Discussion Board
Welcome Guest! You can login or register. Login or Register.
4 Pages<1234>

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
play2win  
#41 Posted : Tuesday, October 9, 2012 7:58:28 AM(UTC)
Porforis said: Go to Quoted Post
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.


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...-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  
#42 Posted : Tuesday, October 9, 2012 8:19:23 AM(UTC)
Zero2Cool said: Go to Quoted Post
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.


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.
Zero2Cool  
#43 Posted : Tuesday, October 9, 2012 8:30:00 AM(UTC)
zombieslayer said: Go to Quoted Post
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.


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!!
LambeauEast  
#44 Posted : Tuesday, October 9, 2012 8:59:59 AM(UTC)
Mediocre at best.
play2win  
#45 Posted : Tuesday, October 9, 2012 9:11:50 AM(UTC)
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  
#46 Posted : Tuesday, October 9, 2012 11:40:24 AM(UTC)
zombieslayer said: Go to Quoted Post
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 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]
Rios39  
#47 Posted : Tuesday, October 9, 2012 12:19:23 PM(UTC)
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.
Porforis  
#48 Posted : Tuesday, October 9, 2012 12:36:29 PM(UTC)
Rios39 said: Go to Quoted Post
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.


But do remember that Starks started running well come the postseason during our SB run. That added dimension definitely helped us out.
Rios39  
#49 Posted : Tuesday, October 9, 2012 12:42:24 PM(UTC)
Porforis said: Go to Quoted Post
But do remember that Starks started running well come the postseason during our SB run. That added dimension definitely helped us out.


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.
Pack93z  
#50 Posted : Tuesday, October 9, 2012 12:56:02 PM(UTC)
Rios39 said: Go to Quoted Post
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.


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.
DarkaneRules  
#51 Posted : Tuesday, October 9, 2012 2:02:55 PM(UTC)
And why do people forget that MOST RBs take time to get going. Not everyone is Adrian Peterson. See how better the Vikings are with him back in the fray!
Zero2Cool  
#52 Posted : Tuesday, October 9, 2012 2:11:09 PM(UTC)
DarkaneRules said: Go to Quoted Post
And why do people forget that MOST RBs take time to get going. Not everyone is Adrian Peterson. See how better the Vikings are with him back in the fray!


No one is forgetting that, maybe zombieslayer? I know Shawn and I have several times said you have to run the ball to be successful running the ball. You can't pass 14 times and sprinkle one run in there and expect your RB to be in the groove. Cedric Benson even said as much after I think the Seahawks game ... said that he needed more carries to get into the groove.

I bet McCarthy would swap out boxers mid-round too and expect them to deliver a knockout blow!
DarkaneRules  
#53 Posted : Tuesday, October 9, 2012 2:24:58 PM(UTC)
Zero2Cool said: Go to Quoted Post
No one is forgetting that, maybe zombieslayer? I know Shawn and I have several times said you have to run the ball to be successful running the ball. You can't pass 14 times and sprinkle one run in there and expect your RB to be in the groove. Cedric Benson even said as much after I think the Seahawks game ... said that he needed more carries to get into the groove.

I bet McCarthy would swap out boxers mid-round too and expect them to deliver a knockout blow!


Exactly! Not liking the offensive coordinating.

zombieslayer  
#54 Posted : Tuesday, October 9, 2012 6:25:29 PM(UTC)
Pack93z said: Go to Quoted Post
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]


In the end, Macbob and I ended up agreeing. It's about rushing attempts, not rushing yards. I know that sounds counter-intuitive, but that's how it is.

So of the arguments I put forth, I was right about elite RBs actually being a bad thing for your team and rushing yards not mattering. I was wrong about passing percentages. I thought we can safely pass 65% of the time. That's wrong. Of the SB winners in the past 5 years, all 5 of them passed more than 50% of the time (so that throws away the idea of a run first team as those teams nowadays don't win championships), but if you go too far lopsided in pass first, those don't win championships either.

I'm not accusing you, Pack93z, but there are some on this board who cannot admit when they're wrong. I readily admit I was wrong on going too far gung ho on passing. The numbers showed I went too far. But anyone who says we should be a run first team, if you want to lead this team, you won't win a Championship. And, we're not the Vikings. We're a Lombardi or bust team. We're here to win Championships, not just have an 8-8 record.

Now just in case anyone was wondering, the last 5 SB winners were pass first teams, just not as pass first as what I advocated several years ago. The 2011 Giants threw 589 vs 411 rushing attempts. That would be a 59% passing team. The 2010 Packers threw 541 vs 421 runs. That would be a 56% passing team. I said 65% pass. I readily admit that was too gung ho now.
zombieslayer  
#55 Posted : Tuesday, October 9, 2012 6:32:54 PM(UTC)
Just one more stat just in case anyone's curious. The last run first team to win the SB was the 2005 Steelers. That team had Willie Parker and Jermome Bettis.
PackFanWithTwins  
#56 Posted : Tuesday, October 9, 2012 6:58:04 PM(UTC)
Two backs running production in the same 1st half Sunday.

A. 3,-2,1,-1,2,1,22,-1,6
B. 4,0,2,9,1,1,3,9,1,3

One is ours, one is Peterson? Which would you prefer?
nerdmann  
#57 Posted : Tuesday, October 9, 2012 7:14:35 PM(UTC)
zombieslayer said: Go to Quoted Post
Just one more stat just in case anyone's curious. The last run first team to win the SB was the 2005 Steelers. That team had Willie Parker and Jermome Bettis.


They also had a little help from their zebra striped friends.
Zero2Cool  
#58 Posted : Wednesday, October 10, 2012 5:36:12 AM(UTC)
zombieslayer said: Go to Quoted Post
But anyone who says we should be a run first team, if you want to lead this team, you won't win a Championship. And, we're not the Vikings. We're a Lombardi or bust team. We're here to win Championships, not just have an 8-8 record.


zombieslayer said: Go to Quoted Post
Just one more stat just in case anyone's curious. The last run first team to win the SB was the 2005 Steelers. That team had Willie Parker and Jermome Bettis.




I said the Packers should pass/run 60/40, that's saying pass first, not run first. I think it would be foolish to waste the WR and QB talent the Packers have by using the likes of Alex Green and/or James Starks first, lol. I laugh there because it just sounds silly saying it.


All I want is the Packers to mix it up some. Use some 3 and 5 step drops quick slant passes or some rollouts with a trailing guy in the flat to dump it to instead of Shotgun chuck it 20+ to Jordy Nelson who's double covered.

Look, I'm not the brightest guy in the room here, but when I can predict the play from the formation, guess what, so can the defense. That tells me teams know when the Packers are going to pass and they go balls out to kill the NFL MVP. I do not like that. I want to be fooled, like I was on the two special team fakes. Those I felt were BRILLIANTLY timed and executed.

Why can't we see an offense like that? BTW, I'm not saying I want to see flea flicker plays or statue of liberty type plays ... you can be brilliant with your routes, your timing of a short pass, long pass, run between tackles, etc ... be brilliant with play calling.
play2win  
#59 Posted : Wednesday, October 10, 2012 5:48:05 AM(UTC)
Zero2Cool said: Go to Quoted Post
I said the Packers should pass/run 60/40, that's saying pass first, not run first. I think it would be foolish to waste the WR and QB talent the Packers have by using the likes of Alex Green and/or James Starks first, lol. I laugh there because it just sounds silly saying it.


As an "out-of-the-box" kind of thing, I would love to see McCarthy call this. Just shock the hell out of the opposing DC, and his own OL, who I am certain would love it as well. 60%run/40%pass.

Establish the frickin' run. Balls to the wall. Why not? McCarthy should tell Aaron, "Dude, you're going to be having an easier day today." It won't happen, but I would love to see it.

HOU is allowing 86 yds/game on 21 att. If there is a way around their strengths on defense, this is it. A whole new can-o-whoop-ass!
zombieslayer  
#60 Posted : Wednesday, October 10, 2012 7:24:24 AM(UTC)
Zero2Cool said: Go to Quoted Post
I said the Packers should pass/run 60/40, that's saying pass first, not run first. I think it would be foolish to waste the WR and QB talent the Packers have by using the likes of Alex Green and/or James Starks first, lol. I laugh there because it just sounds silly saying it.


All I want is the Packers to mix it up some. Use some 3 and 5 step drops quick slant passes or some rollouts with a trailing guy in the flat to dump it to instead of Shotgun chuck it 20+ to Jordy Nelson who's double covered.

Look, I'm not the brightest guy in the room here, but when I can predict the play from the formation, guess what, so can the defense. That tells me teams know when the Packers are going to pass and they go balls out to kill the NFL MVP. I do not like that. I want to be fooled, like I was on the two special team fakes. Those I felt were BRILLIANTLY timed and executed.

Why can't we see an offense like that? BTW, I'm not saying I want to see flea flicker plays or statue of liberty type plays ... you can be brilliant with your routes, your timing of a short pass, long pass, run between tackles, etc ... be brilliant with play calling.


Then you, me, and Macbob were saying the same thing. Yes, keep it pass first, but we'll have to run 40+% of the time, especially when our OL is better at run blocking than pass blocking in 2012.

(Sorry if I'm speaking for you Macbob. You're more than free to correct me if I'm wrong).

I said I went too gung ho with pass %. 65% is too much. High 50s to 60% seems about the right %.

But we agree that if we went to the opposite extreme (run first), then we won't win games either.
Rss Feed
Users browsing this topic
Guest
4 Pages<1234>
Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Notification

Icon
Error

Fan Shout
Zero2Cool (1h) : OT Bryan Bulaga cleared the concussion protoco
Mucky Tundra (2h) : then again, I maybe too optimistic for my own good :/
Mucky Tundra (2h) : I think Hundley can handle; can Dom without the offense, that remains to be seen
uffda udfa (11h) : He ain't done yet for this season. Can Hundley handle?
uffda udfa (11h) : Aaron Rodgers finally communicates on Instagram: COMEBACK STARTS NOW
Barfarn (21h) : Bart's not on injury report, he's startin'
Smokey (21h) : I hope that means that he (Bart Starr) is in better health these days .
Zero2Cool (21h) : Bart Starr returning to Lambeau Field for Packers-Saints game Sunday
Porforis (19-Oct) : Glad to have King back. And House. Packers need 'em.
Zero2Cool (19-Oct) : Good! smack some posts in the forum right?!? :-) can't wait to read it
uffda udfa (18-Oct) : No more clutter.
Cheesey (18-Oct) : Go get him Uncle Ted!!
Zero2Cool (18-Oct) : Former Packers pass-rusher Datone Jones is back on the market.
Zero2Cool (18-Oct) : Good news for #Packers secondary: rookie CB Kevin King and vet CB Davon House (quad) both practiced. King has cleared concussion protocol.
Zero2Cool (18-Oct) : Vince Biegel back on practice field!!
Zero2Cool (18-Oct) : Maybe this little shout has no value if people gonna use it instead of the forum.
Zero2Cool (18-Oct) : He's not writing. He's shouting, and its making the shout kind of without point with the clutter.
buckeyepackfan (18-Oct) : Just like last year at 4-6. The guy is just too funny!
buckeyepackfan (18-Oct) : GOOD news Uffda is already all but writing The Packers off for 2017!
uffda udfa (18-Oct) : Masturbation talk from Barfan? Nothing could make me COME back, quicker.
wpr (18-Oct) : Maybe the shout box needs to take a timeout. People keep using it. ;)
Zero2Cool (18-Oct) : Why do this is in shout? So frustrating. Post in forums. Thanks
Barfarn (18-Oct) : Masterbation will relieve some of that nervous tension!
uffda udfa (17-Oct) : Now, a guy they really liked and have groomed for 3 years is the guy. Tons of toys on O. Let's see how it runs with a great coach, now.
uffda udfa (17-Oct) : The Flynn Patriots game has been used to say that he is. Seneca and Scott showed otherwise.
uffda udfa (17-Oct) : Hundley is going to settle the debate once and for all in whether Mike McCarthy is a great coach, or not.
uffda udfa (17-Oct) : Doesn't speak well to the talent acquired by the org, does it? Easy to say talent is great until Rodgers is gone and you have to see it wit
Porforis (17-Oct) : Could Sam Bradford come into the Packers and post a winning record from here on out? Are there any non-starters in the NFL that could?
Zero2Cool (17-Oct) : Teddy is replaceable. Aaron is not. Vikings have a really good defense. We do not. Understand??
Zero2Cool (17-Oct) : You are wise enough to know the difference. Right?
uffda udfa (17-Oct) : Here's one for you, Z. Vikes lose Teddy B. and go out and aggressively get Bradford. Packers lose 12 and go out and get a UDFA.
uffda udfa (17-Oct) : :) Evans had a pre-draft visit with Packers.
Zero2Cool (17-Oct) : Put it in a topic. My lord why so difficult lol
uffda udfa (17-Oct) : http://www.nfl.com/draft/2017/profiles/jerod-evans?id=2558099
uffda udfa (17-Oct) : http://www.foxsports.com/nfl/story/former-virginia-tech-qb-jerod-evans-issues-warning-after-going-undrafted-043017
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2017 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 10 @ 3:25 PM
SEAHAWKS
Sunday, Sep 17 @ 7:30 PM
at Falcons
Sunday, Sep 24 @ 3:25 PM
BENGALS
Thursday, Sep 28 @ 7:25 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Oct 8 @ 3:25 PM
at Cowboys
Sunday, Oct 15 @ 12:00 PM
at Vikings
Sunday, Oct 22 @ 12:00 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Oct 29 @ 12:00 AM
- BYE -
Monday, Nov 6 @ 7:30 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 12 @ 12:00 PM
at Bears
Sunday, Nov 19 @ 12:00 PM
RAVENS
Sunday, Nov 26 @ 7:30 PM
at Steelers
Sunday, Dec 3 @ 12:00 PM
BUCCANEERS
Sunday, Dec 10 @ 12:00 PM
at Browns
Sunday, Dec 17 @ 12:00 PM
at Panthers
Saturday, Dec 23 @ 7:30 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Dec 31 @ 12:00 PM
at Lions
Think About It
Think About It
Recent Topics
now / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

41m / Green Bay Packers Talk / isocleas2

44m / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

46m / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / DoddPower

2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / DarkaneRules

3h / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

12h / Fantasy Sports Talk / Smokey

14h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

14h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Barfarn

14h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

19-Oct / Green Bay Packers Talk / Barfarn

19-Oct / Green Bay Packers Talk / yooperfan

18-Oct / Green Bay Packers Talk / isocleas2

18-Oct / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

Headlines