One sack per game?

[CaptainKickass]

From here:

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/article/20090921/PKR01/90921185/1058&referrer=NEWSFRONTCAROUSEL

“We have 10 (sacks) at this point, and our goal is to have one sack per game,” offensive coordinator Joe Philbin said. “In ’07, we had 19, so 16 is a realistic goal, but we’ve got an awful lot of work to do.

I don't care what the numbers say, but anyone who's ever set a goal should know way better.

He absolutely should have said:

“our goal is to have ZERO sacks per game,”

Maybe the coach verbally slipped up in front of the media, but if he truly used this as an example of goal setting for the team - I am officially concerned.

.

[cheesner]

Re: One sack per game?

From here:

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/article/20090921/PKR01/90921185/1058&referrer=NEWSFRONTCAROUSEL

“We have 10 (sacks) at this point, and our goal is to have one sack per game,” offensive coordinator Joe Philbin said. “In ’07, we had 19, so 16 is a realistic goal, but we’ve got an awful lot of work to do.

I don't care what the numbers say, but anyone who's ever set a goal should know way better.

He absolutely should have said:

“our goal is to have ZERO sacks per game,”

Maybe the coach verbally slipped up in front of the media, but if he truly used this as an example of goal setting for the team - I am officially concerned.

.

Nothing wrong with being realistic. Our goal is to have a TD on every offensive play, but that isn't very realistic. 5 tds/game is a more realistic goal. And 1 sack per game is not bad. Sacks happen, even to the best of teams.

[red]

so does that mean we've already missed that goal after 2 whole games?

[Deputy Nutz]

Re: One sack per game?

From here:

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/article/20090921/PKR01/90921185/1058&referrer=NEWSFRONTCAROUSEL

“We have 10 (sacks) at this point, and our goal is to have one sack per game,” offensive coordinator Joe Philbin said. “In ’07, we had 19, so 16 is a realistic goal, but we’ve got an awful lot of work to do.

I don't care what the numbers say, but anyone who's ever set a goal should know way better.

He absolutely should have said:

“our goal is to have ZERO sacks per game,”

Maybe the coach verbally slipped up in front of the media, but if he truly used this as an example of goal setting for the team - I am officially concerned.

.

Why does he go back two seasons ago? Why wouldn't he want to improve from 2008, or is that season not referenced anymore?

[CaptainKickass]

Re: One sack per game?

Nothing wrong with being realistic. Our goal is to have a TD on every offensive play, but that isn't very realistic. 5 tds/game is a more realistic goal. And 1 sack per game is not bad. Sacks happen, even to the best of teams.

This is understaood, however, this is NFL football we're talking about. Every team starts, and plays the year out with the most unrealistic of goals - to win the Superbowl.

Would anyone be satisfied with a coach who says something like "Our goal is to win 9 games". Hell no - that's not how it's done.

In this case the goal should be to have ZERO sacks per game. an acceptable or realistice achievement would be to average 1 sack per game, yes. But the goal should not represent what is "acceptable".

.

[ThunderDan]

Re: One sack per game?

This is understaood, however, this is NFL football we're talking about. Every team starts, and plays the year out with the most unrealistic of goals - to win the Superbowl.

Would anyone be satisfied with a coach who says something like "Our goal is to win 9 games". Hell no - that's not how it's done.

In this case the goal should be to have ZERO sacks per game. an acceptable or realistice achievement would be to average 1 sack per game, yes. But the goal should not represent what is "acceptable".

.

You sound like the corporate heads at a semi-private country club I worked at. They said you need to increase net revenues by 15%. That was the goal. The country club was an extremely busy place. The only way to reach the goal would have been to sell 3:45 tee-times for a full 18 hole price when it got dark at 6:00.

Goals have to be achievable. Having zero sacks for the entire year is goofy. What is the best single season sack record? Maybe beating that record would be a reasonable goal.

There is no quicker way to demoralize your employees than to tell them we expect you to reach unachievable benchmarks.

[sharpe1027]

Re: One sack per game?

Nothing wrong with being realistic. Our goal is to have a TD on every offensive play, but that isn't very realistic. 5 tds/game is a more realistic goal. And 1 sack per game is not bad. Sacks happen, even to the best of teams.

This is understaood, however, this is NFL football we're talking about. Every team starts, and plays the year out with the most unrealistic of goals - to win the Superbowl.

Would anyone be satisfied with a coach who says something like "Our goal is to win 9 games". Hell no - that's not how it's done.

In this case the goal should be to have ZERO sacks per game. an acceptable or realistice achievement would be to average 1 sack per game, yes. But the goal should not represent what is "acceptable".

What do you think will happen? They will give up a sack intentionally? This is a non-story of a coach not putting out PC BS for the fans and media to lap up. Moving on....

[CaptainKickass]

Re: One sack per game?

This is understaood, however, this is NFL football we're talking about. Every team starts, and plays the year out with the most unrealistic of goals - to win the Superbowl.

Would anyone be satisfied with a coach who says something like "Our goal is to win 9 games". Hell no - that's not how it's done.

In this case the goal should be to have ZERO sacks per game. an acceptable or realistice achievement would be to average 1 sack per game, yes. But the goal should not represent what is "acceptable".

.

You sound like the corporate heads at a semi-private country club I worked at. They said you need to increase net revenues by 15%. That was the goal. The country club was an extremely busy place. The only way to reach the goal would have been to sell 3:45 tee-times for a full 18 hole price when it got dark at 6:00.

Goals have to be achievable. Having zero sacks for the entire year is goofy. What is the best single season sack record? Maybe beating that record would be a reasonable goal.

There is no quicker way to demoralize your employees than to tell them we expect you to reach unachievable benchmarks.

Geezus man - bitter about that job much?

How do you know zero sacks per game isn't achievable? Improbable, sure, but so is a 16 win season.

If you set mediocre goals, expect to achieve mediocrity.

.

[ThunderDan]

Re: One sack per game?

This is understaood, however, this is NFL football we're talking about. Every team starts, and plays the year out with the most unrealistic of goals - to win the Superbowl.

Would anyone be satisfied with a coach who says something like "Our goal is to win 9 games". Hell no - that's not how it's done.

In this case the goal should be to have ZERO sacks per game. an acceptable or realistice achievement would be to average 1 sack per game, yes. But the goal should not represent what is "acceptable".

.

You sound like the corporate heads at a semi-private country club I worked at. They said you need to increase net revenues by 15%. That was the goal. The country club was an extremely busy place. The only way to reach the goal would have been to sell 3:45 tee-times for a full 18 hole price when it got dark at 6:00.

Goals have to be achievable. Having zero sacks for the entire year is goofy. What is the best single season sack record? Maybe beating that record would be a reasonable goal.

There is no quicker way to demoralize your employees than to tell them we expect you to reach unachievable benchmarks.

Geezus man - bitter about that job much?

How do you know zero sacks per game isn't achievable? Improbable, sure, but so is a 16 win season.

If you set mediocre goals, expect to achieve mediocrity.

.

Not bitter about the job at all. Just telling the story of BS goals. The country club was on a key in Florida in the Gulf of Mexico. It was a wonderful winter.

[sharpe1027]

Re: One sack per game?

Geezus man - bitter about that job much?

How do you know zero sacks per game isn't achievable? Improbable, sure, but so is a 16 win season.

If you set mediocre goals, expect to achieve mediocrity.

.

At the rate they are giving up sacks, I would say on sack per game does not look mediocre to them.

[cheesner]

Re: One sack per game?

Nothing wrong with being realistic. Our goal is to have a TD on every offensive play, but that isn't very realistic. 5 tds/game is a more realistic goal. And 1 sack per game is not bad. Sacks happen, even to the best of teams.

This is understaood, however, this is NFL football we're talking about. Every team starts, and plays the year out with the most unrealistic of goals - to win the Superbowl.

Would anyone be satisfied with a coach who says something like "Our goal is to win 9 games". Hell no - that's not how it's done.

In this case the goal should be to have ZERO sacks per game. an acceptable or realistice achievement would be to average 1 sack per game, yes. But the goal should not represent what is "acceptable".

.

If the Lions coach said their goal was 9 wins, the fans would call him a dreamer.

[PlantPage55]

If he said "our goal is to have 0 sacks per game" - then he would get blasted for talking like a crazy person. Our organization can't win with some people, no matter what.

[mmmdk]

Will allowing 1 sack per game keep the QB knockdowns & QB hurries at bay?

[mission]

It's still not effective goal setting as defined by dozens of experts on the topic. It might be realistic -- and at this point, a miracle -- to have a goal for one sack a game but come on. Do they honor the lineman who gives up the first one with all-you-can-eat pizza at Cici's since he helped them attain their goal? Really...

Aim for the stars, land on the moon. There's a clear division of employee / entrepreneur mentality here...

[swede]

I see the points on both sides.

Zero sacks is unrealistic as an average.

Putting a number on it, even a low number, is too dry and somehow creates an implication that a single sack is okay--when it is clearly a FAILURE to protect the QB!

I think if I were helping an offensive line set goals I might look at the season as a whole. As a group the offensive line could strive to accumulate a record-high number of games in which the QB was not sacked at all.

I sincerely hope they are not planning to beat the number "6" in their next game.