Posts: 40,628
Threads: 1,062
Joined: May 2015
Mood: None
A couple of years ago I came across a rating for O-linemen that combined "sacks allowed" and "holding calls". I realize a holding call does not cost the offense a down, but it makes a lot of sense to treat them the same a a sack because often the holding call just prevented a sack.
Posts: 2,688
Threads: 36
Reputation:
9596
Joined: May 2015
Mood: None
I'd take 1st and 20 over 2nd and 15 in a lot of situations, unless it takes you out of field goal range. The penalty stops the clock too, so there's that to consider. A hold isn't quite as bad as a sack, but it's pretty close. Penalties and sacks are both drive killers.
Posts: 14,520
Threads: 109
Reputation:
43814
Joined: May 2015
Location: Hyborea
Mood: None
Do we have a split on the Viking holds? How many by who?
Posts: 3,357
Threads: 20
Reputation:
9794
Joined: Apr 2021
Mood: None
How many holding calls did the Vikings have? It felt like it was close to double digits. But I'd much rather have had 5 more holding calls then Burrow taking 5 sacks.
Posts: 405
Threads: 3
Reputation:
2221
Joined: Jun 2015
Mood: None
(09-14-2021, 07:42 PM)fredtoast Wrote: A couple of years ago I came across a rating for O-linemen that combined "sacks allowed" and "holding calls". I realize a holding call does not cost the offense a down, but it makes a lot of sense to treat them the same a a sack because often the holding call just prevented a sack.
That 10 yards can be a drive killer. Penalties should be a tracked stat
Posts: 837
Threads: 42
Reputation:
7072
Joined: May 2015
Mood:
"Deserves to be a sack" got nothin' to do with it.
Will Munny
Posts: 14,520
Threads: 109
Reputation:
43814
Joined: May 2015
Location: Hyborea
Mood: None
Seems like LT had 2, LG and RG and RT each had 1.
Posts: 40,628
Threads: 1,062
Joined: May 2015
Mood: None
(09-14-2021, 09:31 PM)Speedy Thomas Wrote: "Deserves to be a sack" got nothin' to do with it.
Will Munny
"I wish there was such a thing as double Rep."
-Fredtoast
Posts: 27,902
Threads: 40
Reputation:
121568
Joined: May 2015
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Mood:
I'm sure there are stats and numbers that know more than I do, but I'd take the sack over the holding call. A quick google search says the average loss on a sack has been a steady 6.5 yards or so since 1993, so I'll take 6.5 yards and a loss of down and the chance to cause a fumble and the demoralizing awesomeness of a sack over the extra 3.5 yards.
I also would ask what you'd rather see on a play:
A: Bengals called for a hold
B: Burrow getting sakced
I'd take A.
Posts: 14,520
Threads: 109
Reputation:
43814
Joined: May 2015
Location: Hyborea
Mood: None
Obviously we prefer a sack, but the fact that the Vikings had to resort to holds to stop Hendrickson and Hubbard and Ogunjobi did definitely set their offense back.
Posts: 6,343
Threads: 104
Reputation:
14038
Joined: Jan 2020
Mood: None
I'd take the sack because it's a loss of down with the yardage loss. With our defense, the loss of down means so much more when we give up 3rd and 24s..
Posts: 14,520
Threads: 109
Reputation:
43814
Joined: May 2015
Location: Hyborea
Mood: None
To be honest if they ever wanted to change the rules make a hold (a real hold not the usual marginal crap) on a passing play (defined as QB had ball in his hands when the hold occurred) be 5 yards and loss of down instead of 10 yards.
Posts: 6,343
Threads: 104
Reputation:
14038
Joined: Jan 2020
Mood: None
(09-15-2021, 12:28 AM)Joelist Wrote: To be honest if they ever wanted to change the rules make a hold (a real hold not the usual marginal crap) on a passing play (defined as QB had ball in his hands when the hold occurred) be 5 yards and loss of down instead of 10 yards.
It should be loss of down...
Posts: 14,520
Threads: 109
Reputation:
43814
Joined: May 2015
Location: Hyborea
Mood: None
(09-15-2021, 12:30 AM)Tony Wrote: It should be loss of down...
Possibly. I would still say only if it is a pass play then add loss of down to the yardage. That removes the incentive for linemen to hold to give their offense another chance. It is also consistent with what happens when holding is called in your own end zone - automatic safety.
Posts: 6,343
Threads: 104
Reputation:
14038
Joined: Jan 2020
Mood: None
(09-15-2021, 12:33 AM)Joelist Wrote: Possibly. I would still say only if it is a pass play then add loss of down to the yardage. That removes the incentive for linemen to hold to give their offense another chance. It is also consistent with what happens when holding is called in your own end zone - automatic safety.
Maybe they could do like nba does.. If you get over 3 in a game where u go into penalty and then you lose the down..
Posts: 15,794
Threads: 406
Reputation:
89806
Joined: May 2015
Mood: None
(09-14-2021, 08:01 PM)NUGDUKWE Wrote: How many holding calls did the Vikings have? It felt like it was close to double digits. But I'd much rather have had 5 more holding calls then Burrow taking 5 sacks.
As I sit here smiling with my coffee... well what are they going to do? They had Hendrickson, Larry O/ BJ Hill, Reader/Topou and Hubbard breathing down their necks. You can't double everyone, and that's a killer line. Everyone is going to eat.
Posts: 16,031
Threads: 150
Reputation:
59653
Joined: May 2015
Mood:
(09-14-2021, 07:48 PM)Bengalstripes9 Wrote: I'd take 1st and 20 over 2nd and 15 in a lot of situations, unless it takes you out of field goal range. The penalty stops the clock too, so there's that to consider. A hold isn't quite as bad as a sack, but it's pretty close. Penalties and sacks are both drive killers.
While i dont like Hold calls... Id rather get a hold call than see someone get a free shot at the QB
Same with DBs and pass interference... IF they know they are beat a penalty is better than a TD.
|