1. Welcome to CowboysZone!  Join us!  Come on!  You know you want to!

I'm Gonna Throw This Out There!

Discussion in 'Fan Zone' started by CowboyRoy, Oct 30, 2012.

  1. Zman5

    Zman5 Well-Known Member

    5,418 Messages
    1,149 Likes Received
    Mabye but if you don't run well, eventurally the defenses will adjust and not play the run. That will take away the effectiveness of the play action.
  2. VACowboy

    VACowboy Well-Known Member Zone Supporter

    3,698 Messages
    168 Likes Received
    Green Bay was 27th in the League running the ball last year but Rodgers still had the #1 QB rating when throwing play-action passes. Detroit was 29th in rushing but Stafford was 5th throwing with play-action.

    The correlation just isn't there.

    http://www.stats.com/emails/AccordingtoSTATS/NFL_ATS_1111.html

    http://www.nfl.com/stats/categoryst...sonType=REG&tabSeq=2&qualified=true&Submit=Go
  3. Idgit

    Idgit Ice up, son. Ice up! Staff Member

    30,483 Messages
    6,192 Likes Received
    If that were true, it would be reflected in the correlation between running effectively and winning.
  4. Mr_Bill

    Mr_Bill Member

    383 Messages
    5 Likes Received
    Here is a question for you. Is there any evidence that a team would be better off not running the ball at all, except in short-yardage situations or trying to run out the clock? If not, how do you think a team should manage it's run-pass ratio, especially at the beginning of a game?

    These are not gotcha questions. I am genuinely interested in your answer.
  5. utrunner07

    utrunner07 Well-Known Member

    9,012 Messages
    40 Likes Received
    Haven't you said pretty much the same thing ever year and been wrong?
  6. Idgit

    Idgit Ice up, son. Ice up! Staff Member

    30,483 Messages
    6,192 Likes Received
    I don't have the benefit of Adam's data or interpretation of it, but it's not the case that the running game doesn't matter. It's that the effectiveness of the running game doesn't matter.

    There are always situations where you need to be able to run the ball, and they apply to all teams. But--apart from short yardage situations that can mean points or a new set of downs--it's not the case that being able to run better than the other guy is going to appreciably help you to win, statistically speaking.
  7. the kid 05

    the kid 05 Individuals play the game, but teams beat the odds

    9,541 Messages
    3 Likes Received
    Uh if we had Troy and Emmitt this team would be heaps better. Solid quarterback who made smart reads and passes and a running back who wasn't made of glass and could play all 4 down.

    If i'm not mistaken we are 3-1 in our last 3 games againts previously undefeated teams (colts, pats (loss), saints, redskins back in 91)
  8. CowboyRoy

    CowboyRoy Active Member

    592 Messages
    28 Likes Received
    YOu have to run the ball, or at least try to establish the run. And you never abondon the run. And ANY coach, unless you have Brees, Manning, or Rogers, should try to establish a physical football team and a physically dominating offense. The offense needs to be multidimensional that has the ability to take advantage of any kind of weakness the opposition has that week. And you need to be able to run to pick up short yardage, get in the endzone, get you in 3rd and short yardage situations, and close out games when you have the lead.

    That being said, I really like the hurry up offense that the Cowboys were running in the second half. They were clearly on a roll and Romo was brilliant in it. Why has this NOT been a staple of the offense or at least a change of pace during games? These are the issues I have with Garrett. He simply doesnt get it. He has been in charge of this offense for 8 years and where is the no huddle? He has a veteran QB perfectly capable of executing it.
  9. CowboyRoy

    CowboyRoy Active Member

    592 Messages
    28 Likes Received
    I completely disagree. Emmitt Smith would go nowhere behind this Oline. And Aikman would get absolutely killed behind this line with no mobility. Once the great Oline we had started to dissolve, so did Emmitt and Aikman and thier effectiveness.
  10. CATCH17

    CATCH17 1st Round Pick

    27,695 Messages
    1,904 Likes Received
    Dallas just needs to do what they've been doing but just not beat themselves in the PROCESS of doing it.


    Thats an old story though and it won't end until some changes are made with the coach.
  11. the kid 05

    the kid 05 Individuals play the game, but teams beat the odds

    9,541 Messages
    3 Likes Received
    Emmitt made the line better by being able to shed and make tacklers miss. Troy would have gotten hit as much as he did during any point of the 90's. His release would hault blitzers from coming and the fact that he knew where his receivers would be would help out. I can't see him demanding no less then perfection from Dez, Miles, KO, Witten or who ever hes throwing bullets to.
  12. Mr_Bill

    Mr_Bill Member

    383 Messages
    5 Likes Received
    I seriously hope that is not Adam's interpretation, and I will attempt to explain why.

    First, I am in complete agreement that correlation to victory is a relevant stat, and also that passing efficiency on offense and defense have far and away the highest correlations.

    Having said that, I have two points to make:

    First, if the attribute with the highest correlation is close to even in a game, certainly lower correlation attributes come into play, and must be addressed. I submit that this is what happened in the last game, when turnovers became determinant.

    Second, a low correlation to victory is not a zero correlation to victory. Even a rudimentary knowledge of probabilities (which is where I reside) tells me that over the course of a season, those lower correlation attributes are going to be determinant for some games. It is obvious that even one game can have a significant influence on the final won-loss record of a team.

    The corollary to my above hypotheses is that a team needs to attempt to improve every single positive influence on the outcome of a game, while attempting to lessen all negative influences.

    In other words, while a team should emphasize pass offense and defense in its planning, it ignores the other factors (including run efficiency) at its peril.
  13. GloryDaysRBack

    GloryDaysRBack Well-Known Member

    9,331 Messages
    744 Likes Received
    All we have to do is not play Dallas cowboys football and we might actually have a chance!
  14. AdamJT13

    AdamJT13 Salary Cap Analyst

    14,961 Messages
    407 Likes Received
    All of what you said is true, to an extent. My point is that other than short-yardage runs, how *well* you run the ball has little effect on your ability to win a game. Some teams like to run a lot, and others don't run it much at all. Either way can work. But for both types of teams, the key to winning is almost always not how well they run the ball but how well they pass it when they do decide to pass -- whether it's 20 times a game or 40.

    If you pass more effectively than your opponent, you will win the game the vast majority of the time, even if your opponent runs it more effectively.

    If you run the ball more effectively than your opponent but allow your opponent to pass it more effectively than you do, you will lose the game the vast majority of the time.
  15. AdamJT13

    AdamJT13 Salary Cap Analyst

    14,961 Messages
    407 Likes Received
    I never said how well you run doesn't matter at all, I said it matters very little. And your final statement is true if you keep in mind the priority level of each. If you devote an *inordinate* amount of resources to improving an aspect of the game that will not make much of a difference between winning and losing, you also do that at your peril.
  16. Idgit

    Idgit Ice up, son. Ice up! Staff Member

    30,483 Messages
    6,192 Likes Received
    I'm not sure it's necessarily true, even then. You've got a finite amount of practice time, you need to spend it on getting as effective as you can at the things that matter most. Only when you deem yourself as effective as you can possibly get at the high-correlation-to-victory categories should you spend time on the lower correlating categories.

    And this all assumes that the time-spent-per-unit-of-efficiency-gain is equal across the board, which, of course, is probably a really bad assumption.
  17. CCBoy

    CCBoy Well-Known Member

    16,922 Messages
    1,229 Likes Received
    But if the connective element that transcends it all, is an aggressive and physical demeaner, then seeing to different elements also keeps focus at high levels as well. Maining momentum on that aggressive nature nurtured.
  18. KJJ

    KJJ You Have an Axe to Grind

    10,776 Messages
    854 Likes Received
    [IMG]
  19. WV Cowboy

    WV Cowboy Waitin' on the 6th

    10,928 Messages
    1,233 Likes Received
    Well said.
  20. Mr_Bill

    Mr_Bill Member

    383 Messages
    5 Likes Received
    I agree with every syllable of this post.

Share This Page