Third-Down Efficiency Key For Cowboys' Offense

[NeonDeion21]

Two seasons ago the Dallas Cowboys statistically had one the best offenses in the league; they ranked fifth in the NFL, averaging 27.4 points a game. Yet if you watched closely, the team didn’t have a very efficient offense.

In 2014, the Cowboys finished seventh in the NFL by averaging 29.2 points per game and looked like a much better unit. The Cowboys also finished seventh in total offense last year, averaging 42.5 more yards per game than they did in 2013, when they were 16th in the NFL. So it was easy to see that Dallas had a much better offense last season.

The outstanding individual play from a number of Cowboys last season made the team look like a well-oiled machine on offense. DeMarco Murray had a monster year leading the NFL in rushing, Dez Bryant topped 1,300 yards again and led the league in touchdown catches and Tony Romo was the most efficient quarterback in the game in 2014.

Read the rest at: http://all22breakdown.com/?p=3042

 

[DFWJC]

As you know...
The huge upgrade at oline now gives us confidence we can convert on third down with the run or pass.
They had little confidence that they could run for it in short yardage situations from 2010-2013.

 

[Beast_from_East]

Short yardage is where we are going to miss Murray............we do not have any "power backs" on the roster than can get the 2 or 3 "dirty yards" on 3rd or 4th down.

 

[xvendettax914]

Short yardage is where we are going to miss Murray............we do not have any "power backs" on the roster than can get the 2 or 3 "dirty yards" on 3rd or 4th down.

Maybe we do maybe we dont, no way to tell yet. What we do know is there are 5 guys who can get some serious push to go ahead and convert in those short yardage situations.

 

[conner01]

Maybe we do maybe we dont, no way to tell yet. What we do know is there are 5 guys who can get some serious push to go ahead and convert in those short yardage situations.

 

[conner01]

Hard to over state the importance of 3rd downs
Maybe the most important stat for an offense

 

[AzorAhai]

Anyone have the average 3rd down distance from both years? Just speculative, but I bet there would be a decent sized difference.The trickle down effect would be in play if true.

Commitment to the run led to shorter down and distance on 2nd and 3rd down. Shorter distance led to more conversions. More conversions led to longer drives and more TOP. More TOP led to fresher, more effective defense. Thats why its so key to stay committed to the run even if its not as effective

 

[DallasInDC]

And to be think, I always thought 3rd down efficiency was key to all 32 offenses....not just the Cowboys.

 

[Eskimo]

I don't understand why converting on 3rd down is any more important than converting on first or second down. If an offense goes down the field 9 times out of 10 without needing to convert a 3rd down and scores TDs each time and yet 1/10 times gets a 3rd down that it fails to convert it would be a great offense and yet have a 0% 3rd down conversion percentage.

I think it is much more important to look at something like points per offensive drive corrected for field position. There is a handy stat that shows what the expected scoring output for each point a drive starts. For example if you start a drive at the opposition 1-yard line 1st and 10 it is worth something like 5.5 points. If you start at your own 1-yard line it is worth -2 points (because on average you punt from poor position giving the other team an offensive advantage). Well you can normalize this per drive too and come up with a stat for how much better the offense is at putting up stats compared to an average offense put in the same situation. You could even do more by just looking at how expected points changed by the end of the drive in non-scoring drives. For example if you start on your own 1-yard line (-2 points) and end up driving it all the way down to the opponents 1-yard line before you turn it over on downs you still generated a change of 4 in expected points (2 - -2 = 4)

At the end of the day the job of the offense should really be to maximize chances of winning through scoring points and avoiding giving the other team good field position.

I'm really looking forward to an offense that finds itself in less 3rd down situations this year. I think last year's performance was a bit of an aberration due to how good Romo was on 3rd down, especially 3rd and long. It was unsustainably high early in the year and then came back down to Earth a bit through the year. We need to focus on ending up much less often in 3rd and long (let's say more than 5 yards) and less about protecting the defense. Hopefully this will mean more passing on 1st down in particular against those base defenses with stacked boxes.

 

[Bullflop]

Short yardage is where we are going to miss Murray............we do not have any "power backs" on the roster than can get the 2 or 3 "dirty yards" on 3rd or 4th down.

I'd be considerably more comfortable if we had a 230 pounder with power to get that "dirty" yardage. Hopefully, the staff will acquire one before the regular season begins. It'd be great if someone like Synjyn Days blossoms.

 

[sureletsrace]

In my opinion, third down efficiency is one of the biggest statistics that correlate with success.

It's huge.

 

[Wolfpack]

Funny how the play calling dramatically changed from 2013-2014 and look what happens.

 

[theogt]

I don't understand why converting on 3rd down is any more important than converting on first or second down. If an offense goes down the field 9 times out of 10 without needing to convert a 3rd down and scores TDs each time and yet 1/10 times gets a 3rd down that it fails to convert it would be a great offense and yet have a 0% 3rd down conversion percentage.

I think it is much more important to look at something like points per offensive drive corrected for field position. There is a handy stat that shows what the expected scoring output for each point a drive starts. For example if you start a drive at the opposition 1-yard line 1st and 10 it is worth something like 5.5 points. If you start at your own 1-yard line it is worth -2 points (because on average you punt from poor position giving the other team an offensive advantage). Well you can normalize this per drive too and come up with a stat for how much better the offense is at putting up stats compared to an average offense put in the same situation. You could even do more by just looking at how expected points changed by the end of the drive in non-scoring drives. For example if you start on your own 1-yard line (-2 points) and end up driving it all the way down to the opponents 1-yard line before you turn it over on downs you still generated a change of 4 in expected points (2 - -2 = 4)

At the end of the day the job of the offense should really be to maximize chances of winning through scoring points and avoiding giving the other team good field position.

I'm really looking forward to an offense that finds itself in less 3rd down situations this year. I think last year's performance was a bit of an aberration due to how good Romo was on 3rd down, especially 3rd and long. It was unsustainably high early in the year and then came back down to Earth a bit through the year. We need to focus on ending up much less often in 3rd and long (let's say more than 5 yards) and less about protecting the defense. Hopefully this will mean more passing on 1st down in particular against those base defenses with stacked boxes.

I get your point but every team does face a lot of 3rd downs. So it's simply an easier proxy for keeping drives alive.

As to the stat you're referencing, it wouldn't necessarily take into account that scoring after a 15 play drive is often a much better result than scoring after 2 plays.

 

[Eskimo]

I get your point but every team does face a lot of 3rd downs. So it's simply an easier proxy for keeping drives alive.

As to the stat you're referencing, it wouldn't necessarily take into account that scoring after a 15 play drive is often a much better result than scoring after 2 plays.

Yes, but most teams usually can't sustain a 15-play drive without a major error resulting in a turnover or a punt so it is a bit of a false dichotomy. You take TDs whenever you can no matter how many or few plays it takes to get it done.

The reason why I would like something like adjusted points per possession is because it would isolate the offensive production from the defense and special teams. When the offense is on the field the priorities should be in this order:

1. Don't turn it over

2. Score points (faster is better when you are behind, closer is better when you are ahead)

3. Chew up the clock by running lots of plays

I think we got so caught up on point 3 last year that we didn't always maximize point 2. The amount of times we ended up in 3rd and long after two unsuccessful Murray runs against stacked boxes only for Romo to bail them out on 3rd and 8 was staggering. I know what the justification was but it is hard to win this way. To me it would be better to pass more when you have an advantage in the passing game against the defense rather than run into a brick wall. We were trying to "protect" Romo but I do worry that we were putting too much on his shoulders with all those 3rd downs and the slow developing pass routes.

This is an offensive, pass-dominant league right now. We have gone a different path with mix power and zone blocking scheme running game. I think we definitely caught the league off balance early in the season and that got us off to our 6-1 start. I think we stuck to something that the rest of the league had caught onto from about game 8-12 before deciding to pass more on 2nd down and we then had an offensive explosion. I think we could do even better if we were more aggressive on first down until defenses played us more straight up in those situations.

 

[theogt]

Yes, but most teams usually can't sustain a 15-play drive without a major error resulting in a turnover or a punt so it is a bit of a false dichotomy. You take TDs whenever you can no matter how many or few plays it takes to get it done.

The reason why I would like something like adjusted points per possession is because it would isolate the offensive production from the defense and special teams. When the offense is on the field the priorities should be in this order:

1. Don't turn it over

2. Score points (faster is better when you are behind, closer is better when you are ahead)

3. Chew up the clock by running lots of plays

I think we got so caught up on point 3 last year that we didn't always maximize point 2. The amount of times we ended up in 3rd and long after two unsuccessful Murray runs against stacked boxes only for Romo to bail them out on 3rd and 8 was staggering. I know what the justification was but it is hard to win this way. To me it would be better to pass more when you have an advantage in the passing game against the defense rather than run into a brick wall. We were trying to "protect" Romo but I do worry that we were putting too much on his shoulders with all those 3rd downs and the slow developing pass routes.

This is an offensive, pass-dominant league right now. We have gone a different path with mix power and zone blocking scheme running game. I think we definitely caught the league off balance early in the season and that got us off to our 6-1 start. I think we stuck to something that the rest of the league had caught onto from about game 8-12 before deciding to pass more on 2nd down and we then had an offensive explosion. I think we could do even better if we were more aggressive on first down until defenses played us more straight up in those situations.

Yes, but 2 is best accomplished by moving the chains. Otherwise teams would throw deep more often. Excluding situations in which the team is in a large point deficit, the ultimate goal of scoring more points is really just a build up individual goals within each set of downs -- ie, the goal of obtaining that next set of downs. And that often is dependent on third down efficiency.

One thing I'd point out, and this may go hand in hand with your original point, is that third down efficiency is in itself largely dependent on first and second down efficiency. A team with more third and shorts will obviously be more efficient on third downs. So, again, third down efficiency can just be a lazy proxy for overall offensive effectiveness.

 

[Eskimo]

Yes, but 2 is best accomplished by moving the chains. Otherwise teams would throw deep more often. Excluding situations in which the team is in a large point deficit, the ultimate goal of scoring more points is really just a build up individual goals within each set of downs -- ie, the goal of obtaining that next set of downs. And that often is dependent on third down efficiency.

One thing I'd point out, and this may go hand in hand with your original point, is that third down efficiency is in itself largely dependent on first and second down efficiency. A team with more third and shorts will obviously be more efficient on third downs. So, again, third down efficiency can just be a lazy proxy for overall offensive effectiveness.

Yes and no. I don't think the key is to have a huge number of first downs (moving the chains). The goal is to score points which is not equivalent but will be correlated to moving the chains.

I do agree that if you can't avoid 3rd down the next best thing is 3rd and short. 3rd and shorts mean that you have made good use of 1st and 2nd down. Now an interesting thing about our success early last year is we succeeded often in 3rd and long when the running game was failing. Romo still kept converting those 3rd and 8's. That started to dwindle when we struggled in games 8-12 but we got things going again by using the empty backfield and using 11 personnel more on 2nd down. We also started to use 1st down a bit more for taking some shots against those stacked boxes.

As for why teams don't go for more big plays it is for point 1 - avoid turnovers. If you try to take a deep shot when there are 2-men deep you will run the risk of a turnover. You also need your QB to hold onto the ball longer which will put him at risk for a sack or a fumble. So a team that tries for the big play when the odds are not in their favor will usually not end up maximizing points 1 and 2. But certainly when the opportunity presents itself you should try to hit big plays. This is how we dismantled the Eagles in game 2 when they didn't give enough help against Dez.

Anyhow, I'm not necessarily encouraging an abandoning of the running game. I do however want to pass more often when teams are selling out to play the run which they will need to do if we run block as well this year as we did last year against 7 men in the box. I want teams to have to play us neutrally and then for us to just do what we want. If they want to sell out against the run then I'd lack to take some shots against them. This should ultimately lead to more 1st downs (preferably without 3rd down conversions). If they want to play us neutrally then I'd like to run a balanced attack (about 53% pass and 47% run).

 

[theogt]

Well, I wasn't intending to mean that the goal is to have as many first downs as possible, but to generally get a first down in any given set of downs. If I'm on my own 30, I'm not thinking scoring, necessarily, I'm thinking by best opportunity at scoring is moving the chains. In that sense, the goal of scoring is achieved through lots of smaller individual goals, which may be accomplished differently than if my goal was to score more immediately.

 

[Idgit]

NFL teams convert less than half of their 3rd downs as it is, and that percentage runs from just under half on the high end to down to about 30% conversion rate on the low end. Put me in the camp that prefers to stay out of third downs, altogether. Give me as high a points/offensive series average as I can get, and if that's coming on big plays on first and second downs or on quick scores generally across the board, I don't care.

 

[DFWJC]

Funny how the play calling dramatically changed from 2013-2014 and look what happens.

The play calling adapted to the talent.
The Oline that we've finally built gives us confidence to run it in more situations. Plain and simple.
Then it had a cumulative effect.
Success built more confidence, more confidence meant more runs, etc.

 

[theogt]

NFL teams convert less than half of their 3rd downs as it is, and that percentage runs from just under half on the high end to down to about 30% conversion rate on the low end. Put me in the camp that prefers to stay out of third downs, altogether. Give me as high a points/offensive series average as I can get, and if that's coming on big plays on first and second downs or on quick scores generally across the board, I don't care.

I'd rather teams just forfeit each game and we be declared all time best team 4ever!

But that's just not how the NFL works.