Running and defense wins championships

[fansinceGWilson]

At first glance, it doesnt seem that run/pass ratio is a factor either. Yes, those teams had fewer rush attempts, but the total plays were low as well. Would that be accurate?

There are endless variables with any team stat. For example, I'm using rush attempts. That excludes pass attempts which affects total plays per game. Seems reasonable a team that passes a higher % of the time has fewer rush attempts. Not just teams so bad their TOP is bad. No way to easily factor in rush attempts in 1Q vs. 4Q. Since the discussion focuses on Y/C and rush attempts, that's what I used.
NBP focuses on efficiency - a legitimate stat and I don't disagree with him. I focus on if the lack of a run game affects how often an OC uses PA.

 

[FINMAN1]

Back to the original topic, running and defense, we'll find out soon.
The 49ers have the 2nd ranked Defense AND 2nd ranked running game.

After I posted this, I had a memory of the 1982 Dolphins. They ranked well in rushing, and had the number 1 defense; BUT the defensive ranking was skewed, because they only ranked 24th AGAINST the run, and number 1 against the pass. Everyone remembers what happened in the Super Bowl. The 49ers rank 2nd in "D", but only 17th against the rush, and number #1 against the pass. That raises their overall ranking in TOTAL defense, and could be their undoing in the playoffs.

 

[Mach2]

There are endless variables with any team stat. For example, I'm using rush attempts. That excludes pass attempts which affects total plays per game. Seems reasonable a team that passes a higher % of the time has fewer rush attempts. Not just teams so bad their TOP is bad. No way to easily factor in rush attempts in 1Q vs. 4Q. Since the discussion focuses on Y/C and rush attempts, that's what I used.
NBP focuses on efficiency - a legitimate stat and I don't disagree with him. I focus on if the lack of a run game affects how often an OC uses PA.

Certainly agree about the "endless variables". NBP puts a lot of time into analytics, and certainly has some valid points.

The more variable one puts in to it though, the greater requirement for "weighting", which then by necessity, becomes subjective to some extent.

 

[volk]

I'm not going to go stat level on how to make play action work, but I do have a theory about the most successful teams in this year's playoffs. For a long time now the prevailing theory is that the NFL is a passing league. This is largely due to NFL rule changes and the outrageous stats many QB's and WR's are making. Because of this, the RB position has become a bit of an afterthought, with RB by committee and lower draft picks being spent on the position. It has also lead to less physical defense. Coverage skills are a premium now, even amongst many LB cores. There isn't a lot of smash mouth football being played anymore.

This is what teams like Tennessee and Baltimore, and even SF are exploiting. Soft defense. Soft defense will always struggle against the run, because these guys aren't built to dole out punishment, they are built to cover and swarm to the ball. This is why Henry can destroy 8 in the box. This is why this year's top teams are extremely physical on both sides of the ball. I don't know how much longer this trend will last, but I expect these teams with this style of offense will be successful For at least a few more years until the balance shifts again. Perhaps Miami would be wise to load up on smashmouth players and ride the trend until they can find a QB.

 

[fansinceGWilson]

Certainly agree about the "endless variables". NBP puts a lot of time into analytics, and certainly has some valid points.

The more variable one puts in to it though, the greater requirement for "weighting", which then by necessity, becomes subjective to some extent.

As does the focus. If I'm focused on pass completion rate, OL ranking is ignored or devalued. If I focus on YPC, I'm ignoring 'yards til 1st contact.' Thus, in any discussion here, a lot of the debate over which stat to over/undervalue. I admit mine is more nebulous than NBP. I'm using a stat to postulate the thinking of an OC. NBP's is more concrete. Nonetheless, I'll stand by 'a team with a lower rush ranking tends to have a lower number of PAs and, IMO, this limits the OC.

 

[DOLFANMIKE]

If we build a quality OL, our entire team gets better.
QB's get more time to throw, and better lanes to throw down
WR's get the time to run the full route tree
RB's get bigger holes to run through
The defense doesn't have to be on the field as much and gets to play fresh more often
We can control the clock in ways we couldn't the last several years

 

[NBP81]

As does the focus. If I'm focused on pass completion rate, OL ranking is ignored or devalued. If I focus on YPC, I'm ignoring 'yards til 1st contact.' Thus, in any discussion here, a lot of the debate over which stat to over/undervalue. I admit mine is more nebulous than NBP. I'm using a stat to postulate the thinking of an OC. NBP's is more concrete. Nonetheless, I'll stand by 'a team with a lower rush ranking tends to have a lower number of PAs and, IMO, this limits the OC.

See I agree with this 100%... My initial argument with ATL was about the correlation between rushing success and PA success being very low. The idea that teams might abandon the strategy because of a lack of a good running game might in fact be true, but those teams are wrong doing it. My bad if the argument shifted without me noticing, might have skipped a few post.

 

[Pachyderm_Wave]

You'll win a lot of games with a great running game and a great defense. But that great defense is hard to come by - even harder to sustain if you do manage to build one.

I'm sure everyone recalls not too long ago when the Dolphins tried to build their team on a foundation of a dominant running game, chewing up clock, and passing up QB's at the top of the draft for offensive lineman. Everyone sat there and watched it culminate in Miami rushing for almost 250 yards and hold the ball for over 45 minutes of game clock against the Colts - who won the game having the ball for less than 15 minutes. Parcells knew his way of building a team was done.

When you run into a top quarterback it's going to be difficult to get by them under the current rules. I'm not sure the owner feels it wise to revisit that strategy.

 

[fansinceGWilson]

See I agree with this 100%... My initial argument with ATL was about the correlation between rushing success and PA success being very low. The idea that teams might abandon the strategy because of a lack of a good running game might in fact be true, but those teams are wrong doing it. My bad if the argument shifted without me noticing, might have skipped a few post.

More likely I was unclear. Sorry

 

[j-off-her-doll]

I generally agree but he is ignoring the fact that the running is helping to take time off the clock. Tenn won the time of possession battle against NE and only had 4 minutes less TOP than the Ravens, despite running running 36 fewer plays.

Not sure if the article takes into account that they were facing two top defenses either.

In the Ravens game, it wasn't even Tennessee's intention until they got 2 quick scores in the 3rd quarter. Tannehill said as much. They had a 10 pass, 13 rush breakdown in the first half and I suspect that would have been the plan for the second half if not for the two scores.

This is all correct. There is value in running well. It's better for short-yardage situations, and it keeps the clock running. But, the poster of the Tweet is arguing against people who want to prioritize smashmouth football in their team building and who point to Tennessee's success as evidence that it's a good idea.

The great thing about building an excellent passing attack is that you'll probably build a good running game without trying - playcalling, OL, and QB have the most influence on rushing success. Hard to build a high-end passing offense without an OL and a QB.

 

[ATL_PHIN_FAN]

Also factor in that some QBs, QB/RB combos, are far better at selling it than others.

Yeah, Marino was pretty well known for his pitiful and lackadaisical PA fakes. I'm not knocking Marino. I think he was probably frustrated by our running game in general, considering PA a waste of time after years of not getting apparent advantage from it. However, with an eye on the big picture, Shula may have seen PA very differently than Marino did.

 

[ATL_PHIN_FAN]

If we build a quality OL, our entire team gets better.
QB's get more time to throw, and better lanes to throw down
WR's get the time to run the full route tree
RB's get bigger holes to run through
The defense doesn't have to be on the field as much and gets to play fresh more often
We can control the clock in ways we couldn't the last several years

But then you get into what kind of O-linemen we should focus on obtaining? If we obsess only on pass blocking skill to protect our shiny new franchise QB candidate, methinks it would be sheer luck if they can also run block well. I think, perhaps, this is why successful professional coaches get paid the big bucks? They know what they want their line to do best, while having the correct personnel to both run and pass block well enough. Average fans may be surprised when a highly respected pass blocking tackle is passed over for a less well known tackle who's more balanced in skills.

 

[NBP81]

Yup! Build that running game... Im convinced

 

[Kamelion4291]

We should offer all of our first rounders to KC for Mahomes because I've been told that it's better to have multiple pieces so they'd be stupid to say no.

 

[Locke]

Yup! Build that running game... Im convinced

There are the exceptions here and there, but overall the elite QB comes through.

This San Fran/Green Bay game is going to be really good. We’ll see if the elite QB goes 2/2.