero2Cool (2-Apr) : WR who said he'd break Xavier Worthy 40 time...and ran slower than you
Mucky Tundra (2-Apr) : Who?
Zero2Cool (2-Apr) : Texas’ WR Isaiah Bond is scheduled to visit the Bills, Browns, Chiefs, Falcons, Packers and Titans starting next week.
Zero2Cool (2-Apr) : Spotting ball isn't changing, only measuring distance is, Which wasn't the issue.
Zero2Cool (2-Apr) : The spotting of the ball IS the issue. Not the chain gang.
Mucky Tundra (2-Apr) : Will there be a tracker on the ball or something?
Zero2Cool (1-Apr) : uh oh
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2024 Packers Schedule
Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
Eagles
Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
Titans
Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
Rams
Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
CARDINALS
Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
Jaguars
Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
Bears
Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
49ERS
Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
DOLPHINS
Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
Seahawks
Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
Vikings
Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Jan 12 @ 3:30 PM
Eagles
Recent Topics
3h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

15-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

13-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

12-Apr / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Zero2Cool

11-Apr / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Rockmolder

2-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

2-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

1-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

1-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

31-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

30-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

29-Mar / Random Babble / wpr

28-Mar / Random Babble / Martha Careful

26-Mar / Random Babble / Mucky Tundra

25-Mar / Random Babble / Martha Careful

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.