TJV
Lifelong Packers Fanatic
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2011
- Messages
- 5,389
- Reaction score
- 954
McGinn has another (IMO) excellent article titled, “Linemen, backs allow Packers to rejuvenate run game”.
Last edited:
I bit ironic to hear that from a Vikings fan, the only team with a primarily rushing-based offense.*And here I though a good running game was no longer important in the NFL anymore.
And here I though a good running game was no longer important in the NFL anymore.
Well it's what Packer fans have been saying for the last 8 years. The running game no longer matters in a passing league. Now of course they have better running game it important again.I bit ironic to hear that from a Vikings fan, the only team with a primarily rushing-based offense.*
* 2007-2013
Well, if you consider winning important then it's a passing league: "Raw efficiency stats also point to the futility of the running game. Offensive running efficiency correlates with team wins at 0.15, a meager relationship compared to the 0.66 correlation of passing efficiency. This stark difference suggested that teams are investing far too much attention and resources into running the ball."
http://www.advancedfootballanalytics.com/2010/10/how-coaches-think-run-success-rate.html
I like the run game, and nothing is greater than running out the clock at the end of a game. But today the running game is secondary to the passing game, just as the NFL wants it.
One thing that should not be expected...the drafting of 330 lb. road-grading interior lineman. We've got some athletic guys who are experienced and sufficiently talented to execute both schemes in specific permutations. I'd expect it to stay that way. The price you pay is you're not going to get that mano a mano push on 3rd. and 1. That's where the Lacy spin-in-the-hole comes in.
Brian Burke, the genius at Advanced Football Analytics, thinks the run/pass ratio should be .15/.85 based on EPA for run vs pass plays. You can read about EPA here: http://www.advancedfootballanalytics.com/2010/01/expected-points-ep-and-expected-points.htmlThat may be true, JBlood, but how much does an effective running game effect the efficiency of the passing offense. Haven't seen the stats but it seems like the Offenses that were really emphasizing spread concepts and the pass have started to put more emphasis on running the football and establishing greater balance.
Brian Burke, the genius at Advanced Football Analytics, thinks the run/pass ratio should be .15/.85 based on EPA for run vs pass plays. You can read about EPA here: http://www.advancedfootballanalytics.com/2010/01/expected-points-ep-and-expected-points.html
I think it's a valid point to make that a good running threat adds to a good passing game, especially play-action. Another point: a good passing team can more readily build up a lead with passes, then run the ball in the 4th quarter to eat up the clock. So such a team might have passed the ball 65% of the time while scoring, but wind up with 55% by the end of the game. But I believe the EPA stat takes that into consideration.
It's always good to be good at everything.
Good question. I don't think that's been published, but he does have success rate, expected points added, and win probability added for offense vs defense over the last 10 years (article in 2011). The numbers show that good offenses beat good defenses, primarily due to QB play. http://www.advancedfootballanalytics.com/2011/01/top-offenses-top-defenses.htmlIt would be interesting to see his ideal run/pass ratio put side by side with the run/pass ratio of the past ten super bowl champions. Winning games in the NFL and scoring lots of points doesn't necessarily lead to trophies.
SR, EPA, WPA...undefined terms, black box formulations, resistant to scrutiny. Looks nice, but how did he get from point A to point Z?Good question. I don't think that's been published, but he does have success rate, expected points added, and win probability added for offense vs defense over the last 10 years (article in 2011). The numbers show that good offenses beat good defenses, primarily due to QB play. http://www.advancedfootballanalytics.com/2011/01/top-offenses-top-defenses.html
Not true. You've got to spend some time on the site and go through all the statistical analyses. I'm not a statistician, so am content with reading the bottom lines.SR, EPA, WPA...undefined terms, black box formulations, resistant to scrutiny. Looks nice, but how did he get from point A to point Z?
What's ideal run/pass ration? I do have this. This is a list back to 2006 of the Super Bowl teams and their run/pass ratio. The data was taken from NFL.com and reflects pass attempts vs. rushing attempts as percent of total. Super Bowl winners are on top. I can also say that during that time period the average for all teams was 55% pass 45% run.It would be interesting to see his ideal run/pass ratio put side by side with the run/pass ratio of the past ten super bowl champions. Winning games in the NFL and scoring lots of points doesn't necessarily lead to trophies.
2006
Colts 56% 44%
Bears 51% 49%
2007
Giants 54% 46%
Pats 57% 43%
2008
Steeler 52% 48%
Cardinals 65% 35%
2009
Saints 54% 46%
Colts 62% 38%
2010
Packers 56% 44%
Steelers 50% 50%
2011
Giants 59% 41%
Pats 58% 42%
2012
Ravens 56% 44%
49ers 47% 53%
2013
Seattle 45% 55%
Denver 56% 41%
Well, here are a couple of things I noted before I stopped looking at it:Not true. You've got to spend some time on the site and go through all the statistical analyses. I'm not a statistician, so am content with reading the bottom lines.