This is what happens

[Rockport]

Really.. this isn't your post?

Post number 18 in the thread.. posted by you, sir.

lol

Well, they do suck. They don't win championships.

Really.. this isn't your post?

Post number 18 in the thread.. posted by you, sir.

lol

They do suck! They don't win championships.

 

[Clove]

I guess the truth hurts. All those who said that the running game is not important in the NFL. Watch the back tracking.

But when you can't, finding a way to win is for winners. Losing cause you can't run, is for excuse makers.

 

[dankman]

Shiner,

I could just go on posting stats that demonstrate the relative unimportance of an effective running game in today's NFL, but since it is you who are claiming that a team "needs to be able to run the ball" why don't you supply something to back up your statement.

 

[Rockport]

Shiner,

I could just go on posting stats that demonstrate the relative unimportance of an effective running game in today's NFL, but since it is you who are claiming that a team "needs to be able to run the ball" why don't you supply something to back up your statement.

It's football 101. Been that way for decades. If you don't know this then you're ignorant. Not an insult. We're all ignorant about some things.

 

[Clove]

Shiner,

I could just go on posting stats that demonstrate the relative unimportance of an effective running game in today's NFL, but since it is you who are claiming that a team "needs to be able to run the ball" why don't you supply something to back up your statement.

Dude, case is closed after that ownage you provided. He's just trying to be the one who discovered running the ball which is nothing new. It helps to have a good running game, but it helps more to have some phase of your offense be dominant.

 

[Lonestar94]

But when you can't, finding a way to win is for winners. Losing cause you can't run, is for excuse makers.

All the teams who had no running game had a solid defense which created turnovers ( ex: 2011 packers 2011 giants )

 

[dankman]

It's football 101. Been that way for decades.

In addition to being factually incorrect, this statement does nothing to back up your claim of the importance do the run game. Please try again.

 

[dankman]

Shiner,

Things have changed. Players no longer wear leather helmets. Offensive lines no longer average 280 pounds and the forward pass is now legal. Don't be afraid of change- embrace it!

 

[jobberone]

Play nice or the thread will be closed. Thank you.

 

[VACowboy]

You, like many others, don't get it. You don't have to have an even split between run and pass. But, when the situation calls for it, you need to run the ball. Pose your will on the other teams defense. You do that and it carries over to all areas of the game. Maybe you have to have played the game to understand. Football is a physical sport. To be able to run the ball you have to be more physical than the other team. Controlling the line of scrmage. That wears on a team and it wears on them quickly. Not only physically, but mentally.

Huh? Did you read my post?

Let me try again: I AGREE that running the ball effectively (imposing your will) has great benefits. But you can't always run the ball effectively. You can't always "pose your will on the other team." At some point, negative and one-yard runs become counter productive, and at that point it's time to stop trying to run and air the ball out.

Just out of curiosity, what if you aren't more physical than the other team? What if you get manhandled at the line of scrimmage? A situation my call for you to run the ball, but just because you want to doesn't mean you can (or should).

 

[Doomsday101]

I agree. In fact, i dont think I would even think of spending a first round draft choice on a RB now. The lifespan is so short and if the rest of your offense is good you can plug one in and run effectively enough to keep the defense honest.

Yet teams do. Indy just gave up a 1st for a RB, NO used a 1st to get Ingram, Peterson is a 1st. Quality players will go in 1st rd even RB. No doubt passing in this league is important but then if the running game can help take pressure off the QB, slow the pass rush down force DB and LB to over react to the run opening up bigger windows to throw into then not to mention as Randy White said running the ball can demoralize a defense faster than anything. It allows the OL to go on the attack not sit back in protection. What some of us disagree with is the notion that running does not help a team win, it can, it has and still does.

 

[Doomsday101]

Huh? Did you read my post?

Let me try again: I AGREE that running the ball effectively (imposing your will) has great benefits. But you can't always run the ball effectively. You can't always "pose your will on the other team." At some point, negative and one-yard runs become counter productive, and at that point it's time to stop trying to run and air the ball out.

Just out of curiosity, what if you aren't more physical than the other team? What if you get manhandled at the line of scrimmage? A situation my call for you to run the ball, but just because you want to doesn't mean you can (or should).

I agree. There are times and games where you are facing a great run stuffing team or teams are putting a lot of guys in the box and while a team may run to keep them honest you know your not going to make a living running in the running game for that particular game. When I talk of balance it really is more about being able to do both things it is not a number 40/60 run/pass it is the ability to keep defense guessing and off balance.

 

[Direwolf63]

Teams have to run the ball enough to make defenses respect the run. If you can force defensess to play 8 men in the box, QB's can take advantage of that by throwing.
If a defense has no respect for your running game, you will find passing difficult. You put too much pressure on your QB. Romo last year was a prime example.

Run/Pass ratios don't have to be 50/50. Offenses rarely are anymore. Rule changes are such that passing the ball is more beneficial these days. But you have to run enough to make defenses defend it. Top offenses generally have at least some success running the football. They don't emphasize it, but they make you think about it. And for some QB's, that's all they need to be successful throwing.

 

[Doomsday101]

So every team that doesn't win a championship sucks? That narrows things down. But then what about the '10 Packers, who ran infrequently with terrible results, and did win a championship?

Their run game was up and down but they are also a west coast offense who uses the short swing passes as part of the running game. Also if you go back to the later part of that season James Starks was running the ball good for GB.

I think vs weaker teams you can be a bit more 1 dimensional but when facing top defense come post season you better be able to do more, does not mean you have to be great at running but you need to be effective.
One thing about seasonal stats they don’t show what a team is doing late in the season only what they did overall over the course of the season.

 

[Rockport]

Huh? Did you read my post?

Let me try again: I AGREE that running the ball effectively (imposing your will) has great benefits. But you can't always run the ball effectively. You can't always "pose your will on the other team." At some point, negative and one-yard runs become counter productive, and at that point it's time to stop trying to run and air the ball out.

Just out of curiosity, what if you aren't more physical than the other team? What if you get manhandled at the line of scrimmage? A situation my call for you to run the ball, but just because you want to doesn't mean you can (or should).

Sorry I misunderstood you. There will always be situations where you're not able to run or always be more physical than the other team . The point I'm trying to make is that if you do control the line of scrimmage and run well you're going to be a winning team.

 

[5Stars]

Sorry I misunderstood you. There will always be situations where you're not able to run or always be more physical than the other team . The point I'm trying to make is that if you do control the line of scrimmage and run well you're going to be a winning team.

IMO, the situation dictates on how you run or how you pass. Both can be effective given the right situation.

If the other team does not stop the run, stay with it. It eats up the clock and demoralizes the opposing team. But, being able to exploit the other team by passing can also demoralize the opposing team...so, what do you do?

You play the "chess match game"...take what you can get because one over the other is not a good way to try and win a game. The league is a passing game prevalent now days, but that does not mean that the running game does not count because it does. If the Cowboys could run like they did this last game, I would stick with it all season long and just let the QB throw his passes when he sees fit...just take what you can, one way or the other, and you will be successful.

 

[arglebargle]

Well, they do suck. They don't win championships.


They do suck! They don't win championships.

So, according to you, each year, there is one good team and 31 teams that suck?

Man, that is some pitbull-bite logic.

 

[jwitten82]

Sorry I misunderstood you. There will always be situations where you're not able to run or always be more physical than the other team . The point I'm trying to make is that if you do control the line of scrimmage and run well you're going to be a winning team.

I believe Washington was ranked 1 in rushing yards last season and according to your logic theu suck because they didnt win the superbowl.

 

[Rockport]

I believe Washington was ranked 1 in rushing yards last season and according to your logic theu suck because they didnt win the superbowl.

Yup, you nailed it.

 

[Rockport]

IMO, the situation dictates on how you run or how you pass. Both can be effective given the right situation.

If the other team does not stop the run, stay with it. It eats up the clock and demoralizes the opposing team. But, being able to exploit the other team by passing can also demoralize the opposing team...so, what do you do?

You play the "chess match game"...take what you can get because one over the other is not a good way to try and win a game. The league is a passing game prevalent now days, but that does not mean that the running game does not count because it does. If the Cowboys could run like they did this last game, I would stick with it all season long and just let the QB throw his passes when he sees fit...just take what you can, one way or the other, and you will be successful.

I played the game growing up and when an opposing team was able to run the ball it demoralized us because there's not much you can do against a team that can out physical you. That's why the running game is so important. It has just as much affect on you mentally as it does physically.