texas vs. Bengals....sacks for & against

[Au165]

I wonder what is going on with he Texans. The Jaguars line is not a good line and they couldn't get home last week. I wonder if it was something the Jags did schematically or if something is off.

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(09-14-2017, 11:13 AM)Au165 Wrote: I wonder what is going on with he Texans. The Jaguars line is not a good line and they couldn't get home last week. I wonder if it was something the Jags did schematically or if something is off.

The Jags only completed 11 passes and only threw the ball 21 times, averaging 6 yards an attempt.

It's not that the Jags OL was good or the Texans DL was bad, it was simply a lack of opportunity for the Texans. It's what happens when your offense can't score points while also turning the ball over 4 times, forcing your D to play from way behind all game long.

Jags offense:
21 throws
39 rushes

If the Bengals can somehow get the game into a situation where they don't need to throw the ball, then they won't give up sacks either. Lol

[Au165]

(09-14-2017, 11:22 AM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: The Jags only completed 11 passes and only threw the ball 21 times, averaging 6 yards an attempt.

It's not that the Jags OL was good or the Texans DL was bad, it was simply a lack of opportunity for the Texans. It's what happens when your offense can't score points while also turning the ball over 4 times, forcing your D to play from way behind all game long.

Jags offense:
21 throws
39 rushes

If the Bengals can somehow get the game into a situation where they don't need to throw the ball, then they won't give up sacks either. Lol

21 attempts and no sacks is plenty of opportunity to judge. Also they allowed 4 yards a carry on 39 rushes against an average to below average O line. I wonder if something is still going on with Watt.

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(09-14-2017, 11:30 AM)Au165 Wrote: 21 attempts and no sacks is plenty of opportunity to judge. Also they allowed 4 yards a carry on 39 rushes against an average to below average O line. I wonder if something is still going on with Watt.

Or Leonard Fournette is just good, which is why he was taken 4th overall. Chris Ivory is also quite good when healthy (which is rarely with how violently he runs, but he is right now).

Honestly, that's gotta be a tough 1-2 to keep up the desire to tackle 35 times in a game. Fournette is a big 230lb RB, and Ivory is a violent 220lb RB. Rather than lightning and thunder, that's just thunder and thunder. Ouch.

[Au165]

(09-14-2017, 11:43 AM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Or Leonard Fournette is just good, which is why he was taken 4th overall. Chris Ivory is also quite good when healthy (which is rarely with how violently he runs, but he is right now).

Honestly, that's gotta be a tough 1-2 to keep up the desire to tackle 35 times in a game. Fournette is a big 230lb RB, and Ivory is a violent 220lb RB. Rather than lightning and thunder, that's just thunder and thunder. Ouch.

I get that, but it wasn't like he gashed them for a big 70 yard run that upped their averages. They both just plodded along and there was at least enough of a whole for them to not get tackled in the backfield. I just don't think it's a forgone conclusion their D is going to be stout.

[*ochocincos*]

Hopefully Geno gets a couple. I'm starting him in my IDP league after seeing the Texans play last week.

[*ochocincos*]

(09-14-2017, 11:43 AM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Or Leonard Fournette is just good, which is why he was taken 4th overall. Chris Ivory is also quite good when healthy (which is rarely with how violently he runs, but he is right now).

Honestly, that's gotta be a tough 1-2 to keep up the desire to tackle 35 times in a game. Fournette is a big 230lb RB, and Ivory is a violent 220lb RB. Rather than lightning and thunder, that's just thunder and thunder. Ouch.

[sandwedge]

(09-14-2017, 11:48 AM)Au165 Wrote: I get that, but it wasn't like he gashed them for a big 70 yard run that upped their averages. They both just plodded along and there was at least enough of a whole for them to not get tackled in the backfield. I just don't think it's a forgone conclusion their D is going to be stout.

I thought I saw on TV lastnight that our D, was statistically better than Houston in game 1?? Maybe I was dreaming? 

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(09-14-2017, 11:48 AM)Au165 Wrote: I get that, but it wasn't like he gashed them for a big 70 yard run that upped their averages. They both just plodded along and there was at least enough of a whole for them to not get tackled in the backfield. I just don't think it's a forgone conclusion their D is going to be stout.

According to PFF, Fournette got 68 of his 100 yards after contact and forced 4 missed tackles.
https://www.profootballfocus.com/news/pro-32-observations-week-1
https://www.profootballfocus.com/news/pro-refocused-jacksonville-jaguars-29-houston-texans-7

So I mean, that's 26 rushes and he only got 32 yards before contact.

[*PhilHos*]

Honestly, I don't expect the line to give up more than 2 sacks and even then, I'm thinking it's from Dalton holding the ball too long 'cause no one got open. Considering how atrocious the protection was in Game 1, I gotta think the coaches are going to do SOMEthing to keep the sacks down. Too bad, it'll only last for this one game and they go back to doing what they did in week 1.

[Au165]

(09-14-2017, 12:54 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: According to PFF, Fournette got 68 of his 100 yards after contact and forced 4 missed tackles.
https://www.profootballfocus.com/news/pro-32-observations-week-1
https://www.profootballfocus.com/news/pro-refocused-jacksonville-jaguars-29-houston-texans-7

So I mean, that's 26 rushes and he only got 32 yards before contact.

So maybe the issue is their linebackers can't tackle.