Running the football overrated? (1 Viewer)

[RJ in Lafayette]

I welcome a serious discussion. I think balance on offense can be important, and there is certainly a need for a running game when a team with the lead wants to run clock.

But do teams win because they run, or do teams run because they are winning. The two are not mutually exclusive. And some teams like the Titans have an offense built on running the football. However, for teams with top offenses, I would like to see the statistical data by quarter as to how often they run and pass. My sense is that the reason for the adage that teams have a high win probability when they run X times is that they are trying to protect their lead in the fourth quarter.

 

[Saint Spud]

. And some teams like the Titans have an offense built on running the football.

That’s the biggest key. It’s all about your identity.

The Patriots have had no problem winning year after year by throwing more than they run.

I’m guessing the Chiefs end up repping the AFC in the super bowl by doing the same.

 

[El Caliente]

Is Sean Payton the OP?

 

[Super44]

It is more about being able to run when your opponent knows that you must run, or that you will be running. If you can effectively run the ball in either case, you will have great success and will win a number of championships. The Saints cannot run the ball when they MUST, or it makes the most sense.
Maybe ask the Patriots snd the Ravens this question. I bet they both have some answers...they got RUN over by a ?

 

[Zack Lee]

i still think balance is important because you can’t let a defense stack the deck to play you one way. But when the importance of running the ball was stressed the most, the passing game looked very different. More passes went downfield with an emphasis on the receiver beating their coverage with either straight up speed and/or physicality. Offense has changed with all the timing routes and passes to RBs that many passes have a completion rate that make them essentially as good as runs in terms of clock management. Almost. The other element though is wearing out the defense with physical blocking. If the defense isn’t particularly deep in the front that can pay huge dividends late in the game.

 

[Merl]

The "run the ball" screamers always fail to realize that the short passing game to backs behind the line are more an extended hand off than a pass. They look at end of the game stats after a loss and point to the pass to run ratio not accounting for the 20-25% short passes as the extended hand offs and blame the ratio to be the reason for the loss. The loos last week was "in my opinion " was Payton failing to adjust for the speed rushers coming up the middle and not calling for more shotgun sets for Drew to go to outlet passes or pitchouts to Kamara or a TE on the edge.

 

[bclemms]

It doesn't matter. Football is totally about efficiency. Each time you get the ball, score more points than your opponent each time he gets the ball and you win every game. You score more points by not turning the ball over, moving the chains on 3rd down, scoring TD's in the redzone instead of kicking FG's.

The MVP award has almost always gone to an offensive player because fans overvalue offense. Defense has to do the exact same things the offense does in reverse. Force turnovers, be good on 3rd down and in the redzone.

How you get to those numbers doesn't matter. It doesn't matter if you run the ball, throw the ball, fumble it down field and recover, score fast on big plays, score slow on long drives, etc. It doesn't matter.

In the older days you had to run the ball because defenders were allowed to destroy WR's and QB's. Now the receivers can get open fast and QB's can get rid of the ball quickly and accurately without taking huge hits. Look at the Saints this season as the perfect example. Brees hit on 75% of his passes. Even if you add in sacks the Saints offense was averaging 6 yards per attempt and rarely turning the ball over. Running the ball they were averaging 4.3 yards per attempt and rarely turning the ball over. The more efficient way for the Saints to win is by passing.

Sports have all these misconceptions and people are really bad about believing perceptions that aren't true. My favorite was some random math guy doing a research paper back in the 90's about 30% of 3 is worth more than 40% of 2 and people actually made fun of him. His suggestion was basketball teams shoot the 3 more, a LOT more. The number part of the equation was so painstakingly obvious yet it took a decade for teams to actually start doing it.

So it's not as easy as that. The question becomes can a defense stop the Saints passing game and if they can are you able to run the ball and vice versa. This is why you need balance, you have to be able to punish teams that lean too far to take away your strengths. The numbers say a baseball hitter pulls the ball almost 85% of the time. Well, the numbers also say to shift your infield because stopping 17% more balls going through you will get more outs than allowing 15% of balls getting through that aren't pulled. So how does a hitter stop that shift? Hit the ball the other way. If he can do that then teams wont shift anymore.

Computers and AI recognize this very quickly while it takes humans decades to make the same changes. This is why moneyball worked, this is why sports teams are investing so much money in computers and AI based software and tracking the sleep, weight, speed, etc of the players. It all matters.


Now you get the flip side of that. Passing the ball works better than running the ball in the NFL. So now teams start building exotic new defenses based on speed to stop the pass. Suddenly teams drop LB's in favor of safeties and corners. The contrarian sees this big shift in the NFL so he builds his offense with extra offensive linemen, big powerbacks, blocking TE's and WR's that can block downfield and have it all anchored with a RB QB. So now this offense built from top to bottom on running the ball is going up against defenses built top to bottom to stop the pass. The dominant running game is going to win the game because while they are pounding that speedy defense into submission they are also beating the opposing team's offense by not letting them on the field. This is why you need balance in sports. You need a big guy in the middle to punish teams for cheating out to the perimeter to stop the 3 point shooting. You need a defense that can stop the run when it needs to. You need an offense that can run/throw the ball to keep teams honest. You have to do what you do best but in that process you have to be able to show teams you are capable of punishing them for over compensating.

 

[Westbank4Life]

This is a great question. I often explain it this way so it makes sense bc it's really not a data analytical tracker type deal. It's more of a Concept deployment timing deal.

The run game is to football like the jab is to boxing. It's the can opener that's used to open up other opportunitIes to do And try other things during the match or in this case a football game in order to control the opponent.

Once established (the jab) you can always always rely on it and call on it when you need it in that match but you MUST establish it first and the earlier the better.

Now ......you could have a boxer who is known for only throwing big bombs to go for the knockouts that everyone loves and uses the jab as a decoy, here and there etc to set up a bomb right hand.

Or you can have the boxer who lives and dies behind a properly deployed established jab alone and rarely risks getting hit in return by exposing themselves so defense behind a strong jab is their primary.

You may have the balanced boxer who uses the jab in every single combination of punches in their arsenal of attack.

Now one thing I learned boxing....you don't ever try to establish the jab in the later rounds....it's too late. Your opponent won't respect it and typically is a sign you've lost control and you are trying to reestablish it by getting something going seeking a rhythm

it's like working the body to slow an opponent down but you are trying it finally in round 10....it's too late.

I think the saints should always try to establish the run early every single week. It builds an attitude starting upfront that this is who we are...this is what we do....you know it...we know it....doesn't matter we are going to do it and Establish it....(Just like 2017 and 2018....we were doing it) and once we get going...saints are a freight train hard to stop.

Hope this helps the mindsets

 

[Domeination]

Bottom line is that an offense has to have the ability to take what the defense gives them. If it's giving them the run by alignment, the offense HAS to be able to take advantage of that. If it's giving them the pass, again, they HAVE to be able to take advantage. The problem with the Saints offense this year is that we couldn't throw the deep ball, so defenses would bring their safeties up and pack the box, play physical with our receivers, and keep us hemmed in. It made it hard to run with so many defenders in the box, yet we couldn't take the top off the defense either. We ended up with no offensive identity in our playoff game.

Having said the above, sometimes an offense needs to impose its will on a defense no matter what they're doing. Have you not been watching Derrick Henry?

 

[guillermo]

You can have the offensive or defensive style you want. It comes from personnel. The decision on your offensive style comes normally with the quarterback available.

What is more important is to have dominant lines.

If you have a dominant offensive line, you have time to make your passing flow and/or to control the clock by running.

A dominant defensive line forbids the opponent to run and allow more zone coverage. It helps eliminate your opponent’s best weapon.

So to answer the question, the run game is a symptom, a cause from a dominant offensive line.

To me, this is the most underrated aspect of football.

 

[RJ in Lafayette]

Some numbers for thought.

In the 1980s, a book by Bob Carroll and others showed that in the first half teams ran roughly 46 percent of the team, though teams that lost by more than 7 points ran only 42 percent of the time. In the second half, teams that won by more than 7 points lead ran 61 percent of the time; teams that won by 7 points or less ran 52 percent of the time; teams that lost by 7 points or less ran 37 percent of the time; and teams that lost by more than 7 points ran 27 percent of the time.

In 2019, only three teams ran more often than than passed:

--Baltimore--596 (rushing plays) to 440 (passing plays)
--San Francisco--498 to 478
--Minnesota--476 to 466

Other teams with a high run percentage:

--Seattle--481 to 517
--Tennessee--445 to 448
--Indianapolis--471 to 513
--Buffalo--465 to 513
--Oakland--437 to 523
--Houston--434 to 534

Bad teams passed a lot. For example, for Miami, it was 349 to 615; for the Giants, it was 362 to 607; for Carolina, it was 386 to 633.

But some very good teams passed a lot:

--New Orleans--405 to 581
--Kansas City--375 to 576
--New England--447 to 620
--Green Bay--411 to 573
--LA Rams--401 to 632

 

[guillermo]

Some numbers for thought.

In the 1980s, a book by Bob Carroll and others showed that in the first half teams ran roughly 46 percent of the team, though teams that lost by more than 7 points ran only 42 percent of the time. In the second half, teams that won by more than 7 points lead ran 61 percent of the time; teams that won by 7 points or less ran 52 percent of the time; teams that lost by 7 points or less ran 37 percent of the time; and teams that lost by more than 7 points ran 27 percent of the time.

In 2019, only three teams ran more often than than passed:

--Baltimore--596 (rushing plays) to 440 (passing plays)
--San Francisco--498 to 478
--Minnesota--476 to 466

Other teams with a high run percentage:

--Seattle--481 to 517
--Tennessee--445 to 448
--Indianapolis--471 to 513
--Buffalo--465 to 513
--Oakland--437 to 523
--Houston--434 to 534

Bad teams passed a lot. For example, for Miami, it was 349 to 615; for the Giants, it was 362 to 607; for Carolina, it was 386 to 633.

But some very good teams passed a lot:

--New Orleans--405 to 581
--Kansas City--375 to 576
--New England--447 to 620
--Green Bay--411 to 573
--LA Rams--401 to 632

Well, some teams you may consider a passing team use the short pass, screens and even run-pass options as ways to compliment the run game.

What is the difference when you are using passes shorter then 10 yards as the main focus of you system?

This style brings the same as a run game. It controls the clock.

So as I said, all are consequences of having a dominant offensive line.

You can call it as the legacy of the west coast offence. I call it a consequence of a dominant line.

Mike Zimmerman understood this and brought Kubiak and Dennison. The offence changed immediately.

Same happened with the Niners. They do have 3 great backs, but they are what they are because of both their lines.

Even the Lamar Jackson phenomenon is to me a consequence of an outstanding line.

 

[RJ in Lafayette]

Have to agree totally with Guillermo.

Also, much has been said about how much Tennessee and San Francisco ran the football yesterday. Well, they were ahead by a large margin and wanted to burn clock. No team likes to run more than Baltimore, but problems running and falling behind caused Baltimore to pass much more than it normally does.

Further, the four quarterbacks yesterday were Tannehill, Garrapalo, Cousins, and Jackson. Today the four quarterbacks are Mahomes, Wilson, Rogers, and Watson.

 

[renegadewa]

I welcome a serious discussion. I think balance on offense can be important, and there is certainly a need for a running game when a team with the lead wants to run clock.

But do teams win because they run, or do teams run because they are winning. The two are not mutually exclusive. And some teams like the Titans have an offense built on running the football. However, for teams with top offenses, I would like to see the statistical data by quarter as to how often they run and pass. My sense is that the reason for the adage that teams have a high win probability when they run X times is that they are trying to protect their lead in the fourth quarter.

In the age of the "passing league"..............................NO the running game is not over rated.

Teams have to be able to run the ball for a variety of reasons. Clock management, a toughness identity, keeping defenses honest, it helps to avoid teams becoming one dimensional...................like the Saints when the game plan totally abandons the run and allows defenses to just pin their ears back and come after the QB!!

Someone posted a stat just last week from Mike Detillier that the Saints are 76-4 when they run the ball 30 or more times in a game in the SP era.........................that's tough to argue with.

 

[Bespoke]

Well, some teams you may consider a passing team use the short pass, screens and even run-pass options as ways to compliment the run game.

What is the difference when you are using passes shorter then 10 yards as the main focus of you system?

This style brings the same as a run game. It controls the clock.

So as I said, all are consequences of having a dominant offensive line.

You can call it as the legacy of the west coast offence. I call it a consequence of a dominant line.

Mike Zimmerman understood this and brought Kubiak and Dennison. The offence changed immediately.

Same happened with the Niners. They do have 3 great backs, but they are what they are because of both their lines.

Even the Lamar Jackson phenomenon is to me a consequence of an outstanding line.

The problem with Short screen passes behind the line of scrimmage, is that they don't work against the athletically dominant Front 7's who have speedy Linebackers, and even Defensive Ends, and Tackles that can diagnose your screens and run down the line. beat the blockers before they are in place to tackle your receiver for either no gain or a loss.

Look at the San Francisco / Minnesota game, screens are pretty much worthless against San Francisco's Defense, their Front 7 players are just too good. Yet Minnesota kept trying running back screens to Dalvin Cook that would routinely get blown up, and even a few bubble screens to Diggs that were stuffed. Putting them behind the chains.

The problem with substituting short screen passes as your running game, is that they require perfect execution and selling the initial fake, and generally only really work on undisciplined or slower Defenses in the leauge... the smarter, faster Defenses you see in the playoffs rarely get beat by screen passes unless they are executed perfectly by all 11 on Offense.