play2win
11 years ago

I'm not saying that it's false, but multiple people keep saying that all you need to do is run the ball, yards don't matter a lick and that it's unintuitive but true. I see people dropping stats about poor rushing teams winning big, but does anybody have some examples of truly ineffective rushing teams (< 3 YPC) being successful? It's definitely unintuitive but I'm no more of an expert than anyone else here (and less of an expert than many), I'd just like a more in-depth explanation of WHY it works with some specific examples.

For example, if you're averaging 2 YPC 8 games in, why wouldn't an opposing defense want to play with an emphasis on passing every down unless it's an obvious running situation? Focus on nullifying your opponent's strengths, not their weaknesses. Yeah, if they're running it 20-25 times a game they might average 3-4 a carry if you don't respect the run but let them try to beat you on the ground and shut them down through the air. 75-100 yards on the ground isn't going to kill you if they're ineffective passing the ball and get minimal benefit from running the play action.

Originally Posted by: Porforis 



Here you go Porforis:

One example I found, Arizona, a division leader, ranking dead last in ypc at 2.8

http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?tabSeq=2&season=2012&seasonType=REG&offensiveStatisticCategory=RUSHING&role=TM&d-447263-n=1&d-447263-o=2&d-447263-p=1&conference=ALL&d-447263-s=RUSHING_AVERAGE_YARDS 

They rank just above us in att/game 23.6 (#21) to our 22.2 (#23).

Their receiving O is nothing special, ranking 22 to our 13. Passing O ranking 25 to our 15. To me, that says they are running just enough and winning with defense & STs. Running the football helps both the passing game and the defense. While their passing game is suspect at QB, they have some good WRs. They lost their #1 RB to injury last week too.

Statistically, this isn't telling us too much, but it does say something, and while outranking us in attempts, they are in fact last in YPC, and 4-1, beating SEA, NE, PHI and MIA while losing to STL.

Their running game is atrocious. I can't figure out how they won all of those outside of D, STs and huge miscues by their opponents. This has to be the weakest team of the front runners offensively.
zombieslayer
11 years ago

This goes along what Shawn and I have been trying to get through to you for a couple years now. The attempts are what keeps a defense honest. A solid 60/40 pass/run ratio is very good for an offense as it opens up a lot of opportunities. Right now the Packers are being manhandled by a two high safety scheme because they are not worried about the second level being reached by a RB or a slant pass.

I'd rather see James Starks than Alex Green running the ball, even though Green has the potential to break one, he's often stuffed at the line for a loss. Starks nearly always gains at least a yard or two.

Until this team figures out how to be more balanced offensively and the QB drops his ego and takes the 5 yard easy out over the 25 yarder into double coverage ... mediocre is all we'll see.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



If you want to win an argument with me, you have to put up FACTS. Opinion doesn't cut it. But you guys have also been ignoring the research I've been doing which got annoying too. I've been saying all along that you don't need an elite RB and actually, an elite RB hurts the team.

I've been doing football research for a few years and honing in my knowledge. When my hypothesis doesn't look right, I change it until it's right. I found that rushing rankings have absolutely no bearing on a team's post-season success.

I also predict trends and thought that teams will eventually go 65/35. This remains to be seen though. It looks like as of 2012, 60/40 is the sweet spot. Maybe 65/35 is in 2015 or so. Or maybe the rules will change again and we'll see more running. Hard to predict the future. As of 2012, it looks like we should be at 60/40.
My man Donald Driver
UserPostedImage
(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷
Zero2Cool
11 years ago

If you want to win an argument with me, you have to put up FACTS. Opinion doesn't cut it. But you guys have also been ignoring the research I've been doing which got annoying too. I've been saying all along that you don't need an elite RB and actually, an elite RB hurts the team.

I've been doing football research for a few years and honing in my knowledge. When my hypothesis doesn't look right, I change it until it's right. I found that rushing rankings have absolutely no bearing on a team's post-season success.

I also predict trends and thought that teams will eventually go 65/35. This remains to be seen though. It looks like as of 2012, 60/40 is the sweet spot. Maybe 65/35 is in 2015 or so. Or maybe the rules will change again and we'll see more running. Hard to predict the future. As of 2012, it looks like we should be at 60/40.

Originally Posted by: zombieslayer 



There really isn't any argument at all. It's pretty much common sense. Yes, an elite RB is not necessary, however an elite QB helps a lot more. You ignoring the point we're making is annoying. 60/40 is exactly what I said in the quoted post.

I think one side is saying look forward and the other side is saying look straight ahead.


Against the Colts, Packers had two drives that were 30 seconds or less (one was 19 freaking seconds). THIRTY SECONDS OR LESS! You run it three times, that eats up 2+ minutes right there. Do that on both drives, that's nearly FIVE MINUTES less that the Colts have to catch up!

Between those six runs, it could be 1 yard per attempt and it still serves a good purpose ... EATING CLOCK to preserve the lead!

I am all for putting teams away, all for it. But when you're skipping your underneath guy or the TE/RB open in the flat, you're playing Madden football and that's just stupid! They have two deep safeties and you're still going to throw it deep instead of the shallow guy who will get you 5+ yards? ARGH pisses me off!!
UserPostedImage
+1
LambeauEast
11 years ago
Mediocre at best.
UserPostedImage
play2win
11 years ago
McCarthy's whole pass heavy attack, saying in essence (and I know there is a quote out there where he actually said this) "we don't need to run" is good only when his short passes are - in fact - high percentage. If we ignore the short passes, or if we aren't catching those, then the whole plan is destined to fail.

I believe we had 2 goals coming into this season from a game management/personnel standpoint:

1. Add pass rush
2. Control the clock better with our offense

We are currently tied with two other teams at #1 in the NFL for sacks, with 18. I was surprised to see that.

Our OL on the other hand, is ranked 2nd to last at #31 in the NFL, allowing 21 sacks thus far this year. We are 15th in Total Points, and 21st in TOP.

We are also ranked #1 in the NFL for penalty yds at 390. These last 4 stats are very telling, as stats go... pretty much place us at middle of the road with our 2-3 record, and our defense ranked #16 both pass and run D. Based on our expectations for the season, this is mediocre, indeed.

Personally, I'm not a big fan of short passes in leiu of run plays. Puts too much at risk with time of possession and your QB's safety. That is a game of high stakes poker IMO, one we should not be playing if we expect to reach our 2nd goal of this season, to control the clock. Not to mention, how long will Rodgers last at this pace? TJ Lang publicly called out the pass heavy play calling for a reason.
Pack93z
11 years ago

If you want to win an argument with me, you have to put up FACTS. Opinion doesn't cut it. But you guys have also been ignoring the research I've been doing which got annoying too. I've been saying all along that you don't need an elite RB and actually, an elite RB hurts the team.

Originally Posted by: zombieslayer 



I have and you have ignored in the past.

I went through and graphed the impact on teams over the course of a season in offensive and defensive impact and it received zero comments or rebuttal. Wait, there was the garbage time runs, which I followed up and showed there was less than a 2% impact in four quarter additional runs. And that was from Greg C.

But yet, I am to readily consume your research as gospel. Really? Tisk, tisk Zombie. [grin1]
"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"
+1
Rios39
11 years ago
The only thing is I don't see how running the ball for 1 yard or less at times does anything for you but sets you back on 1st down. We do run a lot on first down putting us in long down distances. Maybe throw more on first down and try to pound in the easier yards.

Also in the SB we threw a ridiculous amount of times and had great success. Last year in the first half I believe we were mostly a pass offense and then tried to run when the game was out of reach.

It may be time to adjust though as Rodgers has looked like a poor qb.
blank
Porforis
11 years ago

The only thing is I don't see how running the ball for 1 yard or less at times does anything for you but sets you back on 1st down. We do run a lot on first down putting us in long down distances. Maybe throw more on first down and try to pound in the easier yards.

Also in the SB we threw a ridiculous amount of times and had great success. Last year in the first half I believe we were mostly a pass offense and then tried to run when the game was out of reach.

It may be time to adjust though as Rodgers has looked like a poor qb.

Originally Posted by: Rios39 



But do remember that Starks started running well come the postseason during our SB run. That added dimension definitely helped us out.
Rios39
11 years ago

But do remember that Starks started running well come the postseason during our SB run. That added dimension definitely helped us out.

Originally Posted by: Porforis 



That's true and he also had a solid year last year. YPC he was better than Grant. He usually falls forward. Hopefully we can get him going and hopefully improve some in blocking.
blank
Pack93z
11 years ago

The only thing is I don't see how running the ball for 1 yard or less at times does anything for you but sets you back on 1st down. We do run a lot on first down putting us in long down distances. Maybe throw more on first down and try to pound in the easier yards.

Also in the SB we threw a ridiculous amount of times and had great success. Last year in the first half I believe we were mostly a pass offense and then tried to run when the game was out of reach.

It may be time to adjust though as Rodgers has looked like a poor qb.

Originally Posted by: Rios39 



How does it help?

Throw yourself in a defensive lineman or backers helmet.. then look at these two scenarios.

A offense that you know is going to drop back and pass almost all the times, especially if the formation tells you so. Where you can just focus on firing off the snap and beating the man in front of you.

Or an offensive in which you have to read and digest the play being either a run or a pass. Then turn your focus to beating the man in front of you to get to the QB.

It is only a split second, but that slight pause returns the advantage back to the offensive lineman because he now has that second to set up, read the blitz and adjust.

There is a huge difference within that helmet. I don't care if the run is effective or not, you will read that play and pause for the split second if there is a threat of the run.

Why I hate empty sets.. tee off by the players coming on the pass rush, unless you worry about the QB draw, but a QB the caliber of Rodgers isn't going to run by design.

Those little advantages mean the world in the trenches.

Go back to the 2010 season.. it was the loss to the Patriots that really started our run. We had to play Flynn and Mike McCarthy ran the ball to help him along. It showed us we could run the ball and the effect it had on the defense and what it did for our offense. We almost won that game with a first time starter.
"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"
+3
Users browsing this topic
    Fan Shout
    Mucky Tundra (21h) : Based on Gutes comments, now I don't feel as silly having 13 picks in my mock the other day
    Zero2Cool (22h) : Zach Wilson to Broncos.
    Zero2Cool (22-Apr) : Gutekunst says he'd love to have 13 or 14 picks. He's trading back huh lol
    beast (22-Apr) : Someday we'll have a draft betting scandal
    beast (21-Apr) : Sometimes looking extremely amazing, sometimes looking extremely lost
    beast (21-Apr) : I haven't looked into the QBs, but some have suggested Maye has some of the most extremely inconsistent tape they've seen
    beast (21-Apr) : Well it also sounds like Patriots are listening to trade offers, not that seriously considering any, but listening means they aren't locked
    Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : Maye needs to be AFC
    Mucky Tundra (21-Apr) : Not liking the idea of the Vikings getting Maye
    Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : Vikings HC joked that he may or may not have sent flowers to Bob Kraft. That's where rumor came from.
    beast (21-Apr) : Can't tell if this is real or BS, but some rumors about a possible Patriots/Vikings trade for #3 overall
    dfosterf (21-Apr) : One playbook to my knowledge. I was shooting for facetious.
    beast (20-Apr) : I'm not sure they have different playbooks for different OL positions, and Dillard run blocking is supposedly worse than his pass blocking..
    dfosterf (19-Apr) : The only problem with that is he isn't a guard either.
    dfosterf (19-Apr) : Put him at right guard. That is where he will be coached. That is where he will compete. He is not even allowed to look at the LT playbook.
    dfosterf (18-Apr) : Kidding aside, I hope the best for him.
    dfosterf (18-Apr) : Went to a Titans board. One comment there. Not very long. I quote: "LOL" They don't sound overly upset about our aquisition.
    beast (18-Apr) : OT Dillard has been absolutely horrible... like OG Newman levels
    dfosterf (18-Apr) : Suit him up and have him stand in front of the big board as a draft day cautionary tale.
    Zero2Cool (18-Apr) : Packers sign T Andre Dillard.
    Mucky Tundra (18-Apr) : Adds most of the information this time of year comes from agents.
    Mucky Tundra (18-Apr) : @RealAlexBarth Bill Belichick says accurate draft information doesn't leak from teams until about 12 hours before the draft. Adds most of th
    Mucky Tundra (18-Apr) : I am very happy that for moment, Jordan Love seems like a normal human being
    Zero2Cool (17-Apr) : Belichick * whatever
    Zero2Cool (17-Apr) : "There's a lot of depth at Offensive Tackle and Wide Receiver." Bill Bellichick
    Zero2Cool (17-Apr) : Thanks! I can't believe it's over haha
    Martha Careful (16-Apr) : Congratulations
    Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Boom. Student Loan. $0.00. Only took about 20 years.
    Zero2Cool (14-Apr) : Packers DT Kenny Clark: New defensive coordinator Jeff Hafley will 'allow us to be way more disruptive'
    Zero2Cool (12-Apr) : Saints have agreed to terms on a contract with former Packers wide receiver Equanimeous St. Brown.
    beast (12-Apr) : No, but of it's for legislation, then half of the country will find it evil, not good, whatever it says....
    Mucky Tundra (12-Apr) : Draft is still 2 weeks away. UGH
    dhazer (11-Apr) : Does anyone know of a good AI generator to create letters of Support for legislation?
    Zero2Cool (11-Apr) : Gordon "Red" Batty retires as equipment manager
    Zero2Cool (10-Apr) : Sounds like that's pretty certain now.
    Zero2Cool (10-Apr) : Packers "at" Eagles in Brazil. Week One
    dfosterf (10-Apr) : Va' Fazer As Malas Va' !
    Zero2Cool (9-Apr) : Mark Murphy tipping us off?
    Zero2Cool (9-Apr) : “We’re either the first- or second-most popular team in Brazil.”
    Zero2Cool (9-Apr) : Christian Watson got married. Wife better be careful with those hamstrings!! 😂😂
    dfosterf (9-Apr) : Those poor bastards
    Zero2Cool (8-Apr) : Falcons have signed former Packers CB Kevin King, who has been out of football since 2021.
    dfosterf (8-Apr) : Collectively, we need to spend more time in what we have, when analyzing ostendible needs and historical proclivities
    dfosterf (8-Apr) : I say he is better than so many of these draft picks
    dfosterf (8-Apr) : Question of the week for me: Has anyone besides me done any deep dive into the potential of Alex McGough, our 3rd string qb?
    Zero2Cool (8-Apr) : Or in Tunsil's case, something gets released day of draft or day before lol
    Zero2Cool (8-Apr) : Seems every year someone does something pre-draft.
    dfosterf (8-Apr) : Falling down drunk. The draft board
    dfosterf (8-Apr) : Allright! Potential character guy/f#×k up pickup in D'Vondre Sweat!
    Zero2Cool (7-Apr) : Go Badgers!!!
    Please sign in to use Fan Shout
    2023 Packers Schedule
    Sunday, Sep 10 @ 3:25 PM
    Bears
    38 - 20
    Sunday, Sep 17 @ 12:00 PM
    Falcons
    24 - 25
    Sunday, Sep 24 @ 12:00 PM
    SAINTS
    18 - 17
    Thursday, Sep 28 @ 7:15 PM
    LIONS
    20 - 34
    Monday, Oct 9 @ 7:15 PM
    Raiders
    13 - 17
    Sunday, Oct 22 @ 3:25 PM
    Broncos
    17 - 19
    Sunday, Oct 29 @ 12:00 PM
    VIKINGS
    10 - 24
    Sunday, Nov 5 @ 12:00 PM
    RAMS
    20 - 3
    Sunday, Nov 12 @ 12:00 PM
    Steelers
    19 - 23
    Sunday, Nov 19 @ 12:00 PM
    CHARGERS
    23 - 20
    Thursday, Nov 23 @ 11:30 AM
    Lions
    29 - 22
    Sunday, Dec 3 @ 7:20 PM
    CHIEFS
    27 - 19
    Monday, Dec 11 @ 7:15 PM
    Giants
    22 - 24
    Sunday, Dec 17 @ 12:00 PM
    BUCCANEERS
    20 - 34
    Sunday, Dec 24 @ 12:00 PM
    Panthers
    33 - 30
    Sunday, Dec 31 @ 7:20 PM
    Vikings
    33 - 10
    Sunday, Jan 7 @ 3:25 PM
    BEARS
    17 - 9
    Sunday, Jan 14 @ 3:30 PM
    Cowboys
    48 - 32
    Saturday, Jan 20 @ 7:15 PM
    49ers
    21 - 24
    Recent Topics
    17h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

    22-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

    21-Apr / Fantasy Sports Talk / dfosterf

    21-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

    19-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

    19-Apr / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

    18-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    18-Apr / Random Babble / Mucky Tundra

    18-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

    17-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

    17-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

    17-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    17-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    17-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    16-Apr / Random Babble / Martha Careful

    Headlines
    Copyright © 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.