Passing is fancy, but doesn't mean playoffs· Page 4

Dexter_Sinister
Registered

14 years ago

This is the thing, I'm not at all disagreeing with that point. I had that discussion earlier with Pack93z. I agree. You still need to hand the ball off.

My whole point is that it doesn't matter if your RBs are good or if they suck. That's the whole point I was making. Not that we don't need to hand the ball off.

"zombieslayer" wrote:

And obviously (so obvious it should go without saying) you want to be better in every phase of the game. Running, ST, or whatever.

With a finite amount of resources, you want your biggest investment and highest pick to be contributing to an area that gives you the biggest impact and increases the odds of winning the most. Which is D and Passing game.

Most bang for the buck.

I want to go out like my Grandpa did. Peacefully in his sleep.
Not screaming in terror like his passengers.

zombieslayer
Registered

14 years ago

#32

Exactly. Paying for an elite RB is a waste when the bang for the buck with running isn't that important. I would love to see a study on this - comparing the impact of an elite WR or TE vs an elite RB. I think we can all agree that an elite QB smokes an elite RB. Not even in the same ballpark.

Now the thing with D is, it's a unit. You want to be ranked in the top 5. I did this post earlier how the top 5 D is almost a requirement to win a SB (with some notable exceptions like the Saints from the year before last). So hard to say where to put the money there.

Now would it be nice to have the NFL's best RB? Sure. It would be nice to have D Hester as your returner too. It would be nice to have that guy on the Raiders as your Punter and it would be nice to have Vinitari as your Kicker too while we're at it. But we have to stay in the salary cap.

My man Donald Driver

(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷

DakotaT
Select Member

14 years ago

#33

Zombie, so you're saying you need to run the ball? :)

I thought we just gutted the top rated defense by passing the ball down their throats and getting turnovers with our opportunistic defense. Seemed like a fool proof system.

I kind of like our approach, pick your poison opponent - we have the answer for you. No way in hell we should have been 10-6 and a sixth seed, but it sure made for some good drama.

macbob
Veteran Member Topic Starter

14 years ago

#34

I think we can all agree that an elite QB smokes an elite RB. Not even in the same ballpark.

"zombieslayer" wrote:

I can't speak for others, but I'd agree on that.

Now the thing with D is, it's a unit. You want to be ranked in the top 5. I did this post earlier how the top 5 D is almost a requirement to win a SB (with some notable exceptions like the Saints from the year before last). So hard to say where to put the money there.

"zombieslayer" wrote:

Zombie-what criteria were you using for a top 5 D? I was trying to do some analysis over the last 20 SBs, and couldn't decide what criteria to use for a top 5 D. I ended up using two (plus a combination off/def criteria for a 3rd).

What I did was compare the rankings of the SB winners since 1991 in the following categories:

QB rating; Rush yards; Rush attempts; Off 3rd down efficiency; Def yards allowed, Def Pts allowed, Def 3rd down efficiency, and Turn/over differential (the combo stat--part offensive, part defensive).

To summarize the results:

Top 3 categories were Def pts allowed, QB rating, and Turnover Diff (with a little more than 1 ranking difference between the 3).

Rush attempts, Off 3rd down efficiency, and Def yards allowed were all right behind T/O differential. Rush yardage and Def 3rd down efficiency were bringing up the rear, well behind the others. Anything ranked over 10 I didn't feel was significant--was barely in the top 3rd of the league at that point.

Here's how the SB winners ranked in those categories:


				    Rush	3rd	DEF		3rd	TO
          QB Rating		Yds	Att	Eff	Yds	Pts	Eff	Diff
2010    3  Rodgers		24	20	8	5	2	9	4
2009    1  Brees		7	6	6	25	20	14	3
2008   24  Roethlisberger	23	9	14	1	1	1	11
2007   25  E.Manning		4	8	12	7	17	5	26
2006    1  P. Manning		18	18	1	21	23	32	7
2005    3  Roethlisberger	5	1	23	4	3	20	10
2004    9  Brady		7	5	5	9	2	21	8
2003   10  Brady		27	12	15	7	1	7	2
2002    3  Johnson		27	23	26	1	1	3	1
2001    6  Brady		13	8	8	24	6	15	9
2000   20  Dilfer		5	5	11	2	1	5	1
1999    1  Warner		5	15	1	6	4	10	10
1998    5  Elway		2	2	6	11	8	21	6
1997    7  Elway		4	6	3	5	6	1	5
1996    2  Favre		11	14	2	1	1	2	2
1995    3  Aikman		2	4	6	9	3	26	13
1994    1  Young		6	5	1	8	6	16	3
1993    2  Aikman		2	6	7	10	2	15	10
1992    3  Aikman		5	4	6	1	5	1	9
1991    2  Rypien		7	1	1	3	2	6	1
	131			204	172	162	160	114	230	141
	6.55			10.2	8.6	8.1	8	5.7	11.5	7.05

zombieslayer
Registered

14 years ago

#35

Dakota - I've said earlier that I don't believe in balance. If the opponent can't stop the pass, throw it, throw it, then throw it again. Reverse if they can't stop the run.

Macbob - Simply points allowed. I did that post earlier with every single SB winner and the vast majority were in the top 3 and almost all were in the top 6. It's all about points. I don't care how many yards you allow. If they can't score, you got an elite D.

One more thing. I know you don't want to hear this but it's been said a few times now by others. The reason why rushing attempts are up there for teams who win is because when you got the lead, you want to burn off the clock. Rushing burns off the clock more than passing. So of course teams that have the lead are going to run the ball more and to someone who is just looking at the stats and not watching the game, it looks like rushing attempts helps you win. It doesn't. It's the other way around. Winning helps your rushing attempts.

My man Donald Driver

(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷

Dexter_Sinister
Registered

14 years ago

#36

I find QB rating differential to be fairly helpful. The difference between Rodgers and all QB ratings of the others when we played them.

I think we were +41 or something.

I want to go out like my Grandpa did. Peacefully in his sleep.
Not screaming in terror like his passengers.

macbob
Veteran Member Topic Starter

14 years ago

#37

One more thing. I know you don't want to hear this but it's been said a few times now by others. The reason why rushing attempts are up there for teams who win is because when you got the lead, you want to burn off the clock. Rushing burns off the clock more than passing. So of course teams that have the lead are going to run the ball more and to someone who is just looking at the stats and not watching the game, it looks like rushing attempts helps you win. It doesn't. It's the other way around. Winning helps your rushing attempts.

"zombieslayer" wrote:

Zombie-we had this discussion in the fall. I pulled out the stats using ESPN's splits on when a team was ahead, behind, and tied with the other teams. The analysis was part of a comparison of McCarthy, Sherman, and Holmgren's play calling.

The impact that your describing is not nearly what you seem to think it is. All three coaches basically ran just as much when tied with the opponent as ahead. The major difference was when losing all three coaches' passing percentage shot up from in the upper 50s to over 70 percent.

I also did an analysis of running in the 1sr/2nd/3rd/4th qtr. If what you're saying is accurate, I'd expect the 4th quarter running #s to be significantly higher than the other quarters, and they weren't. 1st and 3rd qtr rush attempts were similar, 2nd qtr were two less and 4th qtr were 2 more than 1st & 3rd qtrs. It wasn't this big stat-skewing number like you imply.

I was tired when I posted those stats last night. I've had more time to consider them today and will post updated comments.

macbob
Veteran Member Topic Starter

14 years ago

#38

Ok, my updated analysis:

What I did was compare the rankings of the SB winners since 1991 in the following categories:

QB rating; Rush yards; Rush attempts; Off 3rd down efficiency; Def yards allowed, Def Pts allowed, Def 3rd down efficiency, and Turn/over differential (the combo stat--part offensive, part defensive).

To summarize the results:

Top 3 categories were Def pts allowed, QB rating, and Turnover Diff (with a little more than 1 ranking difference between the 3).

Rush attempts, Off 3rd down efficiency, and Def yards allowed were all right behind T/O differential. Rush yardage and Def 3rd down efficiency were bringing up the rear, well behind the others.

Here's how the SB winners ranked in those categories:


				    Rush	3rd	DEF		3rd	TO
          QB Rating		Yds	Att	Eff	Yds	Pts	Eff	Diff
2010    3  Rodgers		24	20	8	5	2	9	4
2009    1  Brees		7	6	6	25	20	14	3
2008   24  Roethlisberger	23	9	14	1	1	1	11
2007   25  E.Manning		4	8	12	7	17	5	26
2006    1  P. Manning		18	18	1	21	23	32	7
2005    3  Roethlisberger	5	1	23	4	3	20	10
2004    9  Brady		7	5	5	9	2	21	8
2003   10  Brady		27	12	15	7	1	7	2
2002    3  Johnson		27	23	26	1	1	3	1
2001    6  Brady		13	8	8	24	6	15	9
2000   20  Dilfer		5	5	11	2	1	5	1
1999    1  Warner		5	15	1	6	4	10	10
1998    5  Elway		2	2	6	11	8	21	6
1997    7  Elway		4	6	3	5	6	1	5
1996    2  Favre		11	14	2	1	1	2	2
1995    3  Aikman		2	4	6	9	3	26	13
1994    1  Young		6	5	1	8	6	16	3
1993    2  Aikman		2	6	7	10	2	15	10
1992    3  Aikman		5	4	6	1	5	1	9
1991    2  Rypien		7	1	1	3	2	6	1
	131			204	172	162	160	114	230	141
	6.55			10.2	8.6	8.1	8	5.7	11.5	7.05

OK, looking at the Super Bowl winners for the last 20 years, heres the conclusions that Im drawing:

1) SB winners needed to be multi-faceted, not one-dimensional. They needed to be good/toward the top of the league in multiple categories. Almost all of the SB winners were good in most of the categories, potentially ranking in the lower half of the league in 1-2 areas at most.

2) Being deficient in one area could be compensated for by being elite in another category, with an elite Defense (to include ball-hawking TOs) & elite QB being the most important categories. Teams that were in the lower half in more than 1-2 categories (2006 Colts, 2002 TB) were able to compensate by having an elite D or QB.

3) The running game was not irrelevant. Neither the 2007 Giants or the 2000 Ravens had elite QBs, but their running game compensated. The 2007 Giants ranked in the lower half of the league in QB, Defense, and TO ratio (ranking in the lower half of the league in all three categories), but their running game compensated.

4) An elite D wasnt absolutely essential (2009 Saints, 2006 Colts, 2007 NYGthough the Giants D did pick it up big time at the end of the year & through the playoffs), as long as you had an elite QB (Saints/Colts) or a good running game (Giants).

So, having a balanced team, including balanced offense, improves your odds of winning the SB.

Having a good running game is not irrelevantit improves your odds of winning the SB.

zombieslayer
Registered

14 years ago

#39

But as I said, anything improves your chances. Would be nice to have the best punter, kicker, kick returner as well. Money though isn't infinite. That's what I was getting at.

Also note in the past 5 years, none of the SB winners were top 5 in rushing attempts and one was 20 and one was 18. From 2001 on, it really hits the point home that having a good running game or a bad running game (in terms of yards) is irrelevant.

Yes, you need to run the ball at times. But what I'm getting at is your rushing success is irrelevant. Build the D first. That's been my point.

Most important stat has been D points but 3 of the past 5 years, that too has been not that impressive. Look at those lousy Ds that won SBs.

So maybe in conclusion, there is no magic formula. Your best shot is to have an elite D but that's no guarantee as 3 of the past 5 years, the D wasn't (Giants were a weird exception where regular season D wasn't good but their Playoff D ruled).

My man Donald Driver

(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷

macbob
Veteran Member Topic Starter

14 years ago

#40

"zombieslayer" wrote:

Zombie-I agree with you until you get to the point where you say rushing success is irrelevant.

You point out two of the last 5 years teams were ranked 18 & 20 in rush attempts. I'll point out that 2 of the last 5 years team's QB ratings were 24 & 25.

Does that make an elite QB irrelevant? I certainly wouldn't make that argument. Your argument that rushing success is irrelevant is no more valid.

Teams winning the SB ranked only 2 places lower (8 1/2 vs 6 1/2) in rush attempts vs QB ratings.

As important as an elite QB? No. Irrelevant? That's crazy talk.

Important Information:

The PACKERSHOME uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. More Details Close

Fan Shout

Zero2Cool (10-Aug) : Packers LT Jordan Morgan did not allow a single pressure across 23 pass-blocking snaps vs. Jets last night, per PFF

Mucky Tundra (10-Aug) : With buckeye and the reasonable couple, we're currently sitting at 10

buckeyepackfan (10-Aug) : Just posted to re-up on our FFL.

Zero2Cool (10-Aug) : If healthy after, then thats all I care. Well, no drops would be nice

wpr (10-Aug) : I made it through the 1st Q.

dfosterf (10-Aug) : Just gotta figure out how.

dfosterf (10-Aug) : Could have been a worse start, so there is that.

beast (10-Aug) : Yeah, someone tell the Packers football season has started, seems like they weren't ready for it

Mucky Tundra (10-Aug) : Sooooooo many penalties

Mucky Tundra (10-Aug) : It may only be preseason, but this game is a trip to the dentist

Zero2Cool (10-Aug) : Packers do bad -- FREAK OUT!!!!!!

Zero2Cool (10-Aug) : Packers do good -- eh only preseason

dfosterf (10-Aug) : Well that half was fun

Zero2Cool (10-Aug) : Great, zayne is down

Zero2Cool (9-Aug) : 13 minutes away from kickkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkoffff

Zero2Cool (9-Aug) : Had Celebration of Life for my uncle up north. wicked rain hope it dont come south

Mucky Tundra (9-Aug) : THE GREEN BAY PACKERS ARE PLAYING FOOTBALL TONIGHT!!!!!! THIS IS NOT A DRILL!!!!

Zero2Cool (9-Aug) : Woo-hoo

TheKanataThrilla (9-Aug) : NFL Network is broadcasting the game tonight, but not in Canada. Not sure why as no local television is showing the game.

beast (8-Aug) : But the Return from IR designations had to be applied by the 53 man cutdown.

beast (8-Aug) : It's a new rule, so it's not clear, but my understanding was that they could be IR'd at any time

Mucky Tundra (8-Aug) : *had to be IRed at 53

Mucky Tundra (8-Aug) : beast, I thought the designate return from IR players had to be IR at cutdowns to 53, not before

beast (8-Aug) : It's a brand new rule, either last season or this season, prior, all pre-season IRs were done for the season

beast (8-Aug) : But the Packers would have to use one for their return from IR spots on him, when they cut down to 53.

beast (8-Aug) : I think the NFL recently changed the IR rules, so maybe the season might not be over for OL Glover.

Zero2Cool (8-Aug) : Packers star Howton, first NFLPA prez, dies at 95 😔

dfosterf (8-Aug) : Apparently it is too complicated for several to follow your simple instructions, but I digress

dfosterf (8-Aug) : Zero- Did you see what I posted about Voice of Reason and his wife? She posted over at fleaflicker that they are both "In"

Zero2Cool (7-Aug) : Well, not crazy, it makes sense. Crazy I didn't notice/find it earlier

Zero2Cool (7-Aug) : it's crazy how one stored procedure to get data bogged everything down for speed here

dfosterf (7-Aug) : to herd cats or goldfish without a bowl. They reminded me of the annual assembly of our fantasy league

dfosterf (7-Aug) : out on a field trip, outfitting them with little yellow smocks. Most of the little folk were well behaved, but several were like trying

dfosterf (7-Aug) : Yesterday my wife and I spent the afternoon on the waterfront here in Alexandria, Va. A daycare company took about 15 three/four year olds

wpr (7-Aug) : seems faster. yay

dfosterf (7-Aug) : Wife of reason posted on the in/out thread on fleaflicker that both she and vor are in

Zero2Cool (7-Aug) : This page was generated in 0.135 seconds.

Mucky Tundra (7-Aug) : Tbh, I can never tell the difference in speed unless it's completely shitting the bed

Zero2Cool (7-Aug) : Sure does feel like site is more snappy

Zero2Cool (6-Aug) : I thought that was the Lions OL

Mucky Tundra (6-Aug) : Travis Glover placed on IR; seasons over for him

Zero2Cool (6-Aug) : found bad sql in database, maybe site faster now?

dfosterf (5-Aug) : I'm going to call that a good move.

Zero2Cool (4-Aug) : Packers sign CB Corey Ballentine

Zero2Cool (4-Aug) : I'm not sure how to kill the draft order just yet so it's not so confusing.

Mucky Tundra (4-Aug) : *to be able

Mucky Tundra (4-Aug) : and because it's not a dynasty league (which makes a lot more sense to be ability to trade picks)

Mucky Tundra (4-Aug) : Oh I know; I was just exploring and it blew my mind that you could trade picks because of the whole reordering thing

Mucky Tundra (4-Aug) : Zero, I think I preferred my offer: your 1st for my 15th rounder

Zero2Cool (4-Aug) : Keep in mind, we do a draft reorder once all members locked in

Please sign in to use Fan Shout

2025 Packers Schedule

Sunday, Sep 7 @ 3:25 PM

LIONS

Thursday, Sep 11 @ 7:15 PM

COMMANDERS

Sunday, Sep 21 @ 12:00 PM

Browns

Sunday, Sep 28 @ 7:20 PM

Cowboys

Sunday, Oct 12 @ 3:25 PM

BENGALS

Sunday, Oct 19 @ 3:25 PM

Cardinals

Sunday, Oct 26 @ 7:20 PM

Steelers

Sunday, Nov 2 @ 12:00 PM

PANTHERS

Monday, Nov 10 @ 7:15 PM

EAGLES

Sunday, Nov 16 @ 12:00 PM

Giants

Sunday, Nov 23 @ 12:00 PM

VIKINGS

Thursday, Nov 27 @ 12:00 PM

Lions

Sunday, Dec 7 @ 12:00 PM

BEARS

Sunday, Dec 14 @ 3:25 PM

Broncos

Friday, Dec 19 @ 11:00 PM

Bears

Friday, Dec 26 @ 11:00 PM

RAVENS

Saturday, Jan 3 @ 11:00 PM

Vikings