Kazkal Posted October 3, 2005 Report Share Posted October 3, 2005 I saw alot of people on another thread saying they would rather have interceptions over sacks but what does it matter if their winning you the game?If it wasen't for justin,odell and davids sacks/fumbles we might not have won today Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scottishbengal Posted October 3, 2005 Report Share Posted October 3, 2005 Interceptions give you possession back, whilst sacks give the opponents another (albeit somewhat longer) opportunity. I'd take possession anytime, as the other team can't score if they don't have the ball. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JungleFanatic Posted October 3, 2005 Report Share Posted October 3, 2005 I saw alot of people on another thread saying they would rather have interceptions over sacks but what does it matter if their winning you the game?If it wasen't for justin,odell and davids sacks/fumbles we might not have won todayTrue,on the other hand if not for the penalties on our guys it could have been the blowout most of us assumed it would be. Personally I like the INT's more myself But it sure is nice to see the opposing QB being pummeled into the ground by the Bengal D!Interception = drive killer(Our ball,lock n load Carson)Sack = play killer(possible drive killer or possible TD pass next play)In any event I'm thrilled we're 4-0 and can't wait til next sunday night! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC_Bengals_Fan Posted October 3, 2005 Report Share Posted October 3, 2005 I like pressure. Period.Sacks (by definition) come from pressure on the QB. But so do picks, actually. You won't often see a decent QB throw a pick when he's unhurried.So to me, I want a lot of pressure on the QB, if they don't sack him he'll make mistakes anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Columbusbengal Posted October 3, 2005 Report Share Posted October 3, 2005 I was interested in TJ's take on this - he pointed out that the Texans had two weeks to watch all the Bengals interceptions and altered their game plan to avoid them by having Carr hold on to the ball a bit longer before he threw it. Unfortunately for him, our DC adjusted to take advantage of the Texans number one weakness (OL) and was ready with the sacks as an alternative to the interceptions. It's so cool to have a great DC and players who can adjust smoothly to a defensive game plan. Of course, one of these games we will come across a team with BOTH a good OL and a savy QB. There aren't a lot of those on the schedule, but we do have Indy and KC. Fortunately, at least KC doesn't have a defense Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Next_Big_Thing Posted October 3, 2005 Report Share Posted October 3, 2005 Sacks tend to lead to turnovers. The pressure makes the QB make mistakes, and the hits dislodge the ball. Take your pick, potential for a fumble or an interception. The pressure makes a diference.I'll take having our D play like they are any day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lita Posted October 3, 2005 Report Share Posted October 3, 2005 Well, interceptions are always better than sacks, of course.. an immediate turn-over isn't something you can argue with. So, if it was a hard schedual and I had to choose between my team getting interceptions or sacks, I'd pick interceptions. No, it doesn't matter so long as we're winning, but we can't expect for this to happen so regularly.Of course, we still have lots of both of those things, so nobody can complain... but staying on topic, interceptions turn the tide of any game faster than a sack. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrishcovga Posted October 3, 2005 Report Share Posted October 3, 2005 Sacks tend to lead to turnovers. The pressure makes the QB make mistakes, and the hits dislodge the ball. Take your pick, potential for a fumble or an interception. The pressure makes a diference.I'll take having our D play like they are any day.Same here, The turnovers are vital , but nothing wrong with padding the sack stats. A dominant defense usually averages about 3 sacks a game, along with 2-3 turnovers. We may not be there yet, but with some defensive line help next year, No more achilles heel run defense.* Oh and for the " Controversial " fumble by Carr, The Refs owed us that one!! Palmers' grounding call, T.J's pass interference call, and Scott Kooistra's holding call ( the worst one by the way ) more than enough deserved a 50/50 shot in our favor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HairOnFire Posted October 3, 2005 Report Share Posted October 3, 2005 Sacks are overrated, and most defensive lineman will admit it. Most sacks don't result in a major loss of yardage, and if the sack doesn't occur on 3rd down the result is simply a blown up play of no more importance than a defended pass, a tipped ball, or a simple incompletion. Steady relentless pressure is always going to create more impact than a boom-or-bust blitz heavy pass rush that produces more sacks but surrenders more big offensive plays. Sacks and interceptions are linked in the sense that you rarely get one without the other, but when defending the pass job one for any defensive lineman is timing the play...dictating when the ball has to be thrown. Everything else is gravy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
San Antonio Bengal Posted October 3, 2005 Report Share Posted October 3, 2005 Sacks are essentially the same thing as a 5 yard/loss of down penalty. Only if the QB fumbles because of the sack (see yesterday's game), is the sack worth the value of an interception. By the way, you should have heard the broadcasters on the Texans network when the fumble happened. I don't know how many times they said "His arm was going forward," but it was many more than I could count. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kazkal Posted October 3, 2005 Author Report Share Posted October 3, 2005 Well I just remember seeing alot of people complaining wheres the pass rush (though you can get it with out sacks) then we have high sacks and they still seem not to be happy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stripes Posted October 3, 2005 Report Share Posted October 3, 2005 Anyone in their right mind would take an interception over a sack. Sacks are always nice to see, and the pressure can lead to turnovers as previously mentioned. Other than that, sacks are only used as a measuring stick on Pro Bowl ballots and small gains in field position.I will take either one, because both give me fantasy points. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobcat Bengal Posted October 3, 2005 Report Share Posted October 3, 2005 Anyone in their right mind would take an interception over a sack. Sacks are always nice to see, and the pressure can lead to turnovers as previously mentioned. Other than that, sacks are only used as a measuring stick on Pro Bowl ballots and small gains in field position.Hear ye Hear ye. I dunno if you can return a "sack" for a TD.INT's result in immediate possession of the ball, as well as an opportunity to put points on the board.Now unless a QB fumbles the sack and a Defensive player scoops it up and rumbles towards the endzone for a score, INT's are much more valuable than sacks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kazkal Posted October 3, 2005 Author Report Share Posted October 3, 2005 I rather =P have both the point of the post was people were bitching when we dident get high sacks and they still are when we do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.