The Myth of the Bell Cow

[jobberone]

@stasheroo, earlier posts of mine showed data with a success rate of roughly 60-80% on 3rd down up to ten yards except for 3rd and 6 which I don't understand although I have an idea but just a wild guess. This is over roughly a ten year period. I still don't have the splits for 3rd but generally we have been more successful on 3rd down in the Garrett era than many here, including me, have thought just based on my anecdotal purview of posts over that time. We have been more successful running than passing on 3rd in general over the past few years even up to ten yards which I find amazing and even wonder if that data is correct. That excludes 3rd and six.

But I don't have the splits. Maybe @AdamJT13 or @percyhoward has those numbers.

 

[jobberone]

Digging a little deeper into the stats. The last half of the 1977 season Dorsett did this:

16-39
16-50
17-73
19-64
23-206 (84 yard TD run)
20-92
17-50

128-574 or 4.48 avg. on 18.3 carries a game. He had 80 carries the first 7 games.

Nice research. As mentioned Landry didn't like to start rookies anyway and didn't trust Dorsett to run the plays as drawn up. He improvised too much. Finally Landry came up to him and told him to just run as he wanted. Dorsett was never a work horse back and he complained often to Landry to give him the ball more. Landry told him he was not going to change normally his number of carries as he wanted to protect him and prolong his career. Eventually Tony agreed with that.

I'd call Tony a lead or featured back. I think a work horse back gets 20+ carries a game. I'm too busy to look up backs like Riggins etc to see their numbers. We know Emmitt was a 'bellcow' back. I don't think we've ever had another and I'd not call Murray one base on one season.

 

[Doomsday101]

Nice research. As mentioned Landry didn't like to start rookies anyway and didn't trust Dorsett to run the plays as drawn up. He improvised too much. Finally Landry came up to him and told him to just run as he wanted. Dorsett was never a work horse back and he complained often to Landry to give him the ball more. Landry told him he was not going to change normally his number of carries as he wanted to protect him and prolong his career. Eventually Tony agreed with that.

I'd call Tony a lead or featured back. I think a work horse back gets 20+ carries a game. I'm too busy to look up backs like Riggins etc to see their numbers. We know Emmitt was a 'bellcow' back. I don't think we've ever had another and I'd not call Murray one base on one season.

TD did not come out often, not all of his touches were in the running game, when you add in catches that number in most season is around 21 a game. Even at that TD has season of 290 carries, 278, 342, 289, 302 and 305 not counting catches. Even in 1982 he had 177 carries but that was in 9 games giving him over 19 carries a game

 

[percyhoward]

2014-look at power success which is third or fourth down conversion rate.

Just to correct, those are success rates for running plays on 3rd or 4th and 2 or less, or on any down from the 1- or 2-yard line. IOW, obvious running situations in short yardage and goal line. We'd been getting steadily better, then came the big jump in 2014.

2011 23rd
2012 15th
2013 11th
2014 4th

 

[percyhoward]

@We have been more successful running than passing on 3rd in general over the past few years even up to ten yards which I find amazing and even wonder if that data is correct. That excludes 3rd and six.

But I don't have the splits. Maybe @[USER=20]AdamJT13 or @percyhoward has those numbers.[/USER]

3rd Down conversion %
Cowboys' NFL Rank, 2011-14
pass 8th
run 22nd

 

[jobberone]

TD did not come out often, not all of his touches were in the running game, when you add in catches that number in most season is around 21 a game. Even at that TD has season of 290 carries, 278, 342, 289, 302 and 305 not counting catches. Even in 1982 he had 177 carries but that was in 9 games giving him over 19 carries a game

Well, nicely done, so he had more touches but not a great number of carries which is the topic. I do wish we had more pass touches by our RBs than we do. Landry was great at using them in open space and they even lined up outside and of course the screen pass was a staple.

 

[jobberone]

Just to correct, those are success rates for running plays on 3rd or 4th and 2 or less, or on any down from the 1- or 2-yard line. IOW, obvious running situations in short yardage and goal line. We'd been getting steadily better, then came the big jump in 2014.

2011 23rd
2012 15th
2013 11th
2014 4th

That's exactly what I've said PH concerning success rates so that doesn't need correction. But there is a chart from 2010 that shows success rates on 3rd and 3-10. I provided success rates not rankings there. I don't know where your figures came from but I gave rankings for run success that are significantly better in some years than those listed. They are in the thread. We were 2nd to NO in 2014. I don't remember the rest but they're in the tables I provided.

 

[percyhoward]

As someone who has felt that we didn't run enough on 3rd and short, I would be very interested to see any specific numbers you have regarding run and pass numbers there.

Do you have anything you can share or a link you can direct me to?

Run %, 2014
3rd/4th and 2 or less
Cowboys 63.2%
NFL avg 57.6%

Goal Line (1- or 2-yard line, any down)
Cowboys 50.0%
NFL avg 61.1%

We passed four times in goal line situations in week 1 vs. the 49ers, and seven times the rest of the season (17 games).

 

[Stash]

Run %, 2014
3rd/4th and 2 or less
Cowboys 63.2%
NFL avg 57.6%

Goal Line (1- or 2-yard line, any down)
Cowboys 50.0%
NFL avg 61.1%

We passed four times in goal line situations in week 1 vs. the 49ers, and seven times the rest of the season (17 games).

Thanks very much for providing these numbers. It's eye-opening for me to see how much more we ran on 3rd and 2 over the league average.

Would you happen to have the same number for 3rd and 3 and 3rd and 4?

 

[percyhoward]

That's exactly what I've said PH concerning success rates so that doesn't need correction.

It wasn't the numbers, but what they're measuring that needed correcting. You had said that FO's "power success" rate was 3rd or 4th down conversion rate. It's actually just 3rd or 4th down with 1-2 yards to go, and also includes goal line on any down. The table you posted includes both the raw percentage and the league rank. We were 2nd to the Saints in "adjusted line yards" (first column) which is how that table orders the teams, but we were actually 4th in power success.

 

[jobberone]

3rd Down conversion %
Cowboys' NFL Rank, 2011-14
pass 8th
run 22nd

Again I don't know where those numbers are coming from but we were 76% successful in short yardage in 2014 which was 2nd to Seattle at 78%. Overall we were ranked #1 including all run and pass stats per http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ol Our overall OL rank from 2014 to 2011 was 1, 4, 22, and 9. From 2013 to 2011 we had a 68%, 63%, and 57% power success rate. Those are not rankings although our run blocking power rank from 2011 to 2014 was 9, 22, 4, and 2. Our run blocking rank from 2014-2011 was 4,11,15, and 23.

I hope this clarifies.

 

[percyhoward]

Thanks very much for providing these numbers. It's eye-opening for me to see how much more we ran on 3rd and 2 over the league average.

Would you happen to have the same number for 3rd and 3 and 3rd and 4?

Run %, 2014
3rd/4th and 3-4 to go
Cowboys 7.7%
NFL avg 14.2%

 

[jobberone]

It wasn't the numbers, but what they're measuring that needed correcting. You had said that FO's "power success" rate was 3rd or 4th down conversion rate. It's actually just 3rd or 4th down with 1-2 yards to go, and also includes goal line on any down. The table you posted includes both the raw percentage and the league rank. We were 2nd to the Saints in "adjusted line yards" (first column) which is how that table orders the teams, but we were actually 4th in power success.

Maybe in one post I wasn't clear but thru all or most all posts I made it was clear those were power success rates which is defined as 3rd and 4th down success at 1-2 yds for a first down or score. Those stats include QB runs. And I defined power success rates at least once if not more.

See the post above.

So no it does not need correction.

 

[percyhoward]

Again I don't know where those numbers are coming from but we were 76% successful in short yardage in 2014 which was 2nd to Seattle at 78%. Overall we were ranked #1 including all run and pass stats per http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ol Our overall OL rank from 2014 to 2011 was 1, 4, 22, and 9. From 2013 to 2011 we had a 68%, 63%, and 57% power success rate. Those are not rankings although our run blocking power rank from 2011 to 2014 was 9, 22, 4, and 2. Our run blocking rank from 2014-2011 was 4,11,15, and 23.

I hope this clarifies.

The column in the table you're looking at is for running plays only, 3rd or 4th and 2 or less, or from the 2-yard line or closer on any down. The top 4 teams were Phi, Sea, SD, Dal. They've got the table split into two parts, and I think you're ignoring the bottom half of the table completely, so you're missing Phi and SD.

The teams aren't ordered based on all run and pass stats. IOW, it's not an "overall OL rank." They're ordered based on the table's first column: "adjusted line yards" which is a run stat. Dallas' pass blocking ranked 16th, according to that table.

 

[Doomsday101]

208 carries, Newhouse had 180 that is called RB by committee.

You do know Newhouse was the FB and Dorsett the TB? Dallas did run the FB more so back then than we see now days.

 

[jobberone]

I stated our power success rank for 2014 was 4th. And yes the overall OL rankings for run blocking is via adj line yards and we were #1 last year with 4.40. Our pass blocking rank which was via adj sack rates was 16th. This is not our rankings via other methods/stats. The numbers I've given are correct using those tools/data.

I think you're comparing apples to oranges in some instances. Either that are we just aren't communicating. I've put up multiple posts in this thread and admittedly too much. But I think one has to look at ALL of them to actually know what I've said.

But however petty it may seem I think it reasonable for me to be a bit annoyed at your correcting me when I've gone to a lot of trouble to put up some numbers. And of course they are just numbers and 'adjusted' stats which are based on inherently subjective observational bias by people feeding the gross data to those who manipulate them into 'stats'.

They're measuring sticks but not to be taken as coming ex cathedra or seen as the ultimate views on the reality of football. They're just tools to compare to one's eyeball observations to try to come to some kind of reasonable reflection of the 'truth'.

I always enjoy your posts and even asked you to comment so perhaps I shouldn't be annoyed at all by your input. If not then accept my apology.

 

[Bleu Star]

I always enjoy your posts.

I'm flattered.

 

[Nightman]

Then again, Dorsett was a rookie still earning the trust of the coaching staff. His carries rose as the season progressed and by season's end, I would have considered him to be the team's bell cow.

What are your personal qualifiers for that 'bell cow' title?

I think that is the question of the thread? What exactly us a 'bell cow'???

That is a subjective title open to various interpretations.

I personally think it is a 3 down back that gets stronger as the game goes on and can still run the ball effectively when the other knows it coming. He can come off the field to catch a breather and bring in the change of pace, but he is the lead guy.

DMurray, MLynch, LBell, APeterson, AFoster, LMcCoy, MForte, ELacy, JCharles, maybe LMiller and AMorris

 

[jobberone]

I always enjoy yours when its in the 23% common ground rating.

 

[Doomsday101]