Jump to content

Revisiting a very interesting analysis


Matts4313

Recommended Posts

Matts, if you are trying to argue that the team with better QB play is more likely to win, I don’t think you’ll get much of an argument from anyone.

 

Where you will get an argument, however, is whether predictable playcalling and inept game adjustments from SL and JG are the primary cause of passing inefficiency.

 

you want to know the best way to have efficient passing?  Play action pass when the defense has to respect the run.  The more defenders in the box, the easier it is to win 1 on 1 matchups.  When defenders  (LBs and safeties) move forward to stop the run, it greats more space for WRs and TEs behind he LBs.  Easy examples... Romo’s most efficient year coincided perfectly with Demarco Murray blowing up.  Dak’s best year coincided with Zeke blowing up.  These are not coincidences.  It’s just easier to find both passing lanes and 1 on 1 matches when defenses are palying to stop the run.  

 

Where SL and JG are utterly failing this team is failing to stay committed to he run and running he same predictable crap every year/every game.  This is a very simple example but it’s something that is absolutely KILLING us... second down shut gun snaps.  It kills the play action threat and forces Dak to be a passer without much of a threat of a run.  It’s the reason we are getting lopsided pass to run ratios.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, The_Slamman said:

Matts, if you are trying to argue that the team with better QB play is more likely to win, I don’t think you’ll get much of an argument from anyone.

 

Where you will get an argument, however, is whether predictable playcalling and inept game adjustments from SL and JG are the primary cause of passing inefficiency.

 

you want to know the best way to have efficient passing?  Play action pass when the defense has to respect the run.  The more defenders in the box, the easier it is to win 1 on 1 matchups.  When defenders  (LBs and safeties) move forward to stop the run, it greats more space for WRs and TEs behind he LBs.  Easy examples... Romo’s most efficient year coincided perfectly with Demarco Murray blowing up.  Dak’s best year coincided with Zeke blowing up.  These are not coincidences.  It’s just easier to find both passing lanes and 1 on 1 matches when defenses are palying to stop the run.  

 

Where SL and JG are utterly failing this team is failing to stay committed to he run and running he same predictable crap every year/every game.  This is a very simple example but it’s something that is absolutely KILLING us... second down shut gun snaps.  It kills the play action threat and forces Dak to be a passer without much of a threat of a run.  It’s the reason we are getting lopsided pass to run ratios.  

I mainly wanted to share this as it had been a while since I brought it up and I was debating with DaBoys. 

 

Lets take the Cowboys out of it for a second. Lets look at the stats based on the entire NFL for the last 30 years. Statistically speaking there is very very little correlation between the running aspect (Bulk/YPC) of a RB and winning. There is very little correlation between the running aspect of a RB and QB efficiency. Now, anecdotally you can point to Romo's best year having a monster running game as a counter point. And I can point to Rodgers and Brady both being in the GOAT conversation w/o a formidable runner as a counter point. But on the whole, RB performance =/= QB performance.  

I agree, specifically on SL, that he is a major factor in our passing ineffectiveness. I think Dak and the OL have also both significantly regressed.

As for the best way to become more effective, thats a different debate. A lot of teams do it a lot of different ways. If it was just as easy as "run play action" everyone would do it. Hell, its well known that Brady thinks the best way to pass is 5 wide (including Gronk as a wide) because he can read the defense and know exacly where to go. Manning liked to motion people around and play chess. Godgers just runs around like a manic until he crushes my soul into a thousand little pieces. There is no one answer. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DaBoys said:

17 - 5 when Zeke has 20 plus carries.

10 -9(4-7 over the last two seasons) when Dak throws over 30 times 

 

You can keep typing there is no correlation until there is a blister on your thumb, but it doesn't change anything. Because I'm giving you the actual results. 

44 out of 45 when we pass more efficiently than the other team. You can keep typing those stats until there is a blister on your thumb, but it doesnt change anything. I am giving you the actual results. 

 

I think you still arent getting it. Whether Zeke runs 10 times or 30 times it doesnt matter. Whether Dak throws 10 times or 30 times it doesnt matter. The only thing that matters is how efficient Dak is. 

 

And your bulk stats are still trash. ALL TEAMS for ever THROW more when they are losing and RUN more when they are winning. All you are saying is "When Dallas is already winning the game, they give the ball to Zeke and keep winning" and "When the Cowboys are losing, they throw more and Dak is 50/50 on bringing them back".

 

Duh. Thats not Cowboys or Zeke specific.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QBs like Manning, Brady, Brees, Rodgers etc are simply at a different level.  Those guys would be excellent in pretty much any scheme.  Brady has won 3 Super Bowls where the team was a run first and play strong defense traditional powerhouse.  Brady set records in a hurry up offense which almost went down as the greatest team in NFL history.  More recently Brady has won a super bowl in an offense that featured 2 shifty RBs, 2 shifty, undersized WRs and 1 beast TE.  There’s pretty much nothing Brady couldn’t run efficiently which is what makes him the GOAT.  

 

Similarly, Manning had tremendous success in multiple offensive schemes but let’s not forget that his most recent SB featured him handing off the ball and playing extremely conservative.

 

So, I agree with you that there is no one specific formula to ensure success or everyone would have success.  And, the ultra elite can absolutely have success in any system.

 

However, where I will (perhaps) disagree with you is the Dallas Cowboys personnel is not built to be a pass first team.  We have 4 first round talents and 1 second round talent on the OL.  We have the 3 highest paid OL at their position in the NFL.  We invested the #4 pick in a RB who has led the league (per game) in rushing over the last 3 years.  This team is built to run the ball.  Everything about this team is premised on rushing the ball and controlling the clock.  Then taking advantage of defenses with a big play when they over commit to the run.  That’s who we are built to be.  Instead it shut gun snaps, useless TEs, impotent WRs and putting Dak’s square peg into SL’s round hole.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, The_Slamman said:

Dak’s square peg into SL’s round hole

LOL, you knew what you were doing here. 

Im just saying - if we want to win we need our QB to be highly efficient. And you can do that with running teams. Efficient =/= bulk. It needs to be smart. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Matts4313 said:

44 out of 45 when we pass more efficiently than the other team. You can keep typing those stats until there is a blister on your thumb, but it doesnt change anything. I am giving you the actual results. 

 

I think you still arent getting it. Whether Zeke runs 10 times or 30 times it doesnt matter. Whether Dak throws 10 times or 30 times it doesnt matter. The only thing that matters is how efficient Dak is. 

 

And your bulk stats are still trash. ALL TEAMS for ever THROW more when they are losing and RUN more when they are winning. All you are saying is "When Dallas is already winning the game, they give the ball to Zeke and keep winning" and "When the Cowboys are losing, they throw more and Dak is 50/50 on bringing them back".

 

Duh. Thats not Cowboys or Zeke specific.

No I'm saying that when you have a trash QB and an all pro RB you can make your QB more efficient but running the ball more. As Slam said, nobody is going to argue that the team with the better QB play usually wins. I'm also saying that the more you run the better the results are going to be. I'm also saying that there hasn't been a point in the season where it really made sense to completely abandon the run but we have. Zeke didn't get a single carry in the final two drives of the Panthers game. He hasn't had a single carry with under two minutes left in a half. We beat the Giants and he didn't get over 17 carries.

 

I'm saying giving Zeke the ball will limit what we ask of Dak and make him more efficient. So yes, more carries will help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DaBoys said:

I'm saying giving Zeke the ball will limit what we ask of Dak and make him more efficient. So yes, more carries will help.

You know what would make Zeke even more valuable? If he could pick up a blitz or catch a damn ball. Those plays effected the game much more than getting him 4 more handoffs. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Matts4313 said:

44 out of 45 when we pass more efficiently than the other team. You can keep typing those stats until there is a blister on your thumb, but it doesnt change anything. I am giving you the actual results. 

 

I think you still arent getting it. Whether Zeke runs 10 times or 30 times it doesnt matter. Whether Dak throws 10 times or 30 times it doesnt matter. The only thing that matters is how efficient Dak is. 

 

And your bulk stats are still trash. ALL TEAMS for ever THROW more when they are losing and RUN more when they are winning. All you are saying is "When Dallas is already winning the game, they give the ball to Zeke and keep winning" and "When the Cowboys are losing, they throw more and Dak is 50/50 on bringing them back".

 

Duh. Thats not Cowboys or Zeke specific.

You are right. It's all about efficiency. Well almost. The thing to remember about total yards passing or rushing or both is that it involves the moral and endurance factor. When you are able to move it up and down the field at will that wears on a defense. Especially if you score, but if you are able to sustain drives of 10 to even 15 plays per posession, that will take a toll on the opposing both physically and mentally. Our very under talented defense during Dak's first year was not exposed heavily because we were able to keep them fresh most of the time. Not to mention we kept opposing defenses tired and on edge because we kept imposing our will on them. We kept them on edge and when you are constantly threatening the redzone, it's going to be in the back of every defensive players mind that you might score this play and it makes them a little edgy and anxious. Leading to better efficiency.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

There is very little correlation between:

Rushing well and passing well

I find this interesting, but have trouble taking it at face value.

On a YPC basis, I can buy it. But I don't necessarily believe that YPC it the only measure of a quality running game.

If opposing teams made stopping the run their focus,  presumably 1) your team would run for a lower YPC than they otherwise would have, and 2) your passing game would be more efficient through more effective play action, a weakened pass rush, etc.

I'd be interested to know if there was correlation between how opponents treat your running game and how well you passed (and, as a result, how often you won). % of stacked boxes faced might suppress your YPC, but correlate to winning more often.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Nextyearfordaboyz said:

I find this interesting, but have trouble taking it at face value.

On a YPC basis, I can buy it. But I don't necessarily believe that YPC it the only measure of a quality running game.

If opposing teams made stopping the run their focus,  presumably 1) your team would run for a lower YPC than they otherwise would have, and 2) your passing game would be more efficient through more effective play action, a weakened pass rush, etc.

I'd be interested to know if there was correlation between how opponents treat your running game and how well you passed (and, as a result, how often you won). % of stacked boxes faced might suppress your YPC, but correlate to winning more often.

The better running team wins 4% better than the worse team (negligible). There is no correlation between the name of your RB and the efficiency of your QB. From a game to game perspective there is no consistency in the amount of who your RB is and the boxes they face. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Matts4313 said:

The better running team wins 4% better than the worse team (negligible). There is no correlation between the name of your RB and the efficiency of your QB. From a game to game perspective there is no consistency in the amount of who your RB is and the boxes they face. 

I don't really feel like this answers my question.

What's defining "better running team"? YPC?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...