Jump to content

Run Game is largely irrelevant


Matts4313

Recommended Posts

23 minutes ago, Uncle Buck said:

MATTS4313 this is an interesting thread.  Thanks for your time in putting it all together.  One thing I'd be interested in hearing is your opinion about what role Emmitt Smith had in the Cowboys' three Super Bowl runs.  As a fan of another team, I always hear about the "triplets", so I've always thought he played a big role in the team's success.  Do you think the Cowboys would have had just as much success with a mediocre RB?   I'm not saying it would have been one way or the other.  I just think it would be interesting to hear what you or other Cowboys fans have to say on the issue.

Another question would be, what if you don't have an elite QB?  There are only a few of those to go around.  In the case of the Vikings, we have a good to elite defense, two very good receivers, a decent TE, a RB who has shown a lot of promise (if he can stay healthy), and a head coach in Mike Zimmer who has gone on record the last few years as saying that he wants to run the ball more.  Can a very good running game help a team like this get over the hump, or are you just destined to be one of the "also-rans" in a league that is dominated by passing in the postseason?  Thanks for your input.

If I am being 100% honest, I dont believe it myself. But its really interesting to me that there isnt a single stat that has a direct correlation between winning and rushing. 

I posted the stats hoping someone would find me wrong. The closest we have got is teams rushing more in the 4th when they are ahead. Thats the same is arguing a bunt against Rodger Clemens makes sense. It doesnt make you win, its a product of you already winning.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Matts4313 said:

If I am being 100% honest, I dont believe it myself. But its really interesting to me that there isnt a single stat that has a direct correlation between winning and rushing. 

I posted the stats hoping someone would find me wrong. The closest we have got is teams rushing more in the 4th when they are ahead. Thats the same is arguing a bunt against Rodger Clemens makes sense. It doesnt make you win, its a product of you already winning.

In 2012, the Vikings made the playoffs with Christian Ponder at QB, but we need a historic season by Adrian Peterson to get there.  Unfortunately, we were bounced in the wildcard round by the Packers, a team with an elite QB and an average running game.  I'm sure we wouldn't have been even close to getting to the postseason with a merely average or even just a "very good" running game that year.  It seems like the league's rule changes have really favored the passing game to the point where the run game is becoming more and more irrelevant.  I think the running game is part of what makes the sport of football so interesting, and I hope the league hasn't taken it so far that it has become impossible to win it all without an elite QB.  At that point, it would be like the NBA, where going into the season you pretty much know that there are only a few teams who have any shot at winning a championship.  It's probably the biggest reason why I have no interest in the Minnesota Timberwolves and have lost most of my interest in the sport of basketball. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Joe_is_the_best said:

I have some stats for you:

Teams that rush for 150+ yards in a game are 6178-1903 all time, for a win percentage of 76.4%.

Teams that outrush their opponent by 100+ yards are 3399-364 all time, for a win percentage of 90.3%.

It's clear that football games are so complicated and interconnected that boiling them down to one factor is futile.

hello-run-the-dang-ball-memebase-seattle

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

 

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/

 

 

No teams can drain the clock with short passing game except Patriots, because the system is too hard to command, much harder than you can imagine. (See Mahomes in AFCCG, the last TD drive that made the score 28-24. Did he forget how he lost to Pats in regular season?).

In modern games, a RB must be able to catch the balls to be a center piece of offense, which makes rushing yards less relevant to the record of W-L.

Edited by William Lee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, William Lee said:

......RB must be able to catch the ball.......

That muddles the stats hugely. Almost every yard gained is YAC. Long range hand off. The real stat is yards in the air from point of release to point of catch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone watch the Super Bowl?

  • 4:17 let to play and the Rams just scored to make it a 7 point game.
    • The Patriots destroyed the Rams with 8 straight runs burning 3:05, 2 Rams timeouts, and going up 10

How about the divisional round?

  • The magnificent Dak Prescott outplayed Jared Goff in air yards to backup TEs and other vital to winning statistics...
    • 266 passing to 186 passing
    • The Rams ran over Dallas 273 to 50 on the ground
    • Good thing for Dallas the run game is unimportant or they may have lost that one.
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, SkippyX said:

Anyone watch the Super Bowl?

  • 4:17 let to play and the Rams just scored to make it a 7 point game.
    • The Patriots destroyed the Rams with 8 straight runs burning 3:05, 2 Rams timeouts, and going up 10

How about the divisional round?

  • The magnificent Dak Prescott outplayed Jared Goff in air yards to backup TEs and other vital to winning statistics...
    • 266 passing to 186 passing
    • The Rams ran over Dallas 273 to 50 on the ground
    • Good thing for Dallas the run game is unimportant or they may have lost that one.

You are still trying to use anecdotal evidence to disprove hundreds to thousands of games worth of a *TREND*

As a strongly correlated rule of thumb rushing stats do not heavily influence wins. Its true for normally about ~80% of games. Which means 20% of the times you have an anomaly like the Cowboys Rams, where the far superior QB that day loses. As for the Rams/Pats, Brady had the better AY/A, so that held true.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here are the net rushing yards in the playoff wins of the Super Bowl Champs this century

  • 15 teams had positive rushing yards
  • 4 teams had a total negative yards rushing
    • These 4 had
      • Tom Brady's revenge tour in '14 and '16
      • Flacco playing like Joe Montana (11 TDs no picks)
      • New Orleans getting the onsides kick and the Manning pick-6 after a Favre turnover-fest

Individual game breakdown:

  • 45 positive yards rushing games
  • 1 even game
  • 18 negative rushing yards

 

  • 2018 Patriots + 363
    • +136
    • +135
    • +92
  • 2017 Eagles  +101
    • +10
    • +40
    • +51
  • 2016 Patriots  -4
    • -7
    • +3
    • Even
  • 2015 Broncos +51
    • +24
    • +55
    • -28
      • Cam Choke
  • 2014 Patriots  -133
    • -122
      • Brady won a game where his team rushed for 14 yards
    • +94
    • -105
      • Malcolm Butler game
  • 2013 Seahawks  +128
    • +66
    • -46
      • Kaep ran for 130 but had 4 turnovers
    • +108
  • 2012 Ravens  -27
    • +18
    • +30
    • +13
    • -89
  • 2011 Giants  +22
    • +108
    • -52
    • -65
      • Kyle Williams x2
    • +31
  • 2010 Packers +69
    • +57
    • +51
    • +37
    • -76
      • Pick 6 and a Mendenhall fumble
  • 2009 Saints  -75
    • +70
    • -97
      • Vikings moved up and down the field but had 5 turnovers to the Saints 1
    • -48
  • 2008 Steelers  +154
    • +150
    • -21
    • +25
  • 2007 Giants  +119
    • +31
    • -64
    • +106
    • +46
  • 2006 Colts  +173
    • +144
    • +17
    • +32
    • +80
  • 2005 Steelers  +151
    • +60
    • +54
    • -7
    • +44
  • 2004 Patriots  +194
    • +164
    • -37
    • +67
  • 2003 Patriots  +61
    • +12
    • +14
    • +35
  • 2002 Bucs  +159
    • +59
    • -31
      • McNabb to Ronde
    • +131
  • 2001 Patriots  +43
    • -9
    • +9
    • +43
  • 2000 Ravens  +143
    • +80
    • -77
      • Blocked FG and a pick 6 beat the Titans
    • +86
    • +54
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/14/2019 at 10:54 AM, Matts4313 said:

If I am being 100% honest, I dont believe it myself. But its really interesting to me that there isnt a single stat that has a direct correlation between winning and rushing. 

I posted the stats hoping someone would find me wrong. The closest we have got is teams rushing more in the 4th when they are ahead. Thats the same is arguing a bunt against Rodger Clemens makes sense. It doesnt make you win, its a product of you already winning.

200.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd really love to know what the Cowboys record the past 4 decades and SB totals would be without Dorsett, Emmitt, Murray, Barber, Zeke, ect?  Since they clearly based on the statistics shown in this thread, have had no impact in the Win Loss record whatsoever. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Nabbs4u said:

I'd really love to know what the Cowboys record the past 4 decades and SB totals would be without Dorsett, Emmitt, Murray, Barber, Zeke, ect?  Since they clearly based on the statistics shown in this thread, have had no impact in the Win Loss record whatsoever. 

Why make it about the Cowboys, I gave you 20 years of the entire league. This is NFL Gen... So the stats for all NFL teams is readily available on the first page. 

You are trying to do what others ( @SkippyX ) are doing. Boil the stats far enough down to your own specific parameters and maybe you can refute the over arching theme. But when you look at league wide data over any extended period of time, it will all point back to the data I showed. 

 

PS: Cowboys have a 60% win rate when Zeke rushes over 100. They have an 80% win rate when Dak has even a mediocre game. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I tend to think the run game is overrated by some, but you have to be able to keep defenses honest by being able to run against favorable formations and convert short yardage situations.

Rush efficiency is king imo.

The 🐐 explaining....

https://brownswire.usatoday.com/2017/09/22/joe-thomas-breaks-down-what-really-matters-in-rushing-stats/ 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Matts4313 said:

PS: Cowboys have a 60% win rate when Zeke rushes over 100. They have an 80% win rate when Dak has even a mediocre game. 

This is an absolute lame and pathetic lie. I gave you the numbers in this thread.

The Cowboys are 15-4 when Zeke rushes for 100 yards.

  • That is a 79% win rate.

How about this:

The Cowboys are 16-10 when relying on Dak's passing (30 or more passes)

  • That is a 61.5% win rate

 

The Cowboys are 32-7 over the last 3 years when they outrush their opponents.

  • That's an 82.1% win rate

They are 2-10 when the other team outrushes them

  • That's a 16.7 win rate

 

Turnovers are 1st in importance

  • Rushing is second
  • Passing is a distant 3rd

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...