Jump to content
Matts4313

The Run Game doesnt matter

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

I want to separate this from the Dak thread. Ive gotten this stigma that I hate Zeke because I think he is a jerk. I dont hate Zeke. In fact, as a player, he is probably the second best position excluded (behind Martin) on our whole team. And this past year, he helped make himself much more valuable. Not because his rushing. That doesnt matter. Its because he grew a ton in the pass game. The only thing that matters. Here are some facts that are irrefutable the past 25 years (or 5, 10, 15 - any time frame).

Point 1: The team that has a better ANY/A (adjusted net yards per an attempt => an advanced passing stat) in any given game wins the vast majority of the time. 

  • Your goal should be to have an efficient passing game (High completion, low sacks and turn overs). 
  • Bulk passing does not matter.
  • Defensively you need to make the other team inefficient. 

Point 2: Despite "common knowledge" there is no evidence that running the ball helps passing

  • Running efficiently (YPC) doent make you win more or pass better
  • Bulk running (YPG) doesnt make you win more or pass better
  • Attempts doesnt make you win more or pass better.
  • Running the ball does not set up Play Action Passing. 

Point 3: That doesnt mean that running or running backs arent useful.

  • Running short yardage is useful
  • RBs who help in the pass game are useful

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Supporting facts for the above statements:

Quote

 From 1998 through 2017, only 39 of 252 playoff teams allowed more yards per pass attempt than they gained. This implies that 84.5% of playoff teams had a positive pass efficiency.

Super Bowl champions excelled in pass efficiency as well, as 15 of the 21 champions had pass efficiencies of a yard per attempt or more.

----------------------------------------

However, the insignificance of rushing in the NFL might surprise you.

From 1997 through 2017, only 57.5% of playoff teams (145 of 252) had a positive team rush efficiency. The visual of rush efficiency for playoff teams shows a random scatter of points with both positive and negative values. A strong run game or stout rush defense has little effect in helping an NFL team win enough games to make the playoffs.

https://thepowerrank.com/2018/09/24/the-surprising-truth-about-passing-and-rushing-in-the-nfl/

Quote

Conclusion

To review, here are our three main findings:

1) It is not the case that long drives disproportionately have greater rush/pass ratios.
2) Rush attempts that come in situations where running the ball is better than passing the ball in terms of extending drives are extremely rare.
3) There is not strong carryover between rushing success in short-yardage situations and rushing success in other situations.

Justifying an investment in the run game by saying it will help extend drives is misguided. If you want to get first downs, throw the ball (unless it's a short-yardage situation).

https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2018/long-drives-and-running-game

Quote

After measuring this every way I could think if, it appears that the conventional wisdom that running is necessary for play-action passes to be effective should be questioned

https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2018/rushing-success-and-play-action-passing

Quote

So what does this mean?  First, QB play is extremely important to winning games. Second, there is very little to show that a team’s success in the running game influences QB play. And if running doesn’t help you pass, then running does very little to help you win. The conventional wisdom that teams should establish the running game or maintain some kind run/pass balance does not appear to be supported by evidence.  Which isn’t to say that teams shouldn’t run. Rushing is helpful in goal line situations and in running out the clock at the end of the game.

http://www.hawkblogger.com/2017/09/relationship-passing-rushing.html

Quote

What does make the formula predictive? Using net yards per attempt — which deducts sacks from a passer’s production — is the simplest and best way to predict future performance. That’s why when looking at which quarterback will perform the best in the future, NY/A is my favorite statistic. When analyzing past quarterbacks, I prefer Adjusted Net Yards per Attempt, which gives a 45-yard penalty for interceptions and a 20-yard bonus for touchdowns. That’s more useful as an explanatory statistic than NY/A, but is not as helpful in predicting the future.

http://www.hawkblogger.com/2017/09/relationship-passing-rushing.html

Quote

The actual correlation coefficient of ANY/A differential to offensive point differential is a pretty awesome 0.83 through 4 weeks.

http://archive.advancedfootballanalytics.com/2013/10/introducing-anya-differential.html

Quote

I measured the correlation coefficient between winning percentage and Adjusted Net Yards per Attempt in 2017; it was 0.71, which indicates a very strong positive relationship. This is what you would expect: as ANY/A increases, so does winning percentage. Last year, the Saints, Patriots, Chargers, Rams, and Chiefs were the top 5 teams in ANY/A, and they combined for 54 wins and a 0.675 winning percentage. The bottom 5 teams in ANY/A? Cleveland, Denver, Green Bay, Baltimore, and Miami, who combined for just 26 wins and a 0.325 winning percentage.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

 Another would be that in the modern game, rushing yards are just not that important: teams can move the chains and drain the clock with the short passing game

http://www.footballperspective.com/any-a-rushing-yards-and-winning-percentage/

 

Edited by Matts4313

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you ever watched the Dallas Cowboys?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Just looking at the game logs:

 

0-7 in the seven games Zeke has played and got less than 70 yards rushing.

Edited by DaBoys

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, DaBoys said:

Have you ever watched the Dallas Cowboys?

Are you going to refute fact with opinion? But yes. When Dak has a better than 6 ANY/A we won 80% of our games. Under 6 we won 0% of our games. That is highly correlated.

As opposed to rushing for 100 yards an it being 5-3. That is much lower correlation. Its actually a 1 game swing from not being correlated at all. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, DaBoys said:

Just looking at the game logs:

 

0-7 in the seven games Zeke has played and got less than 70 yards.

How far are you looking back? Last year we had losses when Zeke had 87 yards, 129 and 69 yards (not quite 70, but that 1 yard wasnt going to win the game) and 61. 

 

But again, I am using league wide data over large years and sample sizes. 

EDIT:

Losses the rookie year:  125, 107

Sophomore year: 85, 116, 97

As I said. No correlation. 

Edited by Matts4313

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And you coach football?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Matts4313 said:

How far are you looking back?

 Zeke has only played 7 games in which he did not eclipse 70 yards. 

0-7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

This is a horribly misguided and ill informed analysis that completely lacks understanding of the symbiotic relationship between running the ball and opening passing lanes.  Tony Romo’s best season statistically by far happened to coincide with demarco Murray also playing at an mvp level.  By comparison, romos worst years came when he had no run support and we lived in mediocrity.  I dare you to compare Dak’s Numbers when Zeke rushes for over 100 yards to Dak’s numbers when Zeke does not play or gets held in check.  

If you want your QB to have high any/a, run the ball effectively.   The best way to get a High any/a is to effectively run play action.  To effectively run play action, guess what, you gotta run the ball effectively.  You want your QBs to convert on 3rd down, give him 3rd and 3 rather than third and 7.  

Edited by The_Slamman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, The_Slamman said:

This is a horribly misguided and ill informed analysis that completely lacks understanding

And that's putting it nicely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, The_Slamman said:

This is a horribly misguided and ill informed analysis that completely lacks understanding of the symbiotic relationship between running the ball and opening passing lanes.  Tony Romo’s best season statistically by far happened to coincide with demarco Murray also playing at an mvp level.  By comparison, romos worst years came when he had no run support and we lived in mediocrity.  I dare you to compare Dak’s Numbers when Zeke rushes for over 100 yards to Dak’s numbers when Zeke does not play or gets held in check.  

If you want your QB to have high any/a, run the ball effectively.   The best way to get a High any/a is to effectively run play action.  To effectively run play action, guess what, you gotta run the ball effectively.  You want your QBs to convert on 3rd down, give him 3rd and 3 rather than third and 7.  

Did you read any of the analysis that discredit everything you said? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, DaBoys said:

And that's putting it nicely.

Its about 4-5 different statisticians and analyst. You are trying to argue back with anecdotal evidence and no support documentation. 

Please find any research to support your analysis besides making an arbitrary yardage cutoff for a 3 year QB/RB combo.

Edited by Matts4313

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Matts4313 said:

Did you read any of the analysis that discredit everything you said? 

Oh I read it, but I have a deeper understanding of football than the stats alone bear.  I think most of us on this site do as well.  It’s kinda sad that you don’t get it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, The_Slamman said:

Oh I read it, but I have a deeper understanding of football than the stats alone bear.  I think most of us on this site do as well.  It’s kinda sad that you don’t get it.

No, you have ingrained knowledge that has been regurgitated for 100 years. But again, you havent refuted any of it with fact.

There is one article that is nothing but running and the playaction. Why dont you start there? 

Hint: how much you run the ball has an impact on how effective play action it is. You just need the threat of handing it off to make it effective. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Matts4313 said:

No, you have ingrained knowledge that has been regurgitated for 100 years. But again, you havent refuted any of it with fact.

There is one article that is nothing but running and the playaction. Why dont you start there? 

Hint: how much you run the ball has an impact on how effective play action it is. You just need the threat of handing it off to make it effective. 

Matts, just do my challenge... compare Dak’s stats when Zeke plays well compared to when doesn’t play or gets stopped.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×