Passing Better and Defending The Pass (Fallacy Revisited)

[Brooksey]

Please look up what the word differential means and then try to understand how it contradicts your "left out the defending the pass part."

Many here argue to be successful you have to pass and defend the pass at a very high level. We are one of the worst at defending the pass yet we are 11-1.
We pass efficiently no doubt but we are winning by running and stopping the run.

Our pass defense is awful. Our formula is the run, the threat of the run, efficient passing, our rush defense (#6) and our Offensive TOP.
We are ranked #1 NET Pts/ Dr despite our defense being ranked #20 DEF Pts/Dr
We are ranked #1 NET Top/Dr despite our defensive TOP/Dr being ranked #22.

Amazing what a great running game can do for your defense and your rookie QB.

 

[links18]

We more than evened that out with our own turnovers and untimely penalties.

And the final score reflected the practical evenness of the game.

 

[Hoov]

It's called data. The world is becoming a place where those that understand data rule the world. Those who can't work at Subway.

Dallas was the more effective passing team PER ATTEMPT than the Vikings and it wasn't even close.

Dallas: 7.7 YPA
Vikings: 5.5 YPA

Yes. The formula that was posted is a fairly simple math equation. It's not complicated math at all.

Anyone who doubts it can go pull up the appropriate stats from any game every week and fill in the blanks and do the math with a calculator and find out for themselves that the formula works out almost every time.

Again, its just a simple math equation.

 

[KJJ]

Just for the record the Vikings passed better and defended the pass better than we did tonight, and they lost. Looks like that theory isn't holding up very well against these Dallas Cowboys.

They had a fumble deep in their own end of the field that we converted into a TD, that's what ultimately cost them the game. We've been bending all season, winning a couple of games in which we gave up over 400 yards passing and three TD's in each game. It's holding teams to FG's on some of their drives and being able to outscore everyone that's keeping us winning. We've been giving up more yards passing than we've been throwing for most of the season but games come down to who puts up the most points.

 

[Nightman]

They had a fumble deep in their own end of the field that we converted into a TD, that's what ultimately cost them the game. We've been bending all season, winning a couple of games in which we gave up over 400 yards passing and three TD's in each game. It's holding teams to FG's on some of their drives and being able to outscore everyone that's keeping us winning. We've been giving up more yards passing than we've been throwing for most of the season but games come down to who puts up the most points.

Yards don't know who their Daddy is.......it doesn't matter whether you get them by passing, running, STs or penalty.....that is why this debate is so funny........even taken at face value it only correlates to 80% of wins........so that means it is "wrong" 3 to 4 times every weekend

 

[joseephuss]

If you are guaranteed to get 3.4 yards per carry you can run the ball every single play and methodically control the clock. You will accumulate a lot of plays and time. That type of running game compliments an efficient passing game very well.

If you lose 20 yards per carry you won't get many carries in the game. You will have a lot of 3 and outs and lose the time of possession battle. That type of running game won't help a passing game at all.

 

[KJJ]

Yards don't know who their Daddy is.......it doesn't matter whether you get them by passing, running, STs or penalty.....that is why this debate is so funny........even taken at face value it only correlates to 80% of wins........so that means it is "wrong" 3 to 4 times every weekend

We have 20 rushing TD's after 12 games compared to only 8 rushing TD's all of last season so the combination of our passing efficiency along with putting up TD's in the running game has helped us outscore opponents despite our deficiency in pass coverage. Yards don't win games scoring does.

 

[xwalker]

Yes. The formula that was posted is a fairly simple math equation. It's not complicated math at all.

Anyone who doubts it can go pull up the appropriate stats from any game every week and fill in the blanks and do the math with a calculator and find out for themselves that the formula works out almost every time.

Again, its just a simple math equation.

What is the value of know the the team with the better Passing Yards per Attempt will win 80% of the time?

1. It does not tell you that you need to build your team around offense or defense.
2. It does not tell an Offensive Coordinator that he should pass often or run often because it's not based on total passing yards.
3. A game with 1 pass for 40 yards in more "effective" than a game with 40 for 400.
4. It does not tell you to focus on short, high percentage passes or long, low percentage passes. You could pass 10 times for 10 yards each or you could pass 20 times with 10 completions of 20 yards each, the average is the same.
5. The connection to rushing is completely undefined. Any claims otherwise are nonsense.
6. Is it cause or effect? Offense do change what they do when they are up or down on the scoreboard. This and other factors could mean that passing effectively is an effect of winning.

Nobody would object to the Passing Effectively correlates to Winning theory if the people pushing it would acknowledge that it does not in ANY way define the importance (or lack of importance) of rushing.

FYI - Total Rushing Yards does correlate to winning for the Cowboys over the past 10 years. That is a stat that is useful because it's total yards not average.

 

[pancakeman]

FYI - Total Rushing Yards does correlate to winning for the Cowboys over the past 10 years. That is a stat that is useful because it's total yards not average.

But that's a case where it seems likely to be effect rather than cause, though.

 

[Toruk_Makto]

Many here argue to be successful you have to pass and defend the pass at a very high level. We are one of the worst at defending the pass yet we are 11-1.
We pass efficiently no doubt but we are winning by running and stopping the run.

Our pass defense is awful. Our formula is the run, the threat of the run, efficient passing, our rush defense (#6) and our Offensive TOP.
We are ranked #1 NET Pts/ Dr despite our defense being ranked #20 DEF Pts/Dr
We are ranked #1 NET Top/Dr despite our defensive TOP/Dr being ranked #22.

Amazing what a great running game can do for your defense and your rookie QB.

The argument is you need to have a better differential than your opponent.

Please look up what differential means. I promise it will answer your questions.

 

[Nightman]

What is the value of know the the team with the better Passing Yards per Attempt will win 80% of the time?

1. It does not tell you that you need to build your team around offense or defense.
2. It does not tell an Offensive Coordinator that he should pass often or run often because it's not based on total passing yards.
3. A game with 1 pass for 40 yards in more "effective" than a game with 40 for 400.
4. It does not tell you to focus on short, high percentage passes or long, low percentage passes. You could pass 10 times for 10 yards each or you could pass 20 times with 10 completions of 20 yards each, the average is the same.
5. The connection to rushing is completely undefined. Any claims otherwise are nonsense.
6. Is it cause or effect? Offense do change what they do when they are up or down on the scoreboard. This and other factors could mean that passing effectively is an effect of winning.

Nobody would object to the Passing Effectively correlates to Winning theory if the people pushing it would acknowledge that it does not in ANY way define the importance (or lack of importance) of rushing.

FYI - Total Rushing Yards does correlate to winning for the Cowboys over the past 10 years. That is a stat that is useful because it's total yards not average.

I think you nailed it...how does any of this info help

DEN built a super offense with Peyton and took a Tebow led non passing attack/ tough D team to the SB...they got destroyed by a strong D/strong running team in SEA
NE took a super efficient passing team against SEA and narrowly beat their super D
Then DEN took a super D/terrible QBed team back to the SB and beat a strong offense/strong defense team

DAL and OAK have 2 of the best OLs in football with young QBs
NE and SEA have 2 of the worst OLs and veteran QBs

the data is solid and interesting to look back on but it doesn't help you build a team or develop a game plan............"go play great passing offense but if you can't at least play defense a little better than they play passing offense........and watch the turnovers, sacks and special teams blunders"

 

[JD_KaPow]

FYI - Total Rushing Yards does correlate to winning for the Cowboys over the past 10 years. That is a stat that is useful because it's total yards not average.

It does? I get an r^2 of 0.1 over the last 10 years. Going back to 2000, the r^2 drops to 0.02. Not much of a correlation there.

 

[DandyDon1722]

It does? I get an r^2 of 0.1 over the last 10 years. Going back to 2000, the r^2 drops to 0.02. Not much of a correlation there.

Now that was impressive and I have no idea what you wrote but I'm buying it.

I have to admit I laughed when I read the OP because it felt like Wood wanted to say, "Oh yeah, well I'll show you!" by giving a single example against a plethora of statistical analysis and then he ran.

Anomalies will always happen - but you better not hang your hat on them.

Hope is not a strategy. The pass defense has to get better in the playoffs, I think we can all agree on that.

 

[DFWJC]

Just for the record the Vikings passed better and defended the pass better than we did tonight, and they lost. Looks like that theory isn't holding up very well against these Dallas Cowboys.

I don't know verdict.
They lost because they fumbled on their own 8 yard line and they shanked about 3-4 punts to give us a shorter field. Even then it almost went to overtime. Their special teams killed them.

Plus, the one big play they gave up on defense was a long pass play to Dez--where they did not defense the pass well.

And finally, I think we all know that those stats are based on average over the long haul....not on a single game basis.

 

[T-RO]

If you are guaranteed to get 3.4 yards per carry you can run the ball every single play and methodically control the clock. You will accumulate a lot of plays and time. That type of running game compliments an efficient passing game very well.

If you lose 20 yards per carry you won't get many carries in the game. You will have a lot of 3 and outs and lose the time of possession battle. That type of running game won't help a passing game at all.

These types of extreme scenarios pull no weight. Goode's isn't offering a theory, but a finding predicated on real-world data. No one has ever said that superior passing efficiency ALWAYS leads to a win, merely that it does so in the vast majority of games and is the best determiner.

There is no universe where an NFL team is going to lose 20 yards per carry.

 

[Clove]

What I know.

Running the ball well, slows down the game.
Wears defenses down.

Those are things that are obvious.
When you run the ball well, you are keeping the opponents offense off the field. (that has to be a good thing)

When you pass the ball well, it also helps move the ball down the field.

When you put the ball in the end zone is the key to all of this. When you put the ball into the end zone the most, you obviously win.

So let's tally this up. Putting the ball in the end zone is the number one key to success. Keeping guys out of the end zone is also #1b.

And that's why we've been winning. We run, pass affectively. And when we're around the end zone, we put it in there. On the other side of the ball, we give up yards like nothing, but when they get near that goal line, we don't really let guys in.
Turning the ball over gives the opponent unnecessary opportunities. This is why we're mostly good. Our QB doesn't turn the ball over, our team doesn't fumble much, our team doesn't have a ton of penalties. Those things give us a chance to put the ball into the end zone. And of course, when we're close to the end zone, we usually always get in.

All this other mumbo jumbo is irrelevant.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

Many here argue to be successful you have to pass and defend the pass at a very high level. We are one of the worst at defending the pass yet we are 11-1.
We pass efficiently no doubt but we are winning by running and stopping the run.

Our pass defense is awful. Our formula is the run, the threat of the run, efficient passing, our rush defense (#6) and our Offensive TOP.
We are ranked #1 NET Pts/ Dr despite our defense being ranked #20 DEF Pts/Dr
We are ranked #1 NET Top/Dr despite our defensive TOP/Dr being ranked #22.

Amazing what a great running game can do for your defense and your rookie QB.

No they are not one of the worst at defending the pass.

As a matter of fact they are 11th in the NFL in yards given up per attempt at 7.1

Conversely they are 3rd in the NFL on offense in yards gained per attempt at 9.1

That 2 yard spread speaks volumes on why they are 11-1.

They've given up a lot of passing yards because they've faced more pass attempts than any team in the NFL.

Conversely they've had fewer rushing attempts than any defense in the NFL, even though they rank lower (19th) vs. the run in yards per attempt (4.2) than they do in yards given up per pass attempt (11th).

Teams are not running on Dallas because Dallas is stopping the run, because the stats show they're nothing special when it comes to run defense– It's because other teams are behind most of the time and they give up running because they need to score quickly..

 

[Brooksey]

The argument is you need to have a better differential than your opponent.

Please look up what differential means. I promise it will answer your questions.

I won't call you dum dum Mufasa, most people don't get it, they just follow the crowd. LMAO

 

[Brooksey]

No they are not one of the worst at defending the pass.

As a matter of fact they are 11th in the NFL in yards given up per attempt at 7.1

Conversely they are 3rd in the NFL on offense in yards gained per attempt at 9.1

That 2 yard spread speaks volumes on why they are 11-1.

They've given up a lot of passing yards because they've faced more pass attempts than any team in the NFL.

Conversely they've had fewer rushing attempts than any defense in the NFL, even though they rank lower (19th) vs. the run in yards per attempt (4.2) than they do in yards given up per pass attempt (11th).

Teams are not running on Dallas because Dallas is stopping the run, because the stats show they're nothing special when it comes to run defense– It's because other teams are behind most of the time and they give up running because they need to score quickly..

Mike, stop it

 

[MichaelWinicki]

Mike, stop it

Wow!

I was expecting something well thought out brimming with data to support your position.

But this is mind-blowing.


Really.