Originally Posted by SkinsandTerps
That's not true for every team.
For example the Redskins have lost quite a few starters on the defensive side of the ball. To control the bleeding the rush attack had to be solid. They keep the other teams offense off of the field and run the clock down. I am not positive about this stat, but I believe the Redskins have the best 1st down yardage per play in the league. That is because of the threat to run and the execution of the run.
You take away any semblance of a rush attack and your QB will not play more than 3 games next season. And that is being generous. You can't stop the run and your defense will be on the field all game chasing WRs for no reason.
How do you explain the fact that the Redskins averaged more than 5.75 yards per carry in six games this season -- and went 2-4 in those games?
Or that the Redskins averaged less than 4.7 yards per carry in five games -- and went 4-1 in those games?
Or that the Redskins averaged more than 6 adjusted net yards per pass in seven games -- and went 7-0 in those games?
Or that the Redskins averaged less than 5 adjusted net yards per pass in six games -- and went 1-5 in those games?
Or that the team that passed more effectively went 14-2 in the Redskins' games, while the team that ran more effectively went 9-7?
How could such a run-oriented team lose when it runs well and win when it runs poorly? And how does that run-oriented team win when it passes well and lose when it passes poorly?
Shouldn't a run-oriented team win when it runs well and lose when it doesn't, instead of the other way around?