Seems the people who interviewed him didn’t even think he had too much potential for the NFL lmao
One longtime NFL assistant coach said his time with Sanders was "the worst formal interview I’ve ever been in in my life. He’s so entitled. He takes unnecessary sacks. He never plays on time. He has horrible body language. He blames teammates. … But the biggest thing is, he’s not that good.
I’ve never understood why taking “unnecessary sacks” is bad. On 3rd holding the ball allows for big plays I’d risk losing 10 yards for a chance to gain 40.
On 3rd down (out of field goal range) if your choices are dump it down for a short gain and no first, or hold it and risk getting sacked but have the opportunity at a big play the penalty for the sack is not that high. Punting from your 40 vs your 30 doesn’t change much, NFL punters can all punt over 65 yards.
NFL punters don’t average anywhere close to 65 yards. Even if they did, coverage usually can’t cover that much distance that quickly. Long punts usually equal long returns. So 10 yd will absolutely make a difference. You just described a situation in which it would be a stupid sack to take. You’d be sacrificing field position. Not to mention the injury risk and wear and tear build up on your quarterback. You’re using a video game logic.
Seems the people who interviewed him didn’t even think he had too much potential for the NFL lmao
Whew. He went in! Curious to see who ends up taking Sanders lol (not my team pls)
I’ve never understood why taking “unnecessary sacks” is bad. On 3rd holding the ball allows for big plays I’d risk losing 10 yards for a chance to gain 40.
I don’t think people would call third down an unnecessary sack.
On 3rd down (out of field goal range) if your choices are dump it down for a short gain and no first, or hold it and risk getting sacked but have the opportunity at a big play the penalty for the sack is not that high. Punting from your 40 vs your 30 doesn’t change much, NFL punters can all punt over 65 yards.
NFL punters don’t average anywhere close to 65 yards. Even if they did, coverage usually can’t cover that much distance that quickly. Long punts usually equal long returns. So 10 yd will absolutely make a difference. You just described a situation in which it would be a stupid sack to take. You’d be sacrificing field position. Not to mention the injury risk and wear and tear build up on your quarterback. You’re using a video game logic.
Average isn’t the metric to use, punters don’t try to kick it their farthest every punt, most punts are within a punters range.
10 yards of field position is worth a chance at a big play.
And why pray tell do they not try to kick it the furthest every punt?
10 yards of field position could be the difference between winning and losing.