Pass the Ball, Dang it! T-RO T-RIUMPHS

[T-RO]

Just to conclude my season-long assault on the run-loving dinosaurs.

- For the second year in a row a team ranked 32nd in rushing made it to the Super Bowl.
- For the second year in a row the Super Bowl pass-run ratio was more than 70% pass.
- The Saints ran for less yards--only 55--yet won the game going away.
- The Colts tried to run the ball more than usual--and lost with a very meager night.
- 84 passes versus 31 runs - 73% of the game's plays were passes.

At half time Cowher and company were admonishing the Saints: throw the ball. They did. They won.

 

[Hoofbite]

I suppose the fact that the Saints were one of the most balanced teams in the league doesn't matter.

 

[T-RO]

Why do I keep pounding on this? To help build a fan culture that supports a new Cowboy agenda.

The Cowboys need to build their team offensively and defensively around the passing game. You need explosive pass rushers, crazy-good corners, good protection, and plenty of vertical threats.

The Colts were seriously lacking this season in not having the elite receivers they've had in past years. If Freeney is healthy and they have 1 more top receiver they would have won today's game.

The other take-away from today: You have to play aggressive. Risk-aversion is for losers.

 

[Hoofbite]

Just to conclude my season-long assault on the run-loving dinosaurs.

- For the second year in a row a team ranked 32nd in rushing made it to the Super Bowl.
- For the second year in a row the Super Bowl pass-run ratio was more than 70% pass.
- The Saints ran for less yards--only 55--yet won the game going away.
- The Colts tried to run the ball more than usual--and lost with a very meager night.
- 84 passes versus 31 runs - 73% of the game's plays were passes.

At half time Cowher and company were admonishing the Saints: throw the ball. They did. They won.

Yeah, 5+ yard per carry is pretty meager.

 

[T-RO]

I suppose the fact that the Saints were one of the most balanced teams in the league doesn't matter.

The Saints generally built leads via the passing game then would run the ball to burn clock when they were comfortably ahead. So just looking at the stats is a little misleading.

 

[dcfanatic]

Just to conclude my season-long assault on the run-loving dinosaurs.

- For the second year in a row a team ranked 32nd in rushing made it to the Super Bowl.
- For the second year in a row the Super Bowl pass-run ratio was more than 70% pass.
- The Saints ran for less yards--only 55--yet won the game going away.
- The Colts tried to run the ball more than usual--and lost with a very meager night.
- 84 passes versus 31 runs - 73% of the game's plays were passes.

At half time Cowher and company were admonishing the Saints: throw the ball. They did. They won.

Some tell T-Wrong that he sounds like a broken record.

And that the game was lost on a passing play.

:laugh1:

 

[Hoofbite]

The Saints generally built leads via the passing game then would run the ball to burn clock when they were comfortably ahead. So just looking at the stats is a little misleading.

Only if you think that the Saints "time consuming" running game is better than nearly every other team's running game.

I don't. Do you?

 

[T-RO]

Yeah, 5+ yard per carry is pretty meager.

The winning Saints averaged 2.89 yards per play tonight.

 

[Hoofbite]

The winning Saints averaged 2.89 yards per play tonight.

That wasn't my point. You said the Colts had a "meager" running game.

You were wrong.

This game showcased 2 of the best QBs in the league right now. No shocker that two of the teams with the best QBs passed more than they ran.

 

[T-RO]

Some tell T-Wrong that he sound like a broken record.

And that the game was lost on a passing play.

:laugh1:

The MVP of the game was Drew Brees. 81% of the yardage was via the pass. One play never wins or loses a game.

 

[T-RO]

That wasn't my point. You said the Colts had a "meager" running game.

You were wrong.

This game showcased 2 of the best QBs in the league right now. No shocker that two of the teams with the best QBs passed more than they ran.

The Colts had 19 runs against 45 passes. That sounds meager to me. And despite the fact that they ran it better than the Saints----they lost. Running the ball was real valuable, wasn't it?

 

[Hoofbite]

The Colts had 19 runs against 45 passes. That sounds meager to me. And despite the fact that they ran it better than the Saints----they lost. Running the ball was real valuable, wasn't it?

What was the biggest play of the game?

 

[Hoofbite]

Its too bad the Colts didn't win T-RO. If they had you could back up your claim of 60% passing being the recipe for winning.

As it stands, I don't think there has been a team that has won a SB if they threw 60%+ of the time.

 

[NeonNinja]

The biggest play of the game was on a pass that resulted in a pick six.

 

[RainMan]

That wasn't my point. You said the Colts had a "meager" running game.

You were wrong.

This game showcased 2 of the best QBs in the league right now. No shocker that two of the teams with the best QBs passed more than they ran.

Not to speak for the OP, but I almost interpreted his point as: Here the Colts were with one of their better rushing performances, yet their offensive production as a whole was highly meager.

Seventeen points for the Colts is a pretty "meh" performance, and a potent running attack did nothing for them.

For the record: My belief on this run-pass stuff is that the ability to be balanced trumps the actual need to be balanced. I think this is undoubtedly a quarterback-driven, passing league. Heck, seemingly every rule made over the past five years has driven the league in this direction. You're ultimately going to win and lose with the passing game. But you sure as heck better have some good backs and the ability to run, not only as a way to change things up and keep the defense honest but because there are times in the game where the need to run is highly important. Such as the Saints near the goal line tonight, when they failed.

 

[RainMan]

What was the biggest play of the game?

This reminds me of the old saying, "There are three things that can happen when you throw the ball, and two of them are bad."

 

[AdamJT13]

The Saints were more effective passing the ball, and they won. That's almost always the case in the NFL.

It doesn't matter if you pass a little or pass a lot, you almost always have to pass better than your opponent to win. Running it better than your opponent (as the Colts did) has little correlation to winning.

 

[T-RO]

Its too bad the Colts didn't win T-RO. If they had you could back up your claim of 60% passing being the recipe for winning.

As it stands, I don't think there has been a team that has won a SB if they threw 60%+ of the time.

The last four Super Bowl contestants break out like this over their 16 game schedule:
Pittsburgh 53% pass/run (but they averaged only around 3.0 yards per carry)
Arizona 65% pass/run
Indy 62% pass/run
New Orleans 54% pass/run

Interestingly the teams that featured the superior rushing performances in the last two Super Bowls both lost anyway.

 

[T-RO]

This reminds me of the old saying, "There are three things that can happen when you throw the ball, and two of them are bad."

Yeah and a lot of bad things can happen if you walk out of your house. So I guess you should just never leave your house?

Wussies who want to stay conservative never make it anymore to the Super Bowl--and the gutsy ones (who aren't afraid of onside kicks, going for two, going for it on 4th down and passing the ball a ton) are invariably the winners.

 

[RainMan]

Yeah and a lot of bad things can happen if you walk out of your house. So I guess you should just never leave your house?

Wussies who want to stay conservative never make it anymore to the Super Bowl--and the gutsy ones (who aren't afraid of onside kicks, going for two, going for it on 4th down and passing the ball a ton) are invariably the winners.

My risk-reward chart recommends I answer your question "yes" 50 percent of the time. Any more or less could result in anarchy.