Which is more important, rushing the QB or defending the pass?

[Wunder.Noid]

I'm trying to help. Maybe I lack the credentials. Probably so. I think I admitted my lack of experience within the college football envelope. I never advanced that far. I simply want consideration for things I do know. Nobody else knew the relative proficiency of the Western Athletic Conference. I do because I researched it
40% compared to 70%. Southeastern Conference. That's essential information.

I don't know why but I like you as a poster/character.

It's probably because I only read the first sentence or so before moving on...

 

[CollegeFBFan2021]

I don't know why but I like you as a poster/character.

It's probably because I only read the first sentence or so before moving on...

If you don't read you won't learn. Not that anything I think, say or do necessarily matters. I'm talking about life in general. I'm giving you good advice. I've lived long enough to notice how little people know. Not excluding myself. Don't read, dont learn. It might seem like a wonderful way to live life but I'm inclined to think it might not work out too well for you in the long-term. My point is there are things everyone ought to know. I'm inclined to believe I know a few things. I share those things yo make people smarter.
You say you like me. Thank you but I'd rather you didn't and got educated. Not to suggest you aren't intelligent. But don't remain static.

 

[batchaps4me]

If you don't read you won't learn. Not that anything I think, say or do necessarily matters. I'm talking about life in general. I'm giving you good advice. I've lived long enough to notice how little people know. Not excluding myself. Don't read, dont learn. It might seem like a wonderful way to live life but I'm inclined to think it might not work out too well for you in the long-term. My point is there are things everyone ought to know. I'm inclined to believe I know a few things. I share those things yo make people smarter.
You say you like me. Thank you but I'd rather you didn't and got educated. Not to suggest you aren't intelligent. But don't remain static.

Getting back o the topic, let me see if I can help a bit. An elite CB/DB can affect only one receiver's chances to get open per play. An elite pass rusher affects everyone's chance to get open. Keep in mind that throwing on time is extremely important as the pass lanes/windows are generally small and limited. An elite pass rusher can prevent any deep plays from developing, make the QB throw before/after the window is open, force the QB to move his feet and be less accurate on the throws, block the passing lane so the throw cannot be completed and make the QB "feel" heat and move when there is no pressure and/or rush his throws. Once this happens, it frees up extra defenders to play coverage therefore opening up the D's playbook to different coverages. From Toy Bowl to the NFL, football is a line of scrimmage game.

 

[CollegeFBFan2021]

Getting back o the topic, let me see if I can help a bit. An elite CB/DB can affect only one receiver's chances to get open per play. An elite pass rusher affects everyone's chance to get open. Keep in mind that throwing on time is extremely important as the pass lanes/windows are generally small and limited. An elite pass rusher can prevent any deep plays from developing, make the QB throw before/after the window is open, force the QB to move his feet and be less accurate on the throws, block the passing lane so the throw cannot be completed and make the QB "feel" heat and move when there is no pressure and/or rush his throws. Once this happens, it frees up extra defenders to play coverage therefore opening up the D's playbook to different coverages. From Toy Bowl to the NFL, football is a line of scrimmage game.

I actually was saying the line (guards, tackles) were instrumental. Maybe I wasn't clear on thst point. But I'm still saying it's about the formation. Line backers can stack the line or drop back in coverage.
Meaning it isn't quite as simple as 'which is a better formation'?. I remember Buddy Ryan ran a 4-3 for the Chicago Bears. Super Bears.
That's sort of what it means to stack the line in professional football since there more typically are as many as four LBs. Giving the defense more flexibility and possibly making it a zone defensive pass coverage. Defensive backs at least as I understand them to be, unless it's a string safety, don't typically rush the passer. Then there is a safety blitz or a stunt by a linebacker, through the line. But those are strategies, mostly. When I was in grade school sometimes we ran stunts. Those were pretty fun. It was a way to penetrate the line and make a big play. But the greater point would appear to me to be putting people in the right position. Regardless if which strategy is implemented.

 

[batchaps4me]

I actually was saying the line (guards, tackles) were instrumental. Maybe I wasn't clear on thst point. But I'm still saying it's about the formation. Line backers can stack the line or drop back in coverage.
Meaning it isn't quite as simple as 'which is a better formation'?. I remember Buddy Ryan ran a 4-3 for the Chicago Bears. Super Bears.
That's sort of what it means to stack the line in professional football since there more typically are as many as four LBs. Giving the defense more flexibility and possibly making it a zone defensive pass coverage. Defensive backs at least as I understand them to be, unless it's a string safety, don't typically rush the passer. Then there is a safety blitz or a stunt by a linebacker, through the line. But those are strategies, mostly. When I was in grade school sometimes we ran stunts. Those were pretty fun. It was a way to penetrate the line and make a big play. But the greater point would appear to me to be putting people in the right position. Regardless if which strategy is implemented.

The flaw in your perspective is that with an elite pass rush you do not need to stack the line and that frees up 2-4 extra defensive players to be in coverage. In zone coverages, this makes the zones smaller ... so the throwing window is smaller both in physical space and more importantly, time. If man coverage it allows for doubles and bracketing receivers. Blitzing is high risk-reward and an elite pass rush is just high reward while reducing the risks of a big play. An elite DB may be able to lock down his side of the field whereas an elite pass rusher can lock down the entire field.

Two things about your example of Ryan's D. For starter, it was a 46 not a 43. There was at least 8 in the box at all times with three DBs. The rules of the game has changed, so much in fact that the 46 is as obsolete as the wishbone in NCAA and NFL. In those days, the WRs and QBs could literally be mugged without penalty. The NCAA/NFL were run first leagues at the time and the rules have changed that.

 

[CollegeFBFan2021]

The flaw in your perspective is that with an elite pass rush you do not need to stack the line and that frees up 2-4 extra defensive players to be in coverage. In zone coverages, this makes the zones smaller ... so the throwing window is smaller both in physical space and more importantly, time. If man coverage it allows for doubles and bracketing receivers. Blitzing is high risk-reward and an elite pass rush is just high reward while reducing the risks of a big play. An elite DB may be able to lock down his side of the field whereas an elite pass rusher can lock down the entire field.

Two things about your example of Ryan's D. For starter, it was a 46 not a 43. There was at least 8 in the box at all times with three DBs. The rules of the game has changed, so much in fact that the 46 is as obsolete as the wishbone in NCAA and NFL. In those days, the WRs and QBs could literally be mugged without penalty. The NCAA/NFL were run first leagues at the time and the rules have changed that.

I wasn't trying to promote a particular defense. I was just telling you how things were when I was a kid. It's been a long time since I was a kid. But I remember elements.
It would seem to me the fewer people on the line, as far as a defensive formation, the better to protect the pass coverage. As far as assignments go, I doubt I could remember my assignment, but occasionally I managed to make it into the backfield. Rarely was I able to engage the quarterback. He's almost like a sitting duck. St least that's my recollection. I think it would be better to put a shirt on the quarterback. He's too vulnerable. And I don't agree with blindside attacks, under pressure. There ought to be a rule prohibiting that sort of pressure. It seems unfair to put a person in jeopardy, simply because he's a football player. When I was injured it was because they didn't protect the quarterback. He was vulnerable.
I have mixed opinions about the sport. I think they should safe guard players from injury. It can be fun but it's not worth being hurt. It took me a long time to recover. A year. Too long for my taste. No I can't say I particularly enjoyed playing football. But there were a few things I guess we're o.k.

 

[OldDevilDawg]

What do you mean? It's called a 4-2-5 defensive formation. I think it's used exclusively against the spread. Don't fucking patronize me asswipe. Seriously.

OK so here it is. Gary Patterson's 4-2-5 defensive playbook.

1999 TCU 4-2-5 Defense - Gary Patterson - DC.pdf - Google Drive

If you will notice, he doesn't always have 4 down linemen. He doesn't always have 2 linebackers. He doesn't always have 5 defensive backs. It depends on a few things. Down and distance. Opposing offensive scheme. The score. Lots of other things can affect the position of the defensive players on the field. It can change every down.

Does TCU run a "base" 4-2-5? Yes. But it doesn't look like a generic 4-2-5 every down. Same applies to a 4-3 defense and a 3-4 defense. All of them can resemble the others at any time during any game.

The point I was trying to make was that positioning of players on a defense is subject to many factors. It's a fluid situation throughout every game you watch.

If you didn't understand the point I was trying to make. I apologize. Apparently I didn't state it clearly. That doesn't make me "patronizing", nor does it make me an "asswipe".

 

[CollegeFBFan2021]

OK so here it is. Gary Patterson's 4-2-5 defensive playbook.

1999 TCU 4-2-5 Defense - Gary Patterson - DC.pdf - Google Drive

If you will notice, he doesn't always have 4 down linemen. He doesn't always have 2 linebackers. He doesn't always have 5 defensive backs. It depends on a few things. Down and distance. Opposing offensive scheme. The score. Lots of other things can affect the position of the defensive players on the field. It can change every down.

Does TCU run a "base" 4-2-5? Yes. But it doesn't look like a generic 4-2-5 every down. Same applies to a 4-3 defense and a 3-4 defense. All of them can resemble the others at any time during any game.

The point I was trying to make was that positioning of players on a defense is subject to many factors. It's a fluid situation throughout every game you watch.

If you didn't understand the point I was trying to make. I apologize. Apparently I didn't state it clearly. That doesn't make me "patronizing", nor does it make me an "asswipe".

But I wasn't wrong was I? Apology accepted, I guess. But please don't patronize me if the facts are in dispute without first checking them out, if you don't mind. I never said I knew a lot about football. I don't. But I know enough to at least offer an opinion. And Texas Christian has done an especially good job. In my estimation. Meaning I know something. Plus I played a little football in middle school. Admittedly not very much. But I never claimed to be an expert about it.

 

[LyquidMetal]

There's a reason nothing rhymes with orange.

But SUCKS is close enuff, ain't it?

 

[OldDevilDawg]

But I wasn't wrong was I? Apology accepted, I guess. But please don't patronize me if the facts are in dispute without first checking them out, if you don't mind. I never said I knew a lot about football. I don't. But I know enough to at least offer an opinion. And Texas Christian has done an especially good job. In my estimation. Meaning I know something. Plus I played a little football in middle school. Admittedly not very much. But I never claimed to be an expert about it.

I wasn't wrong either, now was I? Are you gonna be arrogant or will see some kind of apology for wrongfully calling me a 'patronizing asswipe"? I'll wait.

 

[CollegeFBFan2021]

I wasn't wrong either, now was I? Are you gonna be arrogant or will see some kind of apology for wrongfully calling me a 'patronizing asswipe"? I'll wait.

Yeah I think you were wrong. If I hadn't thought so, I wouldn't have commented on it.

 

[CollegeFBFan2021]

If I'm correct. Freeze may have interviewed at BAMA for the oc job a few years back. That's it.
Liberty might have challenged? BAMA? LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!! Maybe for this butt babble belt thing some bandy about.
But, uh, did you see the way BAMA plastered osu for the, you know TROPHY?

But that's not the point I'm making. So it's irrelevant. If and when a team meets the challenge and advances, which is what determines a national championship at that point you will be aware of what I've done. At that point it will be crystal clear what works

 

[CollegeFBFan2021]

I wasn't wrong either, now was I? Are you gonna be arrogant or will see some kind of apology for wrongfully calling me a 'patronizing asswipe"? I'll wait.

I'm not apologizing. If you want to take care of it in person you can look me up. Seriously.

 

[LyquidMetal]

But that's not the point I'm making. So it's irrelevant. If and when a team meets the challenge and advances, which is what determines a national championship at that point you will be aware of what I've done. At that point it will be crystal clear what works

Seems folks enjoy the back and forth mocking with a certain amount of hilarity. But, 2 things.
First:
This is what counts for us fans


Second. And I ask this in all sincerity.
When was this relative proficiency thing first published?

 

[CollegeFBFan2021]

Seems folks enjoy the back and forth mocking with a certain amount of hilarity. But, 2 things.
First:
This is what counts for us fans
View attachment 5491

Second. And I ask this in all sincerity.
When was this relative proficiency thing first published?

I'm not making light of the CFP Championship. Quite the contrary. In 2017 it got botched pretty badly, but otherwise I'm A.O.K. except for two things. It really isn't necessary. The Belt legitmizes a NC. Prior to 2014 as best as I can tell, Belt legitmized a title claim. Separated wasn't a good thing.
Anyway have I published it? Indirectly, yes.
I published many parts of it in a forum like this one. (It's how I determined the WAC was at 40% cumulative relative proficiency).
People try to accuse me (either a result I'm guessing of the way it paints Brigham Young, or another legitimate team like the Air Force Academy) as being partisan.
But I would never jeopardize my reputation.
The numbers tell the story better than I can. The interesting thing is Brigham Young isn't the best team from the WAC. It's Arizona St.
Anyway, I determined Brigham Young is within the top-60. All time. Relative Proficiency. Lest people again accuse me of partisanship (and I gave no ties to Brigham Young University) although my deceased brother did, that's mostly coincidental. He was president of Arizona chapter, Cougar Club. And he had a statue of Brigham Young's accomplishment (1984 NC) commissioned to celebrate the event.
Jocelyn Russell. Turning Point. Look it up. Oh I'm not necessarily saying Alabama's title claim in 2017 is fraudulent. But it's sketchy. Actually the Belt legitmizes it
To 1/4 , which actually isn't that bad. It just means they were 1/4 with a claim to it. (Alabama, Pittsburgh, Ohio St. and USF). But Alabama was the only team without multiple losses. A technically, actually gave them the Belt. Meaning they earned it, but not without much difficulty. A lot had to happen. Not unlike 1984 when Brigham Young claimed a Championship. F.W.I.W.
But I wish people would stop the crusade to delegitimize Brigham Young's title claim.
It is personal with me. No I never went to BYU. I never graduated university.
I'm a footnote to history. But I believe I've given sufficient cause to warrant giving the Cougars equal claim to the NC as Iowa..
Yes, equal. While Brigham Young's measure was twice as relevant, Iowa's is sufficient (1/3) to warrant certification. United together. It's actually quite interesting.
No Belt exists to tie them together. That's not what I'm talking about and it would be completely UNFAIR to separate U.C.L.A. from the Belt as an operative.
But it would be equally unfair to separate Pittsburgh from theirs! 2017.
So, people who want to complain about me being partisan, I'm obviously no more partisan with respect to Brigham Young than any of you are with respect to Alabama. And CFP rules apply. I consider it to BE the Belt. Therefore Alabama won a Belt in 2017. Brigham Young didn't, 1984.
Rules are especially important. At 5-7 Pittsburgh was ineligible for the title. They forfeit, meaning their claim falls back to N. Carolina St., who lost to S. Carolina.
S. Carolina surrendered it. Obviously. And eventually it was lost by Auburn to Georgia.
Ordinarily, a Belt wouldn't have included Alabama. But they advanced by beating Clemson (eliminating them in the Sugar)
The Belt NC was between Alabama and Georgia. Who TIED! Oklahoma and Georgia also TIED. Iowa St. therefore carried it (beat Oklahoma) forward. Texas Tech won it from Texas. Texas Tech lost to USF.
USF therefore carried it into 2018.
It was quartered (Alabama, Ohio St., USF and Pittsburgh). Alabama was the only eligible team remaining.
Pittsburgh actually won the Belt. But 5-7 isn't a very good team to claim a Belt NC.
Anyway, it remained divided until L.S.U. beat UCF in the PlayStation Fiesta Bowl.
L.S.U. therefore was a legitimate contender BEFORE 2020. Then went 15-0 and united the Belt, again. It's remained united since.
Alabama was the Belt NC, last season.
I already noted the top contenders for the Belt, thus season. Alabama, Clemson, Ohio St. and Texas A&M. But, also including Oklahoma, Iowa, Mississippi and Georgia.
This shouldn't be difficult. Alabama retains the Belt until someone takes it away. The rest are simply teams to watch until (when or if) that fateful say should happen.
So you want Alabama to remain a perpetual national champion? Cool. Don't lose and you will FOREVER be a NC. Pretty cut and dried from my end. Don't lose don't lose the Championship ever again!

 

[CollegeFBFan2021]

Seems folks enjoy the back and forth mocking with a certain amount of hilarity. But, 2 things.
First:
This is what counts for us fans
View attachment 5491

Second. And I ask this in all sincerity.
When was this relative proficiency thing first published?

Relative Proficiency actually IS the metric through which a title formerly known as the New York Times NC was initiated. I honestly don't know the history. I utilize the metric and apply it judiciously. As I see fit with respect to the national championship. If you want to know more I recommend you read about it. My intention isn't to turn over the apple cart. I don't remember suggesting any title claimed by Alabama (or any other team) was fraudulent. People who accuse me are lyiing. It's actually kind of sad. Apparently there are people who will stop at nothing to claim a title even when they're clearly undeserving of one. I think that's pathetic.
Oh another thing. People honestly can't take away a title already awarded. Thats the irony. People thiink if they can. discredit Brigham Young that somehow changes the formula required to select a deserving champion. The simple fact is Florida was on probation for recruiting violations (multiple).
It's actually a miracle they were recognized.
Yes they were and will remain fir perpetuity a legitimate titleist. The New York Times NC.
You ask me where I learned about it? I actually stumbled on it. But I know the method. People try to accuse me if cheating. As if that were even possible? How do I cheat s team out if a title I say was valid? There's a lot of strange behavior.
My guess is people are threatened by Brigham Young. Which is kind of funny. I have mo connection my brother did. I went to Colorado. Anyway, I don't cheat.

 

[LyquidMetal]

I'm not making light of the CFP Championship. Quite the contrary. In 2017 it got botched pretty badly, but otherwise I'm A.O.K. except for two things. It really isn't necessary. The Belt legitmizes a NC. Prior to 2014 as best as I can tell, Belt legitmized a title claim. Separated wasn't a good thing.
Anyway have I published it? Indirectly, yes.
I published many parts of it in a forum like this one. (It's how I determined the WAC was at 40% cumulative relative proficiency).
People try to accuse me (either a result I'm guessing of the way it paints Brigham Young, or another legitimate team like the Air Force Academy) as being partisan.
But I would never jeopardize my reputation.
The numbers tell the story better than I can. The interesting thing is Brigham Young isn't the best team from the WAC. It's Arizona St.
Anyway, I determined Brigham Young is within the top-60. All time. Relative Proficiency. Lest people again accuse me of partisanship (and I gave no ties to Brigham Young University) although my deceased brother did, that's mostly coincidental. He was president of Arizona chapter, Cougar Club. And he had a statue of Brigham Young's accomplishment (1984 NC) commissioned to celebrate the event.
Jocelyn Russell. Turning Point. Look it up. Oh I'm not necessarily saying Alabama's title claim in 2017 is fraudulent. But it's sketchy. Actually the Belt legitmizes it
To 1/4 , which actually isn't that bad. It just means they were 1/4 with a claim to it. (Alabama, Pittsburgh, Ohio St. and USF). But Alabama was the only team without multiple losses. A technically, actually gave them the Belt. Meaning they earned it, but not without much difficulty. A lot had to happen. Not unlike 1984 when Brigham Young claimed a Championship. F.W.I.W.
But I wish people would stop the crusade to delegitimize Brigham Young's title claim.
It is personal with me. No I never went to BYU. I never graduated university.
I'm a footnote to history. But I believe I've given sufficient cause to warrant giving the Cougars equal claim to the NC as Iowa..
Yes, equal. While Brigham Young's measure was twice as relevant, Iowa's is sufficient (1/3) to warrant certification. United together. It's actually quite interesting.
No Belt exists to tie them together. That's not what I'm talking about and it would be completely UNFAIR to separate U.C.L.A. from the Belt as an operative.
But it would be equally unfair to separate Pittsburgh from theirs! 2017.
So, people who want to complain about me being partisan, I'm obviously no more partisan with respect to Brigham Young than any of you are with respect to Alabama. And CFP rules apply. I consider it to BE the Belt. Therefore Alabama won a Belt in 2017. Brigham Young didn't, 1984.
Rules are especially important. At 5-7 Pittsburgh was ineligible for the title. They forfeit, meaning their claim falls back to N. Carolina St., who lost to S. Carolina.
S. Carolina surrendered it. Obviously. And eventually it was lost by Auburn to Georgia.
Ordinarily, a Belt wouldn't have included Alabama. But they advanced by beating Clemson (eliminating them in the Sugar)
The Belt NC was between Alabama and Georgia. Who TIED! Oklahoma and Georgia also TIED. Iowa St. therefore carried it (beat Oklahoma) forward. Texas Tech won it from Texas. Texas Tech lost to USF.
USF therefore carried it into 2018.
It was quartered (Alabama, Ohio St., USF and Pittsburgh). Alabama was the only eligible team remaining.
Pittsburgh actually won the Belt. But 5-7 isn't a very good team to claim a Belt NC.
Anyway, it remained divided until L.S.U. beat UCF in the PlayStation Fiesta Bowl.
L.S.U. therefore was a legitimate contender BEFORE 2020. Then went 15-0 and united the Belt, again. It's remained united since.
Alabama was the Belt NC, last season.
I already noted the top contenders for the Belt, thus season. Alabama, Clemson, Ohio St. and Texas A&M. But, also including Oklahoma, Iowa, Mississippi and Georgia.
This shouldn't be difficult. Alabama retains the Belt until someone takes it away. The rest are simply teams to watch until (when or if) that fateful say should happen.
So you want Alabama to remain a perpetual national champion? Cool. Don't lose and you will FOREVER be a NC. Pretty cut and dried from my end. Don't lose don't lose the Championship ever again!

Let's try this again. What I mean by the published question is when did the nyt first publish it? You say you got it from there.

 

[Tenn"cock]

This thread is pure gold.

 

[Tenn"cock]

Relative Proficiency actually IS the metric through which a title formerly known as the New York Times NC was initiated.

Apparently even the New York Times has given up on Relative Proficiency:

"Who will be college football’s next national champion, Alabama or Ohio State? The correct answer should be neither.

The team we should be cheering won’t be on the field at Hard Rock Stadium near Miami next Monday.

The real champion?

The University of Connecticut, which was the first Football Bowl Subdivision team to squarely face the coronavirus and decide against playing a single snap during a raging pandemic.

Given the pain and tumult of the last year, it can be hard to remember there was a time when the powers that rule major college sports were more concerned about the virus than about fattening their bank accounts.

In August, it seemed as if a full-fledged collegiate football season might not happen. That’s when Connecticut, ranked among the worst teams in the nation, rose to the top of the heap, killing its season and leading the sport toward sanity."

So there you have it folks, apparently from the makers of "Relative Proficiency", UConn is the current "belt ( lol ) holder.

 

[Tenn"cock]

Let's try this again. What I mean by the published question is when did the nyt first publish it? You say you got it from there.

Maybe one day he will actually give the original name of the "system" so we can actually see how it works regardless of who is being considered. Part of me thinks he is using something based on the Dickinson system but he spouts so much other diatribe to muddy the waters I am not sure.