Pass Prevention Predicament

by Specific on Jan 12, 2012 7:22 PM CST

The Cowboys and almost all of the fans find themselves in a little predicament, how to fix this bad defense. There's a lot of finger pointing going on, almost as much as on the field with Ryan's scheme (I keed, I keed). I want to find out what the big weakness is, once and for all. OCC has already done a bit of digging on the pass rush, and I'm going to provide just a little different spin on it. If you're one of those people still thinks a bad defense can't have a good pass rush, take the jump.

To begin, let's take a look at the rankings for one of the most important stats for both offenses and defenses, Net Yards per Attempt. As we all know this is a passing league, and preventing the pass is what your defense needs to do. FiTaT has been a strong advocate for this stat and here is more or less why...

Team/Rank	NY/A	Team/Rank	PA
Steelers	4.9	Steelers	227
Texans	5.2	49ers	229
Ravens	5.4	Ravens	266
Bengals	5.8	Texans	278
Lions	5.9	Browns	307
Jets	5.9	Dolphins	313
Titans	5.9	Seahawks	315
Browns	5.9	Titans	317
49ers	5.9	Bengals	323
Cardinals	6.0	Eagles	328
Average Team	6.3	Average Team	354.9

Out of the top ten teams in NY/A, 7 also rank in the top ten in points allowed. I think this pretty accurately shows the correlation between controlling passing and limiting points. 6 of these teams made the playoffs.

Now let's look at the top 10 teams in pass rushing. We'll be looking at percentages of passing attempts versus pass rush.

Team/Rank	Sack%	Team/Rank	QBHit%
Eagles	8.8	Texans	16.1
Vikings	8.5	Bengals	15.9
Ravens	8.2	Eagles	14.6
Bengals	7.7	Cowboys	14.0
Texans	7.6	Ravens	13.9
Giants	7.5	Rams	13.7
Redskins	7.5	Dolphins	13.2
Rams	7.5	Vikings	12.8
Cowboys	7.2	Giants	12.8
Broncos	7.1	Broncos	11.8

As you can see, every sack % leader also ranked top 10 in QB hits %, except for one. Its kind of obvious but I had to show you. If you're sacking the quarterback a lot, chances are you're getting hits on him a lot too. I think its fair to say this list of the top 10 pass rushing teams is accurate. So, ladies and gentlemen, the Cowboys really did have a top 10 pass rush.

I don't have all the stats for secondaries. Targets/Allowed Receptions are hard to come by, I've looked. So, in order to gauge how well a team's secondary helped them, I'm going to keep it really simple. Completion %.

Team/Rank	Cmp%
Texans	51.9
Ravens	53.8
Raiders	53.9
Jets	54.2
Steelers	54.5
Browns	56.5
Chiefs	56.6
49ers	57.5
Saints	57.8
Eagles	58.1

Anyone look familiar? Now, with all of this data, I can draw a few conclusions about a team's secondary.

If you were top 10 in NY/A, top 10 in completion %, but not top ten in pass rush, you had a good secondary.
If you were top 10 in NY/A, top 10 in Completion %, and top ten in pass rush, you probably had a good secondary.
If you weren't top 10 in NY/A or completion %, but were top 10 in pass rush, you had a bad secondary.

Guess which category the Cowboys fall under? We are in the same boat the Vikings are in. They've got Jared Allen the sack leader, but could not stop the pass. To illustrate the point of pass rush vs. secondary, look at the Jets. They had an average pass rush this year, but still ranked 6th in NY/A. That screams that they had a good secondary. The Raiders are another example of this.

But maybe Completion % doesn't float your boat, I understand, so I will make a couple of quick comparisons. Lets find out the number of completions the secondary didn't allow (without the influence of the pass rush). So, we've got 545 attempts minus the 336 completions which gives us 209. Now let's take out the sacks and hits we mustered, leaving 78 incompletions that were not influenced by the pass rush (QB 'pressures' aside). That's about 14% of passing attempts that were incompletions that you could say our secondary had the biggest hand in.

Alrighty, lets first take a look at what the Viking's secondary's percentage is, since I suspect they have as bad a secondary as ours (or worse). 7.8% incompletions attributed to their secondary... ouch. Ok, now lets compare that to a team who also has a good pass rush, but whom I suspect also has an average to above average secondary, the Texans. 20% of their incompletions can be attributed to their secondary.

It's hard to tell if a team had a bad secondary, but such a good pass rush it doesn't matter. It isn't hard to tell however, whether a team had such a bad secondary, it's good pass rush didn't matter. That's exactly where the Cowboys are. The whole point of this is to show that the pass rush did its job. Is the pass rush going to do its job every down? No, nor will anyone else's. Its the secondary that didn't do their job.

I will say that a good pass rush is more effective than a good secondary. It's just that your secondary has to not suck so bad that it negates what your pass rush is doing.

So, you tell me which part of the defense needs more help.

Another user-created commentary provided by a BTB reader.

Tweet Comment 37 comments | 6 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Well this is obvious our secondary is shit.

But our d line is too at the moment good right up.

by Sado44 on Jan 12, 2012 7:37 PM CST via mobile reply actions

Dline

I say Dline, just for the fact that the giants have a great Dline and average secondary. You get a good pass rush going and the qb can’t stand back there and pick you apart.

by It's Our Deztiny88 on Jan 12, 2012 7:44 PM CST reply actions

Thats the thing though...

I don’t think we can comfortably say we have even an average secondary

by Specific on Jan 12, 2012 7:53 PM CST up reply actions

THIS!

Give us an average secondary and Ware (and, yes, even Spencer) will look better.

by boyman on Jan 13, 2012 2:27 PM CST up reply actions

Our secondary sucks except for Jenkins. Can we turn it around?

The answer is yes to a degree. If we can land a safety in FA like Griffin and get Minnefield(or Janoris if he falls) in the second to play opposite Jenkins, the secondary by default has to improve. I still think shoring up the OL with DeCastro, if he’s there at #14, and signing Grubbs or Nicks in FA, is the surest way to make us competetive with the Saints and the Pack. I really don’t think our D except for the secondary is that bad. If we are lucky in the third we might find a decent DE or NT, ?Chapman of Bama, or a serviceable OLB to help Spencer and Butler.

Wish you were here and comfortably numb.

by pfloyd1 on Jan 12, 2012 8:23 PM CST reply actions

But we may not ever play the Saints & Pack

If we don’t find a way to stop Hakeem Nicks, Victor Cruz, DeSean Jackson, Jeremy Maclin, et al there’s a good chance we may not have to worry about matching up well with NO and Pack.

Our secondary has too many holes to fill to not adress in draft AND FA. Also, Mike Jenkins is up after 2012. I would love to make our oline elite as well but a back end that could help our D get off the field or, God forbid, score defensive points helps our Offensive in another way.

I orginally wanted pass rush out of #14 but I’m being statistically brow beaten into thinking it will get better with a better secondary. Now, if the board falls right, I would like DeCastro at 14 and CB in 2nd, with maybe slight move up in 2nd to target the CB they really want.

Together, we WILL make it happen!

by nikeorlipstick on Jan 13, 2012 9:28 AM CST up reply actions

Here's where I'm concerned with saying the Seconday Needs the Most Help

Premise: High Completion Percentage means Secondary Needs Help:

I’m not sure if I can buy that. Picture a QB getting pressured and hurrying to get the ball to his receivers downfield. He throws into double coverage: A the pass gets batted down. B it gets intercepted. Although I might buy that incompetent Defensive Backs will still allow the Ball to be completed

Other Premise: Sack% Determines the competency of a Pass Rush

Here’s what Neil Hornsby from PFF said about Sack Statistics:

The point is that sacks are only a minor subset of pressure. Last season, across the league, they accounted for only 16 percent of all pressure when hits and pressure on the QB are included. A hit is when a QB is knocked down but not sacked and a pressure is when a QB is forced to move in the pocket in some other way than simply stepping up into it to throw.

So what does pressure do to a QB? Well, when pressured or hit, a player’s QB rating is reduced by an average of 37 points. That’s the equivalent of turning Peyton Manning into Brad Johnson on every single play involving pressure. Interestingly, while it’s great for the team, sacking a QB doesn’t alter the opposing quarterback’s rating.

I'm not saying Tony Romo is the reincarnation of the mythical Romulus. I'm just saying

by NYHorn on Jan 12, 2012 8:25 PM CST reply actions

Premise 1: So you’re telling me the pass rush of the Jets and Raiders was good enough to help out their secondary, but not good enough to be above-average in sacks or hits?

Premise 2: Thats why I added QB hits as well, perhaps you didn’t see it. I didn’t have pressure data. But, if you showed me that you can be top 10 in sacks and hits, but be below average in ‘pressures’, I will eat my hat.

by Specific on Jan 12, 2012 8:42 PM CST up reply actions

Ah didn't see the pressure statistics my bad

As to your point towards premise 1 that’s not exactly what I said.

There are discernible ways of determining the difference between a good pass rush and a good coverage team. I just don’t believe that completion percentage is the only way of doing it. Perhaps Lack of QB Hits and Pressures + a low completion percentage.

So pretty much I’m agreeing with you, just in a completely contradictory way:

I'm not saying Tony Romo is the reincarnation of the mythical Romulus. I'm just saying

by NYHorn on Jan 12, 2012 8:47 PM CST up reply actions

No, its not the only way, just the most convenient

I could have gone way way way omfg way in depth with it, but I had already spent a lot of time counting team by team, player by player the QB Hits (because stat sites are retarded).

If you take the pass attempts and subtract sacks, hits, and pressures (if available), AND subtract completions, you’d have the number of incompletions that were not influenced by the pass rush. That would be the number you could ‘safely’ attribute to the secondary.

by Specific on Jan 12, 2012 9:27 PM CST up reply actions

I updated the article with a couple of those

by Specific on Jan 12, 2012 10:10 PM CST up reply actions

Thanks for the update.

I’d also mention one other factor when you look at those percentages of incompletions not influenced by the pass rush: quarterback accuracy. We’ve played some truly terrible quarterbacks who routinely overthrow completely open receivers.

This doesn’t speak directly to our rush vs. secondary, but it does make me think that secondary success is actually incompletions minus sacks/ hits minus stupid throws (or stupid drops). Perhaps this averages out (we did play Brady and Manning, although not Rodgers or Brees), but I’d guess that our overall quality of qb opponent this year wasn’t that good. We may be closer to the Vikings than you’d think.

by boyman on Jan 13, 2012 2:48 PM CST up reply actions

Not trying to be antagonistic

As I said last post, I actually agree with your article. Most of my complaints came from a quick read.

I'm not saying Tony Romo is the reincarnation of the mythical Romulus. I'm just saying

by NYHorn on Jan 13, 2012 12:55 PM CST up reply actions

the common denominator that the pats, saints, packers have is they generate turnovers by the defense…gotta get more turnovers …period…and the stats say they are the worst defenses…ha…the best defenses create turnovers

by 0k on Jan 12, 2012 10:45 PM CST reply actions

How do you prepose we draft for turnovers?

by Specific on Jan 13, 2012 12:02 AM CST up reply actions

If the stats say they are the worst defenses, maybe you should look at some different stats.

by Nassau Cowboy on Jan 13, 2012 7:42 AM CST up reply actions

But how many of those are interceptions late in games when heir offenses have built huge leads?

Lotsa turnovers by the D can often be a sign of a dominating offense that forces teams to throw.
Wait for it…………………………
Yes! I checked, and indeed the Packers, Pats, and saints DO have dominating offenses!

So, build the OL first. Always. It’s the foundation of a football team, and that includes the defense.
It’s amazing how much a defense benefits from and offense with a dominant OL.

Pessimists say the cup is half-empty, while optimists say it's half-full. Well, the real question is, is it a good beer? Realist Larry, 2011

by Realist Larry on Jan 14, 2012 11:49 PM CST up reply actions

Actually the Packers have a HoF quality CB who's leading the NFL in INTs.

- The Saints actually had a negative turnover ratio, which came back to bite them as we saw yesterday.

- The 49ers, who beat the Saints, have two Pro Bowl DBs and a ridiculous, league leading +28 turnover ratio despite not having much of an offense.

- The Ravens have a HoF quality safety and at least one CB drafted in the first round.

-The Giants have two CBs drafted in the first round and another in the second.

-The Broncos had a negative turnover ratio mostly due to their offense but Pro Bowl and likely future HoF CB Champ Bailey was a big part of their success.

-The Steelers had a negative turnover ratio but made it as far as they did in large part because they have a HoF quality safety.

-The Bengals have 4 CBs taken in the first round and a S taken in the first round.

-Even the Falcons have a CB who made the Pro Bowl last year complementing a first round pick on the other side.

- Three of the Lions’ 4 primary starting DBs are second round picks, as was at least one of their back ups.

Every playoff team has at least some measure of quality in its secondary. By contrast, as things stand now (assuming Newman’s gone), the Cowboys are projected to start a former first round pick who’s been inconsistent and a fifth round pick at CB, with a seventh round pick backing them up, and a fifth round pick and undrafted FA at S. Their backups are mostly undrafted FAs.

Upgrading CB is the priority. I could support going elsewhere like O-line first round, but only if the CB need is addressed in free agency.

by krl97a on Jan 15, 2012 4:19 PM CST up reply actions

I'll add that even the Saints have CBs drafted in the first and second round, a safety drafted in the first, and a two time Pro Bowl SS drafted in the second.

by krl97a on Jan 15, 2012 4:27 PM CST up reply actions

And...

Even the Patriots, maybe the worst of the bunch, complement a first round CB who made the Pro Bowl last year with a very high second round S.

by krl97a on Jan 15, 2012 7:45 PM CST up reply actions

The Ryan D was confusing

many times I saw players that did not know where they should be etc.

I hope with a full off season and a few more players that fit what Ryan wants to do this D will greatly improve.

As the stats show it wasn’t too bad but just not good enough.

by TCB Orange Dino on Jan 13, 2012 12:18 AM CST reply actions

I seem to recall some of those usual suspects being confused in Wade’s vanilla D as well.

Sometimes it’s not the scheme.

by Nassau Cowboy on Jan 13, 2012 7:34 AM CST up reply actions

Granted, but. . . .

any accountability (including finding out who will learn the scheme and who needs to be out on their butt) requires an off-season in order to teach (to those who will learn) as well as winnow out (those who will not learn). All of which is to say that two rookie coaches (JG and Ryan) without a true off-season are hard to evaluate. All of which is to say that there is a tiny ray of hope that coaching can make a difference (but hasn’t had a chance to yet).

But of course the more likely scenario is that coaching won’t make a difference and that it will take at least two more drafts before this defense doesn’t stink.

by boyman on Jan 13, 2012 2:31 PM CST up reply actions

Thanks for once more looking at evidence

rather than simply blaming every completed pass on our pass rush.

Everyone keeps saying that the rush determines he secondary, and to some degree that’s true: give him all day and the corners won’t be able to cover; put him on his butt and the corners won’t have to cover. But that’s simplistic and we all know it. No pass rush is so magical that the opposing quarterback can never throw the ball. Many quarterbacks have a BETTER rating against blitz than against non-blitz downs. Why? Because the holes in the coverage count for as much as the guys trying to knock the quarterback down.

I actually believe in this pass rush. I have yet to see a sober statistic that says we are anything other than top-10. If we get any real opportunities to get even better, go for it! Otherwise, quit whining and improve the rest of the team. Don’t keep poking at one of our more successful units with ridiculously subjective arguments, like “yeah but on some downs they don’t get a sack” or “half the sacks don’t really count” or “we have the best sacker in the league so our top-10 pass rush doesn’t really count” or “when our two best defenders are hurt we don’t generate as much push as when they’re healthy, boo hoo!”

by boyman on Jan 13, 2012 2:41 PM CST reply actions

I suppose you could use this same analysis to judge our offense

Is our weak link the offensive line or our qb/receivers. The obvious answer is offensive line, but out of curiosity would your analysis show that?

by BigE on Jan 13, 2012 3:56 PM CST reply actions

Well the offensive line would be judged on how much pass rush got to tony. Receivers are way harder to talk about. There’s no stay for ,catchable’ balls or bad route running

by Specific on Jan 13, 2012 10:33 PM CST via mobile up reply actions

Sorry, no stat

by Specific on Jan 14, 2012 2:36 AM CST up reply actions

this is good stuff man.

you’ve sold me a little on the secondary being the greater issue.

i’d say this though. Rat will be 31. Ware will be 30. That’s your pass rush. those will also be the hardest yards, the hardest guys to replace.

it’d be negligent not to start planning for their replacement.

For God and country - Geronimo

by Fan in Thick and Thin on Jan 13, 2012 6:03 PM CST reply actions

FiTaT,

every time I wonder why you just don’t see something that I see, you come around. (Conversely, of course, you convince me of lots of things that I didn’t see before you did.)

The question when it comes to “planning for replacement” is exactly what that means. For Rat, we’ve got at least one up-and-comer at NT, don’t we? And we’ve been pretty steadily churning people that we hope might be surprise gems at the rush. The real question is how you plan to replace a monster like Ware. We missed Von Miller; who else is worth trying for?

I actually look at this stuff more from a fan’s point of view than a GM’s. It’s Jerry’s problem (well, JG’s) to find the next Ware. My “job” as a fan is to realistically enjoy what we’ve got, and to get in the face of anyone who picks on my team where it’s actually doing just fine. (And of course to moan about areas where it isn’t doing just fine.) Some of you, who followed the Cowboys during the Ellis days (long story, but I wasn’t) can also do the classic fan “reminiscing” about the great 2-headed rush that was. But the story I’ll be telling my kids is about the years Dallas had a monster rusher, a Pro-Bowl nose tackle, and some other pretty decent linemen (including Spencer)—and strove to overcome a truly awful secondary.

by boyman on Jan 13, 2012 6:39 PM CST up reply actions

Thanks

Isn’t TNew like 35? While we are all anticipating the pass rush declining, the fact is, when it will decline is an unknown. The secondary being bad is very much a known already

by Specific on Jan 14, 2012 2:35 AM CST up reply actions

Great post.

I made a similar argument in response to one of those pass rush only pieces, though obviously nowhere near as fleshed out. One question though: Are you sure sacks are counted as attempts by your source? Because I think they’re usually separate, and you have to add them to calculate things like sack percentage.

by krl97a on Jan 13, 2012 8:41 PM CST reply actions

Yeah, all sacks occur on passing attempts and they aren't subtracted

by Specific on Jan 13, 2012 10:31 PM CST via mobile up reply actions

I ask because....

Pro Football Reference lists 545 attempts against the Cowboys but they explicitly list sacks separately. You can see this in both the formula they give to calculate sack percentage and by the way rushes, passing attempts, and sacks add up to exactly give their total plays number.

by krl97a on Jan 14, 2012 1:42 PM CST up reply actions

Looks like it's the same on the NFL site.

by krl97a on Jan 14, 2012 1:52 PM CST up reply actions

Ah, I see, you're right

I was using PFR, The percentages should be roughly the same. I’ll look at it later. Thanks

by Specific on Jan 14, 2012 2:17 PM CST up reply actions

I don't think it is an either or proposition. Both need work.

Improving one will probably not be felt greatly if the other isn’t improved as well.

However, what hasn’t been discussed at all are the measures the Cowboys have taken to have a top ten pass rush. I don’t have the data but I would be interested to see if we have to rush significantly more people to get a top pass rush compared to other teams. If we do (and I wouldn’t be surprised with Rob Ryan’s tendencies for exotic blitzes), perhaps that explains the difference. If we blitz more often it would explain why our pass rush may be better than it appears and why teams can still easily complete passes against us at times. Blitzing exotically may work against Tavaris Jackson, but needless to say against Eli Manning the true value of a pass rush for a defense comes from being able to generate pressure with 3 or 4 guys. I also wouldn’t be shocked if our blitzing explains this result since this is the same trap that Wade Phillips fell into for us last year. A bad secondary with a pass rush that requires blitzing to get pressure = a bad defense.

If I had a nickel for every Super Bowl the Eagles have won, I would have zero nickels.

by Creasy729 on Jan 15, 2012 8:22 PM CST reply actions