Why Vick was sacked 34 times
News blogs, sports blogs, entertainment blogs, and more from Philly.com, The Philadelphia Inquirer and the Philadelphia Daily News.
Why Vick was sacked 34 times
Sheil Kapadia, Philly.com
Once the NFL conversation shifts to what's happening on the field, my guess is you're going to hear two numbers closely associated with the Eagles: 49 and 34.
The first is the number of sacks the Eagles gave up in 2010, and only three teams (Chicago, Arizona and Carolina) allowed more.
The second is the number of times Michael Vick was sacked, and only four quarterbacks were taken down more. That ranking is even more troubleseome when you consider Vick only played 10 full games and parts of two more.
Digging a little deeper, Football Outsiders ranked the Eagles 28th overall in adjusted sack rate, which takes into account how often teams pass the ball.
These numbers undoubtedly figured into the moves the Eagles made earlier this offseason. Andy Reid admitted he would not have decided to move Juan Castillo to the defensive side of the ball had he not been able to lure Howard Mudd out of retirement to coach the offensive line.
And despite gaping holes on defense, the Birds used their first-round pick on offense, selecting Danny Watkins to step in at right guard.
So as we continue to look back on 2010 with an eye ahead on 2011, I decided to re-watch the 34 plays where Vick was sacked.
I'll provide most of the findings today, but will have a secondary post on Wednesday that takes a closer look at Vick's tendencies and how he performed against the blitz at various points in the season.
SENDING EXTRA RUSHERS AT VICK
Late in the season, specifically after the Eagles' loss to the Vikings, Vick's struggles against the blitz came into focus. But how many of the 34 sacks occurred when defenses sent extra rushers? Here's the breakdown:
| No. of rushers | Sacks |
| 4 | 12 |
| 5 | 11 |
| 6 | 5 |
| 7 | 2 |
Now before you tell me my math is off, I realize that the numbers in the right column only add up to 30. That's because not all sacks are created equal.
There were four plays that I did not include. One was a botched snap; another was a sack caused by Vick simply slipping; and the other two were botched screen attempts.
Eighteen of the remaining 30 sacks came when defenses sent at least one extra rusher at Vick. But 23 of the 30 sacks came when defenses rushed five guys or fewer.
In other words, the "zero blitz" that was discussed at various times in 2010 didn't get to Vick as much as I originally thought.
Another interesting revelation was how teams used the zone blitz. By my count, Vick had not been sacked on a zone blitz until Week 13 against the Texans.
But in the final four regular-season games, opposing defenses sacked him six times on zone blitzes. As everyone remembers, the Vikings were most effective, sacking Vick four times on zone blitzes. It'll be interesting to see if opponents try to confuse him by dropping linemen back into coverage early in 2011.
EXTRA PROTECTION FOR VICK
The other factor at play is the Eagles' protection, and specifically how often they had tight ends and running backs stay in to help protect Vick.
Here's a breakdown of how many blockers the Eagles had on the 30 sacks:
| No. of blockers | Sacks |
| 5 | 14 |
| 6 | 11 |
| 7 | 4 |
| 8 | 1 |
On 14 of the 30 sacks, the Eagles had base protection (five linemen) with five players going out into pass routes. Note that if a running back or tight end chipped and then went out into a route, I did not count them as a blocker.
On 11 of the 30 sacks, the Eagles kept one extra blocker (a running back or tight end) in to block for the entire play.
On five of the 30 sacks, the Eagles had two or three extra blockers.
I remember hearing coaches and players say last year that on certain plays, the sacks were caused by the defense simply sending more players at Vick than the offense had blockers.
By my count, that happened three times. The Jaguars once sent six rushers, while the Eagles had five players blocking. In the first Giants game, New York got to Vick with seven rushers, compared to six players blocking. And in the second game, the Giants rushed six when the Eagles blocked with only five.
From a scheme standpoint, the Eagles had at least as many blockers as pass rushers on all but three of the sacks.
And finally, on four of the sacks, the Eagles began the play with an empty backfield.
MISSED BLOCKS, SACK ERRORS
On each sack, I made a note when someone either missed a block, was beat by a defensive player or clearly failed to pick up a blitzer.
Obviously, this is all subjective so in cases where I couldn't tell who (if anyone) was at fault, I didn't guess. For that reason, not all sacks are accounted for.
But below is a table with how many times each blocker (again, in my view) made an error that contributed to a sack.
I must emphasize that this is not a table of which players were the best overall in pass protection. Keep in mind that I am looking at 34 isolated plays over the course of an entire season.
| Player | Sack Errors |
| Winston Justice | 5 |
| Nick Cole | 4 |
| Todd Herremans | 3 |
| Jason Peters | 2 |
Several other players had one: Mike McGlynn, Reggie Wells, Owen Schmitt, King Dunlap, LeSean McCoy, Max Jean-Gilles.
Justice led the way, but keep in mind he started 13 games. Cole started only seven.
AND FINALLY...
There's one glaring omission here: Vick's role. Marty Mornhinweg talked about that aspect in a Daily News article by Marcus Hayes last week. In the second part of the post on Wednesday, I'll take a closer look and also break down how Vick performed against the blitz at various points of last season.
You can follow me on Twitter or become a fan of Moving the Chains on Facebook.
Sheil, this is a now story. Stop it. the eagles have no O-line.— Don Cornelius- Umm, what? — beerflow
- Marty McFly sends all the wideouts on deep patterns on almost every pass play. Would it kill him to call a quick slant?— RockStar
- I think one of the problems is that the eagles biggest strength in the skills position, that being the vertical passing game doesn't work well with their biggest weakness, that is pass protection. That is expected to improve, but in the end a good scheme can't fix a lack of talent especially on Vick's right side. They don't necessarily need more running plays but more short quick pass plays especially in the slot. In their comeback against the giants you saw a lot of passes go to avant to extend the series. Vick may not always be able to do a 3 step drop because of limited vision due to his height, but he probably has the quickest release and throws the fastest ball when he wants to. You need to utulize that more, otherwise the Eagles will become like the old oilers with Warren moon— shai
- @rockstar has a point that should not get lost in the shuffle. the eagles ran very few quick slants last year and those allow a QB to dump the ball off quickly in the face of pressure.
i'd be interested to know how many were on play action (where the QB is counting on trickery for protection and gives up a key second or two and may even have his back to the defense). i can't tell you how many times andy had mcnabb faking a handoff on 3rd and 10 (wtf, andy?) and teams had their ears pinned back and gunning for 5.
on at least a couple of vick's sacks last year i recall seeing the only available hot route being a shallow cross in the middle of the field. not a good option for a short QB throwing to short receivers on a team where pressure frequently came up the middle.
play design has a higher impact on success than most folks would think.— poetx - First, Jiggy, your posts are wack. Next, no need for further upgrades on the line. We finally have a great line coach. Mudd will take care of the mess.— MrMiles1
- Jiggy Fly say you a hater. And anyone who with a salutational screen name can't hate, Mr.Inches. — jiggy
- How many sacks on Jason Peters side?— delcodanno
- Break it down how you like but this O-Line sucks...— outta work
Vick is too stupid to read defenses.— ej610- Sheil,
Nice article, appreciate you weeding through the hype. Of course, the numbers show what everyone already knew, the right side of our line is an issue; We don't run the ball quite enough to keep the D off balance; And ej610 is a moron who should help Jay Grace spell nickels correctly.— MidGreen - The coach of this god awful O-line is our new D.C. I swear, it's like A.R. actually has contempt for his own defense! This team will be good on offense an absolute doormat on defense. I honestly have no confidence in this team making the right move to sure up this defense, why should I? Ever since J.J.'s death this defense has been pathetic— yourdaddy!
- Sorry, forgot to mention that everybody pointing out Marty's lack of play calling are spot on. However this is a systemic issue of having a control freak as the H.C. and the ultimate yes man as the O.C. blaming Marty is the same as blaming Reid.— yourdaddy!
- Sheil, we need # of drop-backs and # of passing snaps for each OL to put these numbers into focus. And you're correct to say that the QB omission is a glaring one. More and more statistical studies coming out lately have shown the under-appreciated roles that QBs have in causing and avoiding sacks. Here ( http://www.pro-football-reference.com/blog/?p=4152 ) and here ( http://outsidethehashes.com/?p=134 ) and here ( http://outsidethehashes.com/?p=134 ) .— conceptual_bro
Comment removed.
Follow
Sheil on Twitter. And become
a fan of Moving the Chains on Facebook.
Download our NEW iPhone/Android app for even more Birds
coverage, including app-exclusive videos and analysis. Download it here.
