The key to winning: adjusted yards per pass attempt

[wick]

This is true in general, but it makes most sense for our purposes to look at how Dallas has performed with Tony Romo at quarterback with respect to his adjusted yards per pass attempt in each game of his career, throwing out games he barely played due to injury. This gives us 95 games to look at, which is plenty to start drawing conclusions. I broke each game's ANY/A into seven ranges and looked at Dallas' win-loss record for each range. This takes nothing else into account. The results should point clearly to where Dallas must focus win more games and lose fewer.

> 10.0: 23-3
9.0 - 9.9: 9-5
8.0 - 8.9: 4-1
7.0 - 7.9: 7-7
6.0 - 6.9: 5-5
5.0 - 5.9: 5-8
< 5.0: 4-9

From these ranges, we can see three clear scenarios:

1. If Romo's ANY/A is 8.0 or greater, we win 80 percent of the time.
2. If Romo's ANY/A is between 6.0 and 7.9, the game is a coin flip. We are exactly a .500 team in this scenario.
3. If Romo's ANY/A is less than 6.0, we lose 65 percent of the time.

It's that simple. So far this season, Romo has done the following:

New York: 5.27. This one should have been a loss by the trend, but we bucked it by forcing an incredible six turnovers. Even with that advantage, we had a chance to lose late because our passing was poor.

Kansas City: 7.57. This was a coin flip by the trend, and we lost by a point. Expected result.

St. Louis: 11.25. This is a win by the trend, and we dominated. Expected result.

San Diego: 7.68. This was a coin flip by the trend, and we lost a game closer than the final result indicates. Another expected result.

Unless we can find a way to get Romo consistently above 8.0 ANY/A, don't expect this team to be much better than .500. As this stat goes, so goes our record.

 

[AdamJT13]

The key is having a higher ANY/A than your opponent -- if you do that, you win about 80 percent of the time, no matter how high yours is. Naturally, over the long haul, a high offensive ANY/A will produce more wins because those are more likely to be higher than the opponent's ANY/A against an "average" defensive performance.

So, to win consistently, we need Romo's ANY/A to be higher and/or our defense's ANY/A to be lower than it has been. It's really that simple.

 

[CowboyStar88]

But I'm told that we need to run run run and that the running game is the key to our success. I've been trying to make this point and it's gone unheard. Because people get caught up in what they think wins versus the statistical data that shows what really wins. My guess is if you do this with all teams throughout the league you will probably get similar results. Pass efficiently and you win don't and you lose pretty simple concept.

 

[Cebrin]

But I'm told that we need to run run run and that the running game is the key to our success. I've been trying to make this point and it's gone unheard. Because people get caught up in what they think wins versus the statistical data that shows what really wins. My guess is if you do this with all teams throughout the league you will probably get similar results. Pass efficiently and you win don't and you lose pretty simple concept.

running helps set up play action for the the 8.0 average. Or rather, dual threats. If we had two Dez Bryants, we could opt out on the run.

 

[50cent]

But I'm told that we need to run run run and that the running game is the key to our success. I've been trying to make this point and it's gone unheard. Because people get caught up in what they think wins versus the statistical data that shows what really wins. My guess is if you do this with all teams throughout the league you will probably get similar results. Pass efficiently and you win don't and you lose pretty simple concept.

Uhhhhh his best ANY/A was vs the Rams, you know the game we ran ran ran ran to set up his success. Simple!

 

[CowboyStar88]

Uhhhhh his best ANY/A was vs the Rams, you know the game we ran ran ran ran to set up his success. Simple!

You being up the Rams? Arguably the worst team in the league? That's your argument? Ok got it.

 

[CowboyStar88]

running helps set up play action for the the 8.0 average. Or rather, dual threats. If we had two Dez Bryants, we could opt out on the run.

It helps when you have a RB that strikes fear in a defense we don't have that. But this league is about passing efficiently and stopping the pass the statistical data proves just that. You can add all the variables about play action and running but it still comes back 2 those 2 simple facts that people choose to ignore.

 

[CowboyStar88]

You can rush for 100 plus yards every game and lose just ask the early 2000 cowboys and the current Vikings, Titans, Bills, Eagles etc... But if you pass efficiently you win Ask the Patriots, Broncos, Chargers, Saints, Packers, Lions. Look no further then the Ravens last year in the Playoffs they were unstoppable in passing efficiency and stopping the pass and they are world Champs. But the run crowd can keep hammering this point away when the data proves them wrong

 

[50cent]

It helps when you have a RB that strikes fear in a defense we don't have that. But this league is about passing efficiently and stopping the pass the statistical data proves just that. You can add all the variables about play action and running but it still comes back 2 those 2 simple facts that people choose to ignore.

It helps if the coaches use the rb to strike fear in the defense. You can add all of your variables, but it all comes back to this team plays better when Murray is a focal point in the game plan. Damn what this league is about, this team is about running to keep the defense fresh to keep that stat down and limiting our inefficient passing game! Yes, inefficient passing game. The one that results in too many penalties, dropped passes, qb taking senseless sacks, Ints, predictablity...

 

[50cent]

You being up the Rams? Arguably the worst team in the league? That's your argument? Ok got it.

The Giants are arguably the worst team inthe NFL and we barely beat them with 2 d TDs and 4 other TOs from them with a pass happy game plan. More evidence this team needs Murray involved more than romo passing

 

[CowboyStar88]

It helps if the coaches use the rb to strike fear in the defense. You can add all of your variables, but it all comes back to this team plays better when Murray is a focal point in the game plan. Damn what this league is about, this team is about running to keep the defense fresh to keep that stat down and limiting our inefficient passing game! Yes, inefficient passing game. The one that results in too many penalties, dropped passes, qb taking senseless sacks, Ints, predictablity...

Looking at the statistical data the one you ignore romo when passing efficiently has only 3 losses. So again this team has been built around passing since Romo became the QB so just because the scheme is terrible you want to over compensate it instead of fixing it? When it proves that when romo is throwing the ball down field we win. You can damn the league all you want but it hasn't worked for the Vikings or Eagles they run to compensate for the passing game. But again you can believe that all you would like.

 

[50cent]

You can rush for 100 plus yards every game and lose just ask the early 2000 cowboys and the current Vikings, Titans, Bills, Eagles etc... But if you pass efficiently you win Ask the Patriots, Broncos, Chargers, Saints, Packers, Lions. Look no further then the Ravens last year in the Playoffs they were unstoppable in passing efficiency and stopping the pass and they are world Champs. But the run crowd can keep hammering this point away when the data proves them wrong

We are passing the ball efficiently boss, where are the wins?! Why 2-2?

 

[CowboyStar88]

The Giants are arguably the worst team inthe NFL and we barely beat them with 2 d TDs and 4 other TOs from them with a pass happy game plan. More evidence this team needs Murray involved more than romo passing

If Romo was throwing down field beyond 6 yards this team would've scored more points. Not sure what's so hard for you to really understand? They won not because of the offense they won because of the TO margin. If not for that Dallas loses the game because they didn't throw down field. Man you just keep arguing the same played out point and keep trying to fit it into your argument even when the data and league prove you wrong. Fix the scheme and you fix the problem not try and hide it because when you need it and it's not there guess what? You lose just ask the Vikings.

 

[CowboyStar88]

We are passing the ball efficiently boss, where are the wins?! Why 2-2?

Do you just ignore the data? And look at passing completion %???

 

[50cent]

Do you just ignore the data? And look at passing completion %???

No the data says the Cowboys are undefeated when Murray has 18+ rushes regardless of efficiency in the run or pass game. That data I like! Romo passing north of 35+ att has led us to 1-2 this year. Data says Murray gameplan > Romo gameplan

 

[CowboyStar88]

No the data says the Cowboys are undefeated when Murray has 18+ rushes regardless of efficiency in the run or pass game. That data I like! Romo passing north of 35+ att has led us to 1-2 this year. Data says Murray gameplan > Romo gameplan

Here to your theory Murray is 3rd in the league in rushing. Of course it's the data you like! It fits your worn out agenda. I bet you can find some data about Adrian Peterson as well. But guess what the Vikings won Sunday because they found a passing game! Cool concept huh? Because as the trend shows when Romo is completing Passes over 10 yards he in his 7 years as a starter he's only lost 3 times! It's not about passing more! Do you get that?? It's about being efficient and effective hence completing passes for more then 8 yards.

 

[AdamJT13]

No the data says the Cowboys are undefeated when Murray has 18+ rushes regardless of efficiency in the run or pass game. That data I like! Romo passing north of 35+ att has led us to 1-2 this year. Data says Murray gameplan > Romo gameplan

The data says that when we're already winning, we can give Murray the ball in the fourth quarter to run out the clock, so he gets his 18-plus carries. Murray getting 18-plus carries is the EFFECT of winning, not the cause.

Murray had 14 carries against the Chargers. Do you think if we had given him the ball four times on our last possession, we would have won? Of course not.

 

[Hoofbite]

Of course passing is correlated to winning. Passing accounts for the lion's share of all offensive production. This is not a shocker.

The problem with looking at the "stats" is that there is no way to ensure that you will ever be the more effective passing team. Identifying that passing better than the opponent means you usually wins is great but if there's really no way to ensure that you pass better than your opponent you may as well be telling everyone what day of the week it is.

These threads always go nowhere because people aren't really ever on the same page. The argument basically becomes this;

A) Passing more effectively than your opponent wins games.

B) I think running better would help the passing game.

A) Passing more effectively than your opponent wins games.

B) Yeah, yeah. I just think if the team had a better rushing attack the passing game would benefit and the offense as a whole would be more successful.

A) Running doesn't correlate to wins, passing does. Passing more effectively than your opponent wins games.

 

[50cent]

Here to your theory Murray is 3rd in the league in rushing. Of course it's the data you like! It fits your worn out agenda. I bet you can find some data about Adrian Peterson as well. But guess what the Vikings won Sunday because they found a passing game! Cool concept huh? Because as the trend shows when Romo is completing Passes over 10 yards he in his 7 years as a starter he's only lost 3 times! It's not about passing more! Do you get that?? It's about being efficient and effective hence completing passes for more then 8 yards.

Why do you keep bringing up other teams, their success has nothing to do with ours. The stat I'm using goes back to his 1st year with us not just this year and its still flawless. Your agenda is to prove that we can keep up with the Joneses in this so called passing league and history proves Romo can't keep up. He's better and were better when Romo is below 30 pass att (27-5). You add that to Murray getting more carries and I'm a happy camper. My agenda is to win not prove a theory that since this is a passing league we must follow suit. WRONG! Romo success lies ina pitch count not ANY/A

 

[CowboyStar88]

The data says that when we're already winning, we can give Murray the ball in the fourth quarter to run out the clock, so he gets his 18-plus carries. Murray getting 18-plus carries is the EFFECT of winning, not the cause.

Murray had 14 carries against the Chargers. Do you think if we had given him the ball four times on our last possession, we would have won? Of course not.

Yes he does because he likes that stat. But like I said earlier Murray is 3 rd in the NFL in rushing and this guy keeps hounding we need to run more and he completely ignores the fact that we are not passing effectively or efficient enough. He will look at the completion % and say we are but 5-6 yard passes do not win games especially with Romo at the helm. Probably most likely with the entire league.