CFZ Dallas Offense 2021 Stats analysis

[KJJ]

Some disregard the 180 yards of rushing that we had last week. Hard for a QB to get 350 yards of passing while that is going on.

I would say that this team can have sucess with a more balanced offense. We weren't getting that last year and it don't work in the long run.

Had Cooper Rush been put in a position where he had to pass for 350 yards because of no running game we would’ve lost last week. We’re not going to win games with him having to carry the offense.

 

[shabazz]

Had Cooper Rush been put in a position where he had to pass for 350 yards because of no running game we would’ve likely lost last week.

Just food for thought. Cooper passed for 325 yards and 2 tds against the Vikings pass defense last year. Granted that the vikes pass defense was bad last year too, but it does show that he can put up above average stats when needed

I don't have a dog in this fight because I wish we had signed veteran talent at the backup position but rush is exceeding my expectations at the moment. He could crap the bed next week, but I'll wait to see it before saying he CAN'T elevate his game until I predict it

 

[KJJ]

Just food for thought. Cooper passed for 325 yards and 2 tds against the Vikings pass defense last year. Granted that the vikes pass defense was bad last year too, but it does show that he can put up above average stats when needed

I don't have a dog in this fight because I wish we had signed veteran talent at the backup position but rush is exceeding my expectations at the moment. He could crap the bed next week, but I'll wait to see it before saying he CAN'T elevate his game until I predict it

He passed for 325 yards last year against the Vikings with Amari Cooper and Cedrick Wilson both putting up over 100 yards. We have different personnel this season. Our offense was loaded with talent last season. Even Dak is going to struggle putting up numbers with this group.

 

[ak47kaehu]

We will once Dak gets back. If they open up the passing game a little more with Rush they could do it as well.

 

[shabazz]

He passed for 325 yards last year against the Vikings with Amari Cooper and Cedrick Wilson both putting up over 100 yards. We have different personnel this season. Our offense was loaded with talent last season. Even Dak is going to struggle putting up numbers with this group.

Cooper and Wilson had to have somebody throwing to them…..and that was Mr. Rush

I don’t know his ceiling and the fact of the matter is that NOBODY knows his ceiling after just 3 games

 

[KJJ]

Cooper and Wilson had to have somebody throwing to them…..and that was Mr. Rush

I don’t know his ceiling and the fact of the matter is that NOBODY knows his ceiling after just 3 games

The point is he had a couple of real good receivers who made some plays. Plus they didn’t drop any of his passes. Those players are no longer here. The two games he’s played so far this season haven’t come close to the game he played against Minnesota. This is not the same offense we had last season.

 

[black label]

jerry bad bra

 

[pete026]

I’ve put some more teams in the mix to try to sort through. I only excluded games if a squad sat their starters. Or if a starting QB could not make the start. That way, I’m hedging against other biases. I didn’t worry about garbage time at all-just offense scoring excluding touchdowns scored directly by defense or special teams.

My main interest is how the team shapes up against the better teams, so that’s where I focus but you can spot false narratives and hidden narratives based on this compilation.

Yeah, this confirms my opinion that the offense last season was meh against better teams (not just the playoffs). Barely below 23 PPG means that those huge numbers vs bottom tier squads or backups means little when facing higher quality competition. Dak evidently does not make much difference with the higher end clubs, but DOES vs lower end clubs (considering variance between the lists). This is not to say he is bad-but he is obviously not elevating results vs higher end teams.

This also means how much this team and other teams lower on this list must rely upon their defense to win. It also shows how poorly some of the club’s defenses played last season vs good competition (considering some of the teams higher on the list).

All in all, the team needs to stick with the game plan being currently employed to give them the best chance at winning big games. Stay fairly conservative while taking the shots given by the defense and ask that the receivers hold onto the ball, lol. Rest the strength of the team like the 49ers do.

Help me understand ONE part of your conclusion.

You statistically evaluated the team's offensive scoring vs. All/Better opponents and from that analysis, concluded that Dak takes advantage of lesser opponents and doesn't elevate his performance against better opponents which results in an overrated Dallas offense (paraphrase).

Now this could be absolutely true, could be a major/minor contributor (most probable) or could be completely false.

Obviously a QB is a significant contributor to offensive point scoring. But this is true against any opponent, good or bad. But there are other significant contributors to offensive point scoring: Play calling, Field position, Injuries, Penalties, Turnovers, Rushing performance, etc in which the QB, has some, little, or no control over. These can also be affected to varying degrees based on the quality of the opponent. Were these factored into that particular conclusion?

You seem like a smart guy and based on my previous post, you can probably see where I'm going with this. I am not this Dak homer but football is far too complex to draw that particular portion of your conclusion from the analysis you did. I do agree balance is the key to any offense unless you have an elite QB and even those QBs need some help.

FWIW, You also mentioned the Cowboys 23 PPG average and the huge numbers against backups (bolded in quote above). You did remove the Philly game, correct? But I gotta tell you I have to give you credit for going through every NFL game from last year, determining when defensive backups were playing, then removing those points from your analysis like you did for the Cowboys offense .

 

[Blitzen]

Help me understand ONE part of your conclusion.

You statistically evaluated the team's offensive scoring vs. All/Better opponents and from that analysis, concluded that Dak takes advantage of lesser opponents and doesn't elevate his performance against better opponents which results in an overrated Dallas offense (paraphrase).

Now this could be absolutely true, could be a major/minor contributor (most probable) or could be completely false.

Obviously a QB is a significant contributor to offensive point scoring. But this is true against any opponent, good or bad. But there are other significant contributors to offensive point scoring: Play calling, Field position, Injuries, Penalties, Turnovers, Rushing performance, etc in which the QB, has some, little, or no control over. These can also be affected to varying degrees based on the quality of the opponent. Were these factored into that particular conclusion?

You seem like a smart guy and based on my previous post, you can probably see where I'm going with this. I am not this Dak homer but football is far too complex to draw that particular portion of your conclusion from the analysis you did. I do agree balance is the key to any offense unless you have an elite QB and even those QBs need some help.

FWIW, You also mentioned the Cowboys 23 PPG average and the huge numbers against backups (bolded in quote above). You did remove the Philly game, correct? But I gotta tell you I have to give you credit for going through every NFL game from last year, determining when defensive backups were playing, then removing those points from your analysis like you did for the Cowboys offense .

That’s just it. My conclusion is a reflection of the totality of results. If the offense last year was a powerhouse like some believe, then the results of my analysis would have turned out differently.

You can even see that certain offenses had better results facing the better teams. This is a mixture of complex factors, BUT if Dak was making a difference in scoring offensively then it was not in a positive mathematical sense (as far as points are concerned). Which is why you leave all the games except for those I mentioned. I left the second Washington game in there, even though they were playing with backups throughout the lineup (and they didn’t really have a starting QB to begin with).

 

[pete026]

That’s just it. My conclusion is a reflection of the totality of results. If the offense last year was a powerhouse like some believe, then the results of my analysis would have turned out differently.

You can even see that certain offenses had better results facing the better teams. This is a mixture of complex factors, BUT if Dak was making a difference in scoring offensively then it was not in a positive mathematical sense (as far as points are concerned). Which is why you leave all the games except for those I mentioned. I left the second Washington game in there, even though they were playing with backups throughout the lineup (and they didn’t really have a starting QB to begin with).

Is it possible for an NFL player, any player, to contribute in a positive way without the TEAM performing at that same level? The obvious answer is yes.

So doing a statistical analysis using a data point that relates to overall team performance and concluding an individual must have also performed poorly just doesn't work, statistically speaking. It becomes an opinion. Could be true; could be false, could be somewhere in the middle.

I don't have any problem with a conclusion drawn from your analysis that states the Dallas Cowboys team performed poorly against better opponents compared to other top teams. However, jumping to statistically evaluating an individual while using an Offensive stat like Avg. PPG, no matter how important a position the player plays, is filled with possible error (you ignored those points I made).

As you stated above; you went into this analysis to prove that the Cowboys offense wasn't the powerhouse some people claimed it to be then concluded, among other things, that one individual should be highlighted as the reason for this particular performance metric. You would have been better off leaving Dak out of your conclusion because for one, it isn't a valid statistical analysis. It also only unnecessarily raises questions about your overall analysis which had some good points.

 

[Blitzen]

Is it possible for an NFL player, any player, to contribute in a positive way without the TEAM performing at that same level? The obvious answer is yes.

So doing a statistical analysis using a data point that relates to overall team performance and concluding an individual must have also performed poorly just doesn't work, statistically speaking. It becomes an opinion. Could be true; could be false, could be somewhere in the middle.

I don't have any problem with a conclusion drawn from your analysis that states the Dallas Cowboys team performed poorly against better opponents compared to other top teams. However, jumping to statistically evaluating an individual while using an Offensive stat like Avg. PPG, no matter how important a position the player plays, is filled with possible error (you ignored those points I made).

As you stated above; you went into this analysis to prove that the Cowboys offense wasn't the powerhouse some people claimed it to be then concluded, among other things, that one individual should be highlighted as the reason for this particular performance metric. You would have been better off leaving Dak out of your conclusion because for one, it isn't a valid statistical analysis. It also only unnecessarily raises questions about your overall analysis which had some good points.

No. I did not say he performed poorly. I said he did not make a positive difference when comparing the outputs vs lesser opponents and better opponents. It was the opposite. The offense had a much better PPG vs lesser opponents-which lends to the argument that he makes a difference vs lesser opponents.

That is about all you can say. You can also say that the rest of the offensive players ALSO did not make a positive statistical difference vs the better squads. The narrative that the highest paid player on the squad is all that necessary to beating good clubs becomes a futile argument. This squad does not need Dak to beat the better clubs. They can obviously beat teams with a backup QB.

The offense was not a juggernaut vs the better clubs last season and their current offensive PPG with Rush is not far from their offensive outputs vs those better teams last season. I am skeptical that Rush can elevate his game much further, but positive that Dak will not elevate his play vs better teams.

All I am doing is making inferences based on facts. Dak was unable to make a significant positive point difference vs better teams last season. But he was able to make a significant positive point difference vs lesser teams based on all measurables (tds thrown, yards, 1st downs, points scored offensively-including field goals).

 

[Ken]

I enjoy stats just like those here, but I really like a more in depth approach to face more telling data. For instance, I see plenty of posters that throw out points per game to prove a point about a particular QB’s ability. I am not trying to prove that Dak is bad or good-just throwing some data for your interpretation.

I put together some stat analysis regarding points per game last season (I excluded the Cooper Rush game and final game vs Philadelphia for obvious reasons) BUT included the San Francisco game too. I also removed points scored via special teams and defense to further illuminate offense scoring. I am not going to worry about starting field position when the defense sets the offense up in great field position (too much trouble). If you spot some issues with the stats, let me know so that I can adjust if needed.

The sixteen contests I analyzed revealed the offense averaged 25.81 points per game with a standard deviation of 8.92 points. Against teams that finished over 0.500 (again dropping the final Philly game and including SF game) the offense averaged 22.77 points per game in the nine contests with a standard deviation of 7.00 points. Lots of games had at least one special teams or defensive touchdowns over the entire season.

I checked out other top offenses to inspect their scoring too. Tampa Bay’s offense averaged 29.21 points per game with a standard deviation of 9.45 points (including the two playoff games). Against above 0.500 teams they averaged 25.8 PPG with a standard deviation of 9.89 points (10 games including postseason). KC offense averaged 28.35 PPG with a standard deviation of 11.42 points (including playoffs). Against over 0.500 teams, they averaged
29.92 points with a standard deviation of 12.65 points (in a whopping 14 games). Buffalo’s offense averaged 29.42 PPG with a standard deviation of 10.96 points. Against above 0.500 teams the offense they averaged 27.7 PPG with a standard deviation of 10.55 points (10 games including postseason).

I will update this later to get a better idea as to where the Cowboys rank with all the other offenses based on my criteria.

Here is the major flaw in this study...the cowboys defense scored a lot last year. That takes a possession away from the offense and changes the offensive game plan when up.

Also...removing the philly game when Dallas put 41 up against them the first time while TB got them in their first playoff game and Dallas adds SF, just further skews the results, imo.

Also, why take out the minny game if you are not focusing on impuning Dak?

 

[pete026]

No. I did not say he performed poorly. I said he did not make a positive difference when comparing the outputs vs lesser opponents and better opponents. It was the opposite. The offense had a much better PPG vs lesser opponents-which lends to the argument that he makes a difference vs lesser opponents.

Yeah, those statements sound like a statistcal analysis. I have to admit I was very wrong in one other statement in my last post LOL.

You should give up on the statistics and become a politician. Or better yet, the GM of the Dallas Cowboys. Like you said about the DC QB position, there would be very little difference with the change. Go find that lamp post.

 

[zeke21]

• Rush for less than 78 yards = Loss (100% of the games in 2021 & 2022)
  • They rushed for 77 yards in the playoff loss to the Niners.
  • They rushed for 71 yards vs Tampa in game 1 of 2022.
  • In 2021, they lost all games when they rushed for less 78 yards.
  • In 2022, they rushed for over 100 yards in the 2 wins.
• Rush for more than 100 yards = Win (100% of the games in 2021 & 2022)
  • In 2021, they won all games when they rushed for more than 100 yards.
  • In 2022, they won all games when they rushed for more than 100 yards.
• Summary:
  • Regardless of QB performance, they're doomed if they don't rush for more than 77 yards.

This, this and this. So much hate for Zeke and all that.. our offence begins and ends with the rush. Been saying it since Dak came in here. The man was blessed by the guys running the rock and the defences reacting to that. If we run the ball, we win. Plain and simple.

I'd love to see the same thing but in terms of pure passing attempts.. no doubt that we lose more than we win when we see Dak put up those horrible pass attempt numbers..

 

[GINeric]

I would argue if you are being completely unbiased, you would have to evaluate the other team's games against "compromised" opponents like Philly game for the Cowboys. Otherwise, it should stay.

But here is the problem. You do that and you start down rabbit holes. Well this team was in "garbage point" territory with 13 minutes left in such and such game. No, I think it was at the 18 minute point. It will never resolve it, people will argue stats to make anything fit their agenda.

Like the drunk with the lamp post; they use it for support, not illumination.

Compromised??? Philly was a playoff team last year.

 

[Blitzen]

Yeah, those statements sound like a statistcal analysis. I have to admit I was very wrong in one other statement in my last post LOL.

You should give up on the statistics and become a politician. Or better yet, the GM of the Dallas Cowboys. Like you said about the DC QB position, there would be very little difference with the change. Go find that lamp post.

True, I would need to go much farther with the statistical analysis to try to give more definitive answers. There are so many variables that it would require a team of statisticians, and WAYYYYYY more time than I can dedicate.

I have no issues saying that considering the analysis, the Cowboy’s offense did not perform very well last season vs above 0.500 teams (and the second game vs Philly cannot really be counted with the rest of the games). The QB playing can be a real difference maker when the rest of the combined offense/defense is playing high level similar ball as the opponent-and my theory is there are only 4-5 of those individuals max per season. The bulk of the rest (maybe 20-25 guys) are bus drivers of slightly varying levels, and have much more limitations in making positive adjustments to their bus than those 4-5 people.

I think my theory that more time spent under the same offensive coordinator/system [before playing in actual games] can dramatically improve the QB’s performance-is being proven again with Cooper performing so well. The more time spent, the higher the probability of good success in actual games.

If you want, I could do an analysis about the chances of winning a Super Bowl with a QB not drafted in the first two rounds if your name is not Tom Brady. That might be illuminating enough for you. Let’s just say it’s not so open to interpretation. My opinions are usually based on measurable data.

My opinions of Dak have slightly changed over the course of his career. I thought of him as a top of the pile on the bus driver group I mentioned (at the beginning stage of his career), but he can ebb dramatically when he loses even a half a step in mobility/strength (because of how much he has relied on it for his success). I said that statement 2017-2018. It came true.

 

[pete026]

Compromised??? Philly was a playoff team last year.

From what I remember, they didn't play with the "playoff" team roster on the field in the 2nd game. I could be wrong.

But I am sure there were other NFL offenses that played against "less than complete" teams so for an accurate analysis, all the NFL games have to be reviewed to determine those cases. Otherwise, the Philly game should be included. But based on some of the responses above, including it would change the numbers in a way that doesn't favor the OPs "analysis", otherwise it would have been left in.

 

[USArmyVet]

Cooper Rush hasn’t come close to averaging 249 yards passing in his first two starts this season. Plus Dak finished with 23 TD passes in 2016 and didn’t even play the second half of the season finale against Philly. As you pointed out he had four games with three TD passes and he was a rookie. Cooper Rush will finish with 17 TD passes on his current pace in a 17 game season. The big difference in 2016 was that Zeke was tearing it up. He scored 15 rushing TDs that season, so our running game was generating a lot of offense and TDs. We scored over 30 points six times in 2016 including a 40 point game. We were averaging around 28 points a game. We’re averaging well under that right now.

Those are 13 games listed based on your reference to 2016.

In 3 full games of 2022 Rush has thrown for the following:

235 yards 1 TD
215 yards 1 TD
223 yards 2 TD's

So in 3 games Rush has averaged 224 yards and 1.33 TD's a game. So that is 25 yards and .36 td's a game difference....which really isn't much.

 

[pete026]

True, I would need to go much farther with the statistical analysis to try to give more definitive answers. There are so many variables that it would require a team of statisticians, and WAYYYYYY more time than I can dedicate.

I have no issues saying that considering the analysis, the Cowboy’s offense did not perform very well last season vs above 0.500 teams (and the second game vs Philly cannot really be counted with the rest of the games). The QB playing can be a real difference maker when the rest of the combined offense/defense is playing high level similar ball as the opponent-and my theory is there are only 4-5 of those individuals max per season. The bulk of the rest (maybe 20-25 guys) are bus drivers of slightly varying levels, and have much more limitations in making positive adjustments to their bus than those 4-5 people.

I think my theory that more time spent under the same offensive coordinator/system [before playing in actual games] can dramatically improve the QB’s performance-is being proven again with Cooper performing so well. The more time spent, the higher the probability of good success in actual games.

If you want, I could do an analysis about the chances of winning a Super Bowl with a QB not drafted in the first two rounds if your name is not Tom Brady. That might be illuminating enough for you. Let’s just say it’s not so open to interpretation. My opinions are usually based on measurable data.

My opinions of Dak have slightly changed over the course of his career. I thought of him as a top of the pile on the bus driver group I mentioned (at the beginning stage of his career), but he can ebb dramatically when he loses even a half a step in mobility/strength (because of how much he has relied on it for his success). I said that statement 2017-2018. It came true.

Thanks. This is a much more reasonable response.

I wasn't arguing for Dak, for Cooper, or for neither although I have given the last one thought at certain times over the last few years. But I will not enter into those Dak vs. Cooper discussions. I am basically an engineer at heart so I hold strongly to the differences between analysis, theories, and opinion. I am not opposed to discussion of opinions but I have a hard spot with opinions, cloaked with a statistical analysis "cape". As you said, it would take an unbelievable amount of resources to "statistically" prove any of this and even then, we are dealing with humans and all the variables they bring to the table. Nuff said.

All I was trying to point out in my first post is there are quite a few stats someone could use to evaluate a QBs performance against different levels of opponents. Offensive PPG would not be one of them.

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

Just food for thought. Cooper passed for 325 yards and 2 tds against the Vikings pass defense last year. Granted that the vikes pass defense was bad last year too, but it does show that he can put up above average stats when needed

I don't have a dog in this fight because I wish we had signed veteran talent at the backup position but rush is exceeding my expectations at the moment. He could crap the bed next week, but I'll wait to see it before saying he CAN'T elevate his game until I predict it

he has been lucky with some errant throws that could cost games...luck will run out at some point. in the vikings game, the pass to Cooper on the sideline should have been intercepted as the Vikings player had it in his hands and bounced up right into cooper. against cinci he had to throws dropped by their secondary and yesterday two interceptions called back because of penalties.

plus, he has played against lesser competition, defense and commitment to run has helped. once there is more tape on him, DCs will figure out the weaknesses. there just hasn't been enough tape....

one thing though, he sees the field pretty good, and makes some good decisions.