Why people need to get off Bruce Irvin's Stat-line

Pandion Haliaetus · Dec 31, 2013

In 2012, Chris Clemons (11.5) and Irvin (8.0) combined to post 19.5 of the teams 36 Sacks. 9 other players combined for 16.5 sacks.

In 2013, Clemons missed the first 2 games plus rehabbing his knee the whole off-season/pre-season Irvin missed the first 4 games due to suspension plus he had to switch to SAM OLB from situational DE pretty much on the fly due to pre-season injuries and said suspension.

Together, Clemons (4.5) and Irvin (2.0) only combined for 6.5 of the team's 43 sacks. 12 other players combined to post more sacks with 36.5 than the 2012 total of 36. Actually think about these facts because they make a bold statement on how good our pass rush was compared to year's prior.

Its kind of unfair to Bruce Irvin that no one is calling out Clemons for being rather "invisible" in 2013 with a decline in tackles and sacks. Kind of like last year where people were flaming Irvin as a rookie in 2012 for having 6 of his 8 sacks in 3 games but lauded a 9 year vet in Clemons despite 6.5 of his 11 sacks coming in 2 games. (And Clemons having 500 more snaps than Bruce)

And

With the definition of Irvin being "invisible" in 2013 is basically becoming the team's best coverage LBer (during the season nonetheless) and using his unique size plus elite athletic ability to take his assignments out of the play for the majority of the time. I'll take that on the No. 1 Scoring, Yardage, Passing, and Passer Rating Against Defense in the NFL plus the No. 7 Rush Defense in a year where Offenses were setting scoring records week after week.

In Conclusion, INDIVIDUAL STATS don't mean JACK SQUAT... just doing the job you're asked to do with 100% effort for the TEAM is what matters in the BIGGER PICTURE.

theENGLISHseahawk · Dec 31, 2013

He did a good job at linebacker. He wasn't really asked to do too much pure pass rushing.

RiverDog · Dec 31, 2013

Pandion Haliaetus":m4mrp030 said:
In 2012, Chris Clemons (11.5) and Irvin (8.0) combined to post 19.5 of the teams 36 Sacks. 9 other players combined for 16.5 sacks.

In 2013, Clemons missed the first 2 games plus rehabbing his knee the whole off-season/pre-season Irvin missed the first 4 games due to suspension plus he had to switch to SAM OLB from situational DE pretty much on the fly due to pre-season injuries and said suspension.

Together, Clemons (4.5) and Irvin (2.0) only combined for 6.5 of the team's 43 sacks. 12 other players combined to post more sacks with 36.5 than the 2012 total of 36. Actually think about these facts because they make a bold statement on how good our pass rush was compared to year's prior.

Its kind of unfair to Bruce Irvin that no one is calling out Clemons for being rather "invisible" in 2013 with a decline in tackles and sacks. Kind of like last year where people were flaming Irvin as a rookie in 2012 for having 6 of his 8 sacks in 3 games but lauded a 9 year vet in Clemons despite 6.5 of his 11 sacks coming in 2 games. (And Clemons having 500 more snaps than Bruce)

And

With the definition of Irvin being "invisible" in 2013 is basically becoming the team's best coverage LBer (during the season nonetheless) and using his unique size plus elite athletic ability to take his assignments out of the play for the majority of the time. I'll take that on the No. 1 Scoring, Yardage, Passing, and Passer Rating Against Defense in the NFL plus the No. 7 Rush Defense in a year where Offenses were setting scoring records week after week.

In Conclusion, INDIVIDUAL STATS don't mean JACK SQUAT... just doing the job you're asked to do with 100% effort for the TEAM is what matters in the BIGGER PICTURE.

I expected more of a pass rush out of him, but he seems to hold his own in pass coverage. He was once a liability in run defense and he doesn't seem to get off blocks very well, but he can't be real bad as our defense vs. the run has been pretty darn good. If he was that much of a liability, teams would be seeking him out like flies to a turd. A defense is only as strong as its weakest link, and our D doesn't seem to have many weak links.

Bottom line is that I'm relatively neutral about his performance. He is learning a new position, so I guess we need to give him the benefit of the doubt.

Tical21 · Dec 31, 2013

We all like Bruce, but he isn't one of the Seahawks top 3 cover LBers.

getnasty · Dec 31, 2013

It really easy, he doesn't have sacks because he isn't ask to rush the passer. I don't know about him being the best cover LBer, seems like he's always taken off the field on obvios pass situations, while the other two stay.

Pstark3 · Dec 31, 2013

He's doing a good job in coverage, but I still wish we'd rush him more. He was looking to be a beast last year, and it looks like he's only gotten stronger

Scottemojo · Dec 31, 2013

Bruce does fine in his little zone assignments. If his job is to contain the end, he does it pretty well.

What I want to see from him is more involvement in being the second or third guy to the scene of the tackle. There isn't enough flow to the ball when his primary job has been done.

Happypuppy · Dec 31, 2013

He is doing an excellent job in coverage. He is pretty stout again the run as well. Keep in mind he is only in for 1/3 or the plays as well as a new position. He is playing more or less like a classic OLB.

AROS · Dec 31, 2013

Who's Bruce Irvin?

(Sorry, too easy to resist).

Hawknballs · Dec 31, 2013

If I'm correct Bruce is on the field a lot, and we win a lot and have the league's best defense and are #1 against the pass, in turnovers, and scoring. So i'm not sure what the discussion is about.

tmobilchawker79 · Dec 31, 2013

Pete said yesterday in his presser that at one point he considered sitting Earl down for a game. That he was trying so hard to make plays that it was hurting the defense. Now Earl plays within the system and makes plays and is a perennial pro bowler. Bruce plays within the system and makes the defense better. So does McDaniel, so does McDonald...everyone plays a role. Lets stop measuring everything and realize that the sum of the parts are greater as a result of Bruce's contribution.

CANHawk · Dec 31, 2013

When Bruce was drafted, I thought he was drafted to be a pass rush phenom so yeah... i'm a little dissapointed that he isn't producing sacks.

However, he is doing a bang up job doing what he's been asked to do. It's kind of akin to Zack Miller; just because Zack doesn't put up gaudy recieving stats like he did in Oakland doesn't mean he isn't doing a great job of exactly what he's been asked to do. What Bruce has been asked to do doesn't generate gaudy stats either, but that doesn't mean he hasn't been hella good at it. Especially considering he's never in his life even played the position before.

So no. I'm not at all worried about Bruce. He has 2 sacks and a pick. That's actually pretty not bad for a SAM in our system.

Seaswab · Dec 31, 2013

he drafted him to rush the passer, but we don't ask him to pass rush. Makes sense.

BamKam · Dec 31, 2013

I don't think Bruce has played bad this year he is just so silent out there for being a starter. The last play I remember from him was lighting up Graham against the Saints. He doesn't seem to make many mistakes but you don't hear him making that many impact plays either.

CANHawk · Dec 31, 2013

Seaswab":2luidwue said:
he drafted him to rush the passer, but we don't ask him to pass rush. Makes sense.

I don't necessarily think we DID draft him to rush the passer. We drafted him because he was a phenomenal athlete with a unique skillset. They might have had LEO in mind when they picked him, but I don't think they were married to the idea. They just liked the tools he brought. Right now they're putting him in the best position to contribute, and he's doing as much. He's a starter who regularly contributes, makes a difference and rarely gets called out for blowing his assignment. That's all you can ask for.

Or would you rather have Aaron Curry..?

Seaswab · Dec 31, 2013

Pete went on and on after we drafted him about his pass rush ability and thats why we took him.

FlyingGreg · Dec 31, 2013

Yeah, let's not sugar coat it ... Irvin didn't work out as in in-line edge rusher. Plain and simple. The stat geeks will cry "but he had 8 sacks!" but the reality is he got marginalized way too easily by the big linemen that used his speed against him by just riding him out of the pocket.

And OF COURSE he was drafted to be a pass rusher...you don't spend a top-15 pick on a "pass rush specialist" one trick pony when your biggest need was pass rush and then not use him in that role.

However, kudos to Pete and the staff for making the move to OLB. I'm willing to be patient with him as he develops in this role...he flashed a little, and it will take time.

I'm a huge supporter of 97% of everything Pete and John have done, but there are have been some clear missteps (the Whitehurst trade, Carpenter, Irvin in the 1st round, Durham in the 4th, etc.).

NorthDallas40oz · Dec 31, 2013

He's a Sam LB. Sam LB's rarely rush the passer. They play on the strong side of the line and help set the edge in the running game, and drop into coverage (mostly zone coverage the way the Hawks use their LB's and SS in their 'triangle' coverage schemes) in the passing game. So he's not supposed to have much of a sack total. Measuring Sam LB's by their sack total is tantamount to measuring fullbacks by their rushing yardage.

Tigwelds1 · Dec 31, 2013

The team doesn't need him to be a pass rusher right now so their initial expectations in a draft two years ago shouldn't dictate his role for the team his entire career, and thankfully it isn't.

sutz · Dec 31, 2013

I absolutley LOVE that our sack total is spread around amongst several players. We don't have that one guy other teams can scheme to neutralize, or that one guy who we miss too much if he gets injured (cough, cough Clemons vs Atlanta).

As for Irvin? I don't worry too much about when he was picked or how much he makes. He's out there, he's a Seahawk and he's contributing to our success. If Pete thought he wasn't good enough, he wouldn't be out there.

Besides, they've probably been saving him for the playoffs.

Why people need to get off Bruce Irvin's Stat-line

Well-known member

Active member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

New member

Active member

New member

Administrator

Well-known member

New member

New member

New member

Well-known member

New member

New member

Active member

New member

New member

Well-known member

Similar threads