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

Off-Season Priority #1: Find A Running Game

Discussion in 'Fan Zone' started by TheFinisher, Jan 1, 2013.

  1. CATCH17

    CATCH17 1st Round Pick

    28,021 Messages
    2,258 Likes Received

    How are the 49ers winning games from a statistical viewpoint?

    I think Garrett wants an offense like the 49ers run but he has pieces more like the Saints.
  2. Doomsday101

    Doomsday101 Well-Known Member

    78,384 Messages
    3,722 Likes Received
    True but then even the Saints felt the need to do something to help their running game which is why they used a 1st rd pick on Ingram. Makes no sense for teams to draft RB high in the draft if they felt the position did not matter in terms of winning.
  3. wick

    wick Active Member

    749 Messages
    48 Likes Received
    What difference does it make how you get the ball into the end zone?
  4. Milkbone

    Milkbone Member

    65 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    Why bother. It appears that the bloodbath you give anywhere, is more like a wading pool.
  5. Zman5

    Zman5 Well-Known Member

    5,913 Messages
    1,585 Likes Received



    Team 1 QB: 100 yards, 0 int, 10 attempts, 0 sack, 0 TD. ANYPA = 10
    Team 2 QB: 300 yards, 1 int, 30 attempts, 0 sacks, 2 TDs. ANYPA =8.3


    Team 1 RBs: 200 yards, 3 TDs
    Team 2 RBs: 50 yards, 0 TDs.

    Team 1 points scored: 21 (from the run game)
    Team 2 points scroed: 14 (from the pass)




    This is what's wrong with the whole premise of "team that passes better will win
    and run game doesn't matter" premise using Adam's formula.

    As you can see, using his formula Team 1 QB passed "better" (ANYPA: 10 vs 8.3). And Team 1 did win 21-14.
    So you can claim that Team 1 won becaused they passed better.
    But only reason they actually won was because their run game was so much better and scroed 3 TDs.

    But is that really correct? If the Team 1 run game didn't score any TDs, they would have lost.

    The reason TD by the QB is important is because teams like us can't score TDs by rushing . If Romo can't throw TDs,
    we'll be kicking FGs.

    Last Sunday's game is a perfect example where this formula doesn' tell the full story.
    If Redskins didn't have all those rushing TDs, they would have lost even though RG3 passed "much" better
    than Romo according to Adam.
  6. percyhoward

    percyhoward Research Tool

    8,636 Messages
    2,739 Likes Received
    They passed better than we did, but he's saying their rushing performance didn't matter.

    I think if you switch the two teams' rushing performances, Dallas wins that game.

    How many teams with an 7- to 15-point edge in passer rating were outrushed by their opponent by 20+ attempts and 170+ yards, gave up 4+ more rushing TD than the opponent, and won that game?
  7. Zman5

    Zman5 Well-Known Member

    5,913 Messages
    1,585 Likes Received
    Typical Bus Driver type QB numbers: 220 yards, 0 int, 22 attempts, 0 sack, 0 TD. ANYPA = 10

    Typical Romo numbers: 330 yards, 1 int, 40 attempts, 3sacks, 2 TDs. ANYPA = 6.5


    So what type of passing game would you want, knowing how bad our rushing attack is?


    Even though the "Bus driver" is a much better passer (according to Adam's formula), I'll take Romo type of performance every time.

    I have few problems with this formula. One, it doesn't use TDs. Two, it treat every int the same way.
    An int that is thrown at the end of the half because of a no risk hail mary pass to the end zone would be penalized the
    same way as a pick six int at the end of the game.
  8. IrishAnto

    IrishAnto Well-Known Member

    1,091 Messages
    171 Likes Received
    Who developed this formula anyway?

    Was it somebody from MIT? :D
  9. Zman5

    Zman5 Well-Known Member

    5,913 Messages
    1,585 Likes Received
    Better. Some one from the Zone!!!!! :)
  10. AdamJT13

    AdamJT13 Salary Cap Analyst

    15,059 Messages
    630 Likes Received
    You are using total yards for rankings, which is a terrible way to judge how effective a team is at running or passing.

    For the umpteenth time, there is no proof that running the ball better helps a team pass the ball better or win more to any degree whatsoever. This has been proved year after year in the NFL. But closed-minded people who cling to their disproved theories can't accept that fact.
  11. AdamJT13

    AdamJT13 Salary Cap Analyst

    15,059 Messages
    630 Likes Received
    Nope. There is no significant correlation attached to the method of scoring.
  12. Doomsday101

    Doomsday101 Well-Known Member

    78,384 Messages
    3,722 Likes Received
    In terms of stats maybe not as for what takes place on the field yes there is. Safety being forced to move up, LB biting up on the run. The physical toll it takes on a defense as they are getting hammered. It matters and if it didn't teams would not run the ball the game would be 100% passing and nothing else but it does not work that way.

    HC after HC talks about the importance of the running game to them so this non sense of well running does not win games? It does if it helps the offense move the ball and the chains

    You want to use a stat watch the game see what a big time running game will force a defense to do to combat it and the passing lanes it creates.

    It is not that hard to see and stats are not the be all
  13. wick

    wick Active Member

    749 Messages
    48 Likes Received
    Let's suppose running the ball effectively does help your passing game. We should then be able to see a clear trend over many games and seasons that shows a positive correlation between more effective running and more effective passing, right? After all, if passing doesn't actually get better as running effectiveness increases, then our theory is just wrong. But as Adam has pointed out in this thread, there is no such correlation.

    I fully appreciate that many football people claim there is a correlation between they two, but they are simply wrong, just as legions of baseball people were proven wrong in their beliefs about things like bunting and stolen bases over the last 30 years.
  14. wick

    wick Active Member

    749 Messages
    48 Likes Received
    To add to the prior point, people tend to confuse the success of play-action passing with the success of running the ball. Play-action passing does work because of how it changes the spacing on the field, resulting in larger windows between the second and third levels of the defense. The fallacy is in the notion that a good running game is a prerequisite for effective play-action passing. There's no correlation between the two. Play-action passing works by tricking a linebacker or safety into seeing a running play develop. Players react to a running play independent of the success of prior running plays.
  15. Doomsday101

    Doomsday101 Well-Known Member

    78,384 Messages
    3,722 Likes Received
    Not every team is built the same, running game is very important to some teams and HC still will tell you the importance of running and stopping the run. That takes nothing away from the importance of the passing game. However watch the games sometimes, safeties start moving up you get 8 in the box you start creating the one on one matchups, LB move up creating gaps behind them. Sorry but it matters

    This is not a debate about passing vs running but the running game does matter and can have a big affect on the games if you don't get that then fine but it not myth it is fact

    This past game RGIII threw for 100 yards Morring ran for 200 and had 4 rushing TD that fricken mattered big time. There are a lot more risk in the passing game than the running game.
  16. Doomsday101

    Doomsday101 Well-Known Member

    78,384 Messages
    3,722 Likes Received
    No one is confusing a damn thing. HC around the NFL will tell you the same thing. You want to think running does not matter? Well given the fact how often teams run the ball why bother? why run the ball at all if it does not matter? This is not flag football
  17. Doomsday101

    Doomsday101 Well-Known Member

    78,384 Messages
    3,722 Likes Received
    It is almost too funny this debate when the leading rushing teams in the NFL are

    1 Wash
    2 Minn
    3 Sea
    4 SF
    7 NE
    8 Hou
    11 Balt

    What do they have in common? :laugh2:
  18. wick

    wick Active Member

    749 Messages
    48 Likes Received
    When you state that something is a fact, you are obliged to actually prove it and not simply declare it. Adam has proven with facts that you are wrong. Again, nobody is saying play-action passing is not effective, but it is simply incorrect to claim that successful play-action passing is a function of successful running.
  19. percyhoward

    percyhoward Research Tool

    8,636 Messages
    2,739 Likes Received
    Of course it doesn't matter how you score -- it's how often.

    2011
    Giants: 32 red zone TD -- 15 passing and 17 rushing.

    Cowboys: 24 red zone TD -- 20 passing and 4 rushing.

    I look at those numbers and conclude that it's important to be able to run in the red zone. I conclude that the Giants won the division in 2011 because they scored more TD (even more TD per possession) than we did. And I attribute that to their rushing TD.
  20. Idgit

    Idgit Ice up, son. Ice up! Staff Member

    31,829 Messages
    7,553 Likes Received
    Nothing in the statistics say that running the ball doesn't matter. They say that running it effectively doesn't make you more likely to win.

    There are game situations where you very definitely have to run the ball. It's just that, other than short yardage/goal line situations, doing it better than your opponent isn't going to make you (significantly) more likely to win.

    Yes, you want to call passing plays from 3rd and 4 rather than 3rd and 10. But a more effective passing offense can overcome the difference between 3rd and 6 and 3rd and 4 fairly readily. Or that differential is dwarfed by what happens when you cough up a ball in a passing situation. Those kinds of passing game inefficiencies are the things that cause you to lose.

    Again, if running the ball well keeps you on the field and helps you avoid passing ineffectively, by all means do it. You'll still lose if the other guy can pass more effectively than you can, but if avoiding the negative passing plays works in your favor, it's the smart thing to do. But it's smart because it keeps you from making a passing game mistake, not because rushing better than the other guy correlates strongly with winning.

Share This Page