Question for people who know way more about Xs and Os than I do?

A sack is a bonus in the overall scheme of QB pressure. The main goal is to shorten the time a QB has to go through progressions. Making them throw early or have to move out of pocket. If they move left or right, it typically takes away a significant % of the field they can throw to.

Conversely, some sacks are more about coverage being good. And some are just good individual efforts. Not only do we run blitzes, but we also run stunts with 3 or 4 players that pressure O Line assignments.

Rushing 5 or more puts more pressure on the pass defense, but in theory, the coverage is based on taking away the faster developing routes. In a lot of cases, there is a void left in coverage. Tech was able to beat it a few times by throwing to the TE in the MLB void. The QB had to throw it over the blitzers who were coming but not too far to get the safety involved. He beat it a few times. In OT, we ran basically the same blitz and he didn’t have the time for the long drag route to develop (that they got us on earlier) and he basically threw it out of the back of the end zone. Not a sack, but the blitz helped us win the play.

Dan Jackson is the King of safety blitzers. He gets a jump on the snap and is full speed as the OL is starting to stand up and look around. He doesn't always get the sack but he makes the QB run for his life.

That his hit on King forcing the fumble going into the 2 min warning wasn't reviewed mercilessly for targeting is a miracle. He's been ejected for less.

Jacksons eyes were tracking the football which caused the duck. It was reviewed as all plays are.

Think that game is how all officiating should be, that it was called even and they let them play. We can point to a target on tech in the end zone, a roughing call that was waved off, and a bullshite pi in OT.

Agree.

Think the blitzing is in response to DL not good enough to win 1 on 1 up front.

But then you have games like Texas where they are super productive.

Chris Hayes has a great video on youtube that goes over the conflict buster was putting us in. He knew what we were doing and exploited the frick out of it. A running QB is kryptonite to Kirby's defense. Need to come up with answer to that in the off-season.

quote:

---

That his hit on King forcing the fumble going into the 2 min warning wasn't reviewed mercilessly for targeting is a miracle. He's been ejected for less.

---

I think the targeting rule is way overused. They need to add "malicious intent" to the definition.

Our D ends are crashing the middle due to poor tackling. This prevents us from setting the edge. Those guys should always keep that edge closed or “stay home”. Running QB’s and backs that cut back across the field end up going for chunk plays. I believe this is due to being beaten up across our front seven. I certainly don’t think Kirby misses it watching film.

quote:

---

Those guys should always keep that edge closed or “stay home”. Running QB’s and backs that cut back across the field end up going for chunk plays.

---

I remember one specifically in the tech game. The RB headed toward the right side and Chambliss turned up field instead of trailing the play behind the LOS. Then the RB reversed field and there was nobody home.

quote:

---

I remember one specifically in the tech game. The RB headed toward the right side and Chambliss turned up field instead of trailing the play behind the LOS. Then the RB reversed field and there was nobody home.

---

Something I don't recall a Dawg RB doing consistently since Swift.