Discussion in 'Fan Zone' started by wick, Jan 3, 2013.
They do. That's not the same as equating the running game to the passing game, however.
No one's saying the two are equal.
Explain how rushing TD help you win as much as passing TD, but rushing does not help you win.
this should be Guuud
"The rushing game" covers vastly more than a handful of plays each year that result in a rushing touchdown. The fallacy in your argument is that more rushing touchdowns does not mean more overall scoring. It simply means reallocating existing scores from the passing bucket to the rushing bucket. To have a net additive impact, you would need to create more total scoring opportunities.
It seems to me the logic is flawed in regards to rushing impact on the game. People keep quoting that "rushing" does not correlate to winning...implying that it is not as important as the passing game.
Is it possible to look at time of possession of teams that "pass" vs "run" more...? I believe that the running teams are able to keep their defenses fresher and more successful. Limit offensive opportunities of competition while wearing down their defenses. All of which should make them more successful.
Just a thought...
statistics can be molded to say a lot of different things
one has to assume that NFL teams have more statistical support than forum posters and have all this information (and a lot more) available to them
if that is so
why do we never hear NFL coaches say
"the running game has no correlation with winning"
"we dont really care about stopping the run"
it is because anyone who watches football with their eyes open can see this is not true
He can't. I shot down his whole argument with a previous post about the 2009 season ending in a playoff appearance. It clearly proved that this offense is much better with a running game and it resulted in more wins despite less scoring. He choose to ignore the post and continue with his agenda.
You are entitled to your own opinions but not your own facts. It is your opinion that the running game matters. It is fact that it does not correlate with winning and losing.
how long have NFL coaches/players been giving interviews and stating their opinions about the importance of running and passing? a few decades worth
why dont you quote my entire post and then post some clippings/videos of NFL coaches making your point?
Now here is Saban’s defensive philosophy in his own words from an article last year on the Pats website:[Our] philosophy on first and second down is to stop the run and play good zone pass defense. We will occasionally play man-to-man and blitz in this situation. On third down, we will primarily play man-to-man and mix-in some zone and blitzes. We will rush four or more players versus the pass about ninety-percent of the time.From the Texans site a july 2012 article on WPs philosophy:Wade Phillips might fall short as a head coach, but there is no denying his greatness as a defensive coordinator......Given his extraordinary ability to do more with less, I thought I'd pop in some game tape to see how exactly Phillips got it done. Here's what I found:1) Stopping the run is the Texans' priority.
The NFL has evolved into a passing league, but elite defenses still focus on shutting down the run to force opponents into a one-dimensional approach....I remember Wade (when he was here) and the defensive starters saying that he likes to stop the run FIRSTI remember that Rob Ryan said somethnig similarI can probably find similar quotes from DCs and OCsAre all of these DCs and OCs in the NFL just wrong or ignorant?
We've been here before.
Your reading comprehension is lacking here.
I really don't care what NFL coaches and players say, if the statements don't agree with facts, then they are simply wrong. Once again, nobody is entitled to his own facts, whether they played or coached in the NFL or are just a random Joe on a message board.
and there we have it
so NFL/college coaches (respected co-ordinators like wade, ryan, saban, and i am sure i can find countless others on both sides of the ball) and players who have access to all this data/analysis and whose livelihood 24/7 depends on getting better, beating the opponent, finding the edge, have all been ignoring these "facts" and are "just wrong"
i think i will back away from this charade now
It does matter with this offense and these players. If you dislike Garretts offense, then that is the subject you should debate.
Explain the difference between "simply reallocating scores from the passing bucket to the rushing bucket" and "more rushing TD only means fewer passing TD."
This is one of the funniest threads I have ever read on any board.
Thanks wick, it is indeed entertaining.
On ES you wouldnt even notice it since it would fit right in with the other threads
You didn't underscore the most important point. It is well and good to have a hypothesis. "Running the ball is key to winning" is a perfectly acceptable hypothesis, for example. You then test the hypothesis with experimentation to obtain actual data (facts) that either prove or disprove the hypothesis. In this case, measurable data disproves the hypothesis that running the ball is the key to winning. So whether this theory is espoused by some schmuck in a coffee shop or the most respected figure in the NFL, it is still unequivocally and irrefutably incorrect.
I fail to see why this is so difficult to understand. Unless you are creating more touchdowns than previously existed, moving from a lower number of rushing touchdowns to a greater number of touchdowns simply reallocates from the passing total to the rushing total.
Suppose you have 40 total touchdowns, 25 via pass and 15 via the ground. You then argue that having 20 rushing touchdowns instead of 15 would have made Dallas a better offensive team. Unless you increase the total number of touchdowns, all you have done is changed five passing touchdowns to five rushing touchdowns, leaving the same total of 40 touchdowns.
You could then argue, "OK, so just score five more touchdowns and make them rushing touchdowns." To which I would reply, "Great! We scored 45 touchdowns instead of 40, and that helps us have a better record. But the fact that we scored the net-new touchdowns via the ground is immaterial to its impact on our team."
haha. Sad but true in most cases. haha.
And you would clearly have no understanding of ball control. You want a shoot out.
You dismissing what coaches are saying is pretty silly in this thread though. Stop the run, establish the run. You have to address the OL whether you want to run or pass however. You have to stop the run to get that offense on the field.
It's just unreal that you can't see that.