Fraley: Cowboys' pass rush needs to show up in a hurry

[Bonecrusher#31]

Fraley: Cowboys' pass rush needs to show up in a hurry

11:05 PM CDT on Thursday, September 23, 2010
Column by GERRY FRALEY / The Dallas Morning News
gfraley@dallasnews.com

Column by GERRY FRALEY / The Dallas Morning News | gfraley@dallasnews.com

Gerry Fraley
Archive | Bio | E-mail
IRVING – The Cowboys' outside pass rushers, Anthony Spencer and DeMarcus Ware, are again late arrivals.

In their 0-2 start, the Cowboys have two sacks, one each by Spencer and Ware. That's an improvement over last season, when the defense went without a sack in the first two games.

Two sacks from a defense that has elite pass rushers in Spencer and Ware are not much in the grand scheme of the NFL. The Cowboys are tied for 27th in sacks. That's a steep drop in a short time. In 2008, the Cowboys led the league with 59 sacks.

"I think we're getting good pressure," coach Wade Phillips said. "I'd like to get great pressure."

The pass rush made a cameo appearance during Sunday's loss to Chicago before going back into seclusion.

Spencer sacked Bears quarterback Jay Cutler on the second play. Led by Ware, the defense hit Cutler on each of the first five pass plays and on two other snaps that were erased by penalties. A harried Cutler completed two of four passes for 5 yards in that span.

And then, nothing.

For the rest of the game, Cutler went 19-of-25 for 272 yards and three touchdowns with no sacks despite operating behind a makeshift line. For the second consecutive game, the Cowboys allowed a sack-prone quarterback remain upright.

In the opener, Cutler took four sacks in a win against Detroit. In the opener, the Cowboys had one sack against Washington's Donovan McNabb. Last season, the Cowboys dropped McNabb a total of 12 times in three games.

"If you look at it number-wise, it's not up to where it should be," Ware said of the club's sacks total. "If you look at it pressure-wise, I'm getting there. I have to be aware of those things and have more sacks and more pressure and make big plays, because we haven't had them."

Ware has applied significant pressure. He has only one sack but is tied for second with Philadelphia's Trent Cole for combined quarterback hurries and knockdowns with nine, one behind league leader Clay Matthews of Green Bay. A year ago, Ware led the league with a combined 45 hurries and knockdowns.

The Bears countered Ware's presence with quicker passes. Washington also did not wait on double-move routes to develop, letting McNabb roll away from pressure and make safe throws.

Ware blamed himself for allowing Cutler and McNabb to duck sacks by outmaneuvering him. Ware has at times broken through protection so quickly that he flew past the quarterback.

"You still have to get the guy down," Ware said. "That's a problem you can run into, being overly aggressive when you have a running quarterback like a Cutler or a McNabb."

Ware has come closer to takedowns than Spencer. He has not yet picked up on last season's powerful finish.

Spencer, who meets more blocking as the strongside linebacker, went from no sacks in the first 10 games of 2009 to six sacks and 14 hurries in the final six regular-season games. He tied for fifth in the league with 40 combined hurries and knockdowns.

At training camp, Phillips put Spencer on the same pedestal with another strongside linebacker he coached: Hall of Famer Ricky Jackson.

"I'm not really surprised," Spencer said. "I didn't have a sack for a while last year. We're doing the things we need to do in practice. We're trying to get it down and done right."

Spencer has one sack but only three combined hurries and knockdowns. To create sacks, takeaways and havoc, Spencer must meet Ware in the backfield. The Cowboys need that to happen soon.

The Cowboys face Houston quarterback Matt Schaub on Sunday. Schaub enters the game ranked fifth in the NFL at 302 passing yards per game.

 

[dbair1967]

The offensive struggles get all the attention, but the defense sucked vs Chicago. There was absolutely no excuse to have only one sack for the game and very few hits on the QB after that first couple of series. That Bears OL flat out stinks, its worse than ours.

And then there's the turnover thing. None in two games. And other than Newman's pick in the endzone that was negated by his own penalty, nothing even close to a turnover either.

I expected more from this defense.

 

[Plymkr]

Turnovers are a huge issue and seem to get overlooked frequently because of the offense stinking up the joint. This defense hardly has made any big plays on their end. Which, doesn't help a struggling offense.

I haven't like this 3-4 defense from the beginning. And year after year, I like it less and less. Maybe a different DC? or different players? I don't know.

 

[Bonecrusher#31]

It's not the 3-4 IMO. It's defensive coaching. I see other 3-4 defenses that get plenty of turnovers.

You don't even have to have the best players just take a look at the Bears. They were always clawing at the ball and holding our guys up to do it.

You rarely see the Cowboys employing this strategy. Their not taught it.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

The offensive struggles get all the attention, but the defense sucked vs Chicago. There was absolutely no excuse to have only one sack for the game and very few hits on the QB after that first couple of series. That Bears OL flat out stinks, its worse than ours.

And then there's the turnover thing. None in two games. And other than Newman's pick in the endzone that was negated by his own penalty, nothing even close to a turnover either.

I expected more from this defense.

The last 2 out of 3 games that mattered... And this defense has come up small.

 

[Midswat]

By design, a 3-4 should get more turnovers because the QB should never know where that fourth rusher is coming from. Offensive confusion leads to mistakes, which should leave to turnovers.

There was no excuse, whatsoever, to ease off the blitz like we did last week. That was a boneheaded coaching decision.

 

[Plymkr]

Agree with all statements. I have always just like the 4-3 for some reason. If this 3-4 could create turn overs, I would sure like it a lot better. .

 

[sbk92]

The 3-4 is the superior scheme. You create confusion and it's a hell of lot easier to find rush linebackers than it is DEs athletic enough to excel rushing the passer but also strong enough at the point of attack to hold up in the run game.

 

[sbk92]

The offensive struggles get all the attention, but the defense sucked vs Chicago. There was absolutely no excuse to have only one sack for the game and very few hits on the QB after that first couple of series. That Bears OL flat out stinks, its worse than ours.

And then there's the turnover thing. None in two games. And other than Newman's pick in the endzone that was negated by his own penalty, nothing even close to a turnover either.

I expected more from this defense.

The defense was riding a streak where they didn't even let up a touchdown for games.

Sure they were bad last Sunday. But I think they earned a mulligan with their play dating back to last year.

 

[dbair1967]

The 3-4 is the superior scheme. You create confusion and it's a hell of lot easier to find rush linebackers than it is DEs athletic enough to excel rushing the passer but also strong enough at the point of attack to hold up in the run game.

Tom Landry, Jimmy Johnson, Chuck Noll and others disagree with you.

 

[Plymkr]

The defense was riding a streak where they didn't even let up a touchdown for games.

Sure they were bad last Sunday. But I think they earned a mulligan with their play dating back to last year.

I will give a few TD's the Defense give up if they could create some turnovers for the offense.

 

[dbair1967]

The defense was riding a streak where they didn't even let up a touchdown for games.

Sure they were bad last Sunday. But I think they earned a mulligan with their play dating back to last year.

They werent all that great vs Washington either. Had very limited pressure on McFlabb, and guys were wide open all over the place. We got bailed out several times by the inaccuracy of McChunky.

 

[sbk92]

Tom Landry, Jimmy Johnson, Chuck Noll and others disagree with you.

Bill Parcells, Bill Belichick, Dick Lebeau and others tell me to pay them no mind.

There isn't anything to disagree with. It's an absolute fact that the 3-4 creates more pass rush options and that a rush linebacker is easier to find than an athletic DE capable of getting to the QB while also holding fort in the run game.

 

[sbk92]

They werent all that great vs Washington either. Had very limited pressure on McFlabb, and guys were wide open all over the place. We got bailed out several times by the inaccuracy of McChunky.

Excuses.

I'm talking results. They dominated that game. Like they dominated the final month of last season.

They laid one egg last Sunday and suddenly this is a defense rife with problems. I don't buy it.

 

[Cr122]

I don't care what defense your running, you still need to create turnovers.

In the 3-4 defense though you should have more though. You can bring better pressure with your LB's.

 

[dbair1967]

Bill Parcells, Bill Belichick, Dick Lebeau and others tell me to pay them no mind.

There isn't anything to disagree with. It's an absolute fact that the 3-4 creates more pass rush options and that a rush linebacker is easier to find than an athletic DE capable of getting to the QB while also holding fort in the run game.

I agree that today, a rush OLB type is easier to find than a true 4-3 pass rushing RDE, but dont agree with the rest of what you are saying.

Some of the best defenses in league history are 4-3 defenses. Many of them were extremely dominant vs the run and the pass, and feasted off sacks and turnovers.

One's no better than the other if you have quality coaching and the players to fit that style of defense.

 

[dbair1967]

Excuses.

I'm talking results. They dominated that game. Like they dominated the final month of last season.

They laid one egg last Sunday and suddenly this is a defense rife with problems. I don't buy it.

The problem with the defense is the same thats been here for years, inability to force turnovers and inconsistent pass rush. Some games under Wade the past few yrs the pass rush has been outstanding, but the first two games of this year its been almost non existant.

As for Washington, I'm sorry that I dont give the same credit you do for QB's missing wide open receivers with what should be easy completions. Guys were open, McNabb just missed them. And most of the misses werent because he was forced into a bad throw, it was just his usual inaccuracy.

There's too much talent on this defense to be ok or average...they should be outstanding and in alot of games should be able to come up with game turning plays.

 

[sbk92]

Inconsistent pass rush has been a problem with this defense for years?

Really?

What?

 

[sbk92]

I agree that today, a rush OLB type is easier to find than a true 4-3 pass rushing RDE, but dont agree with the rest of what you are saying.

Some of the best defenses in league history are 4-3 defenses. Many of them were extremely dominant vs the run and the pass, and feasted off sacks and turnovers.

One's no better than the other if you have quality coaching and the players to fit that style of defense.

If you have the perfect players for either scheme, I say the 3-4 is better. It gives the offense more to think about it. It gives the coordinator more options to create confusion.

You can win with either. I'd rather stick with the 3-4.

 

[Sheik]

Turnovers= hurting the other teams feelings.

Wade= not having any of that on his watch.