PDA

View Full Version : Running the Football/Stopping the Run 2006


thunderkyss
01-16-2007, 09:35 AM
Stopping the Run & Running the Ball

Common wisdom suggest there are certain keys to building a successful football team. Two of those keys are stopping the run, and running the ball. However, looking at the stats from the 2006 season may challenge such ideas.

First, you must define success. For me, success would be a play-off berth….. So for this, teams that made it into the play-offs were successful. Those that didn’t weren’t.

Looking at the Rushing Yards per Game stat, all together, 12 of 32 teams reach the play-offs. Of those 12 teams, only 5 were in the top 10 in yards/game allowed.

#2. Baltimore Ravens: 75.9 ypg allowed, 5 TDs
#5 New England: 94.2 ypg allowed, 11 TDs
#6 Chicago: 99.4 ypg allowed, 7 TDs
#7 San Diego: 100.8 ypg allowed, 13 TDs
#10 Dallas: 103.7 ypg allowed, 12 TDs

Other play-off teams…
#14 NYGiants: 103.7 ypg, 19 TDs
#18 Kansas City: 120.5 ypg, 14 TDs
#20 Houston: 122.2 ypg, 16 TDs
#22 Seattle: 126.8 ypg, 12 TDs
#23 New Orleans: 128.9 ypg, 10 TDs
#24 NYJets: 130.2 ypg, 14 TDs
#26 Philadelphia: 136.4 ypg, 12 TDs
#32 Indianapolis: 173.0 ypg, 20 TDs

Of course the Houston Texans are not a play off team, but I added them to the list to illustrate where our run defense stands compared to the play-off teams. Overall, our stats were better than 4 play-off teams, better than 2 AFC teams.


Looking at Rushing Yards per Game, only 3 of the top 10 teams made it into the play-offs in 2006.

#2 San Diego: 32 carries/game, 161 ypg, 32 TDs
#7 NYGiants: 28.4 carries/game, 134.8 ypg, 14 TDs
#9 Kansas City: 32 carries/game, 133 ypg, 17 TDs


Other play-off teams:
#11 Philadelphia: 26 carries/game, 124 ypg, 13 TDs
#12 New England: 31 carries/game, 123 ypg, 20 TDs
#13 Dallas: 29 carries/game, 121 ypg, 21TDs
#14 Seattle: 30.2 carries/game, 120.2 ypg, 8 TDs
#15 Chicago: 31.4 carries/game, 119.9 ypg, 14 TDs
#18 Indianapolis: 27 carries/game, 110 ypg, 17 TDs
#19 New Orleans: 29.5 carries/game, 110 ypg, 19 TDs
#20 NYJets: 30 carries/game, 108 ypg, 15 TDs
#21 Houston: 26.9 carries/game, 105 ypg, 13 TDs
#25 Baltimore: 29.8 carries/game, 102 ypg, 11 TDs

Again, Houston isn’t a play-off team…. Wasn’t even close…… but to compare where we stand compared to play-off teams, Houston was added to the list.

teams in blue are going to the conference championship games.

So, what can we conclude from these stats??

Kaiser Toro
01-16-2007, 09:44 AM
That a team must have balance on both sides of the ball in each mode, pass and run. Our passing game and defending the pass both need to get better as we all know.

real
01-16-2007, 09:50 AM
It reafirms the fact that stats don't mean much at the end of the day...What really matters is having players that can make plays in key situations.

thunderkyss
01-16-2007, 10:07 AM
That a team must have balance on both sides of the ball in each mode, pass and run. Our passing game and defending the pass both need to get better as we all know.

Baltimore is #2 against the run......... #25 running the ball.

Indianapolis is #32 against the run...... #18 running the ball.

I don't think I follow what you are saying.

7 of the top 10 running teams didn't get into the play-offs..... 5 of the top defenders against the run didn't as well.....

gtexan02
01-16-2007, 10:11 AM
This is also sort of silly. If 16 teams make it to the playoffs, shouldn't you be looking at top 16 teams?

A more powerful argument here would be to find a team who is top 10 (or 16) in both running the ball and defending the run and DIDN"T make the playoffs.

Kaiser Toro
01-16-2007, 10:11 AM
Baltimore is #2 against the run......... #25 running the ball.

Indianapolis is #32 against the run...... #18 running the ball.

I don't think I follow what you are saying.

7 of the top 10 running teams didn't get into the play-offs..... 5 of the top defenders against the run didn't as well.....

Balance, ying and yang, Starsky and Hutch, Ginger and Mary Ann. Sure it is great to excel with a great Run Defense (Minnesota), but you must have an average Pass Defense or else they will always pass and expose you. Putting out a statistical analysis on just one side of the ball provides no actionaable data.

real
01-16-2007, 10:14 AM
Balance, ying and yang, Starsky and Hutch, Ginger and Mary Ann. Sure it is great to excel with a great Run Defense (Minnesota), but you must have an average Pass Defense or else they will always pass and expose you. Putting out a statistical analysis on just one side of the ball provides no actionaable data.

Basically when you're lacking in one area, you have to excel in another area to balance it out....

or be like the Patriots and be decent all the way around

thunderkyss
01-16-2007, 10:19 AM
Balance, ying and yang, Starsky and Hutch, Ginger and Mary Ann. Sure it is great to excel with a great Run Defense (Minnesota), but you must have an average Pass Defense or else they will always pass and expose you. Putting out a statistical analysis on just one side of the ball provides no actionaable data.

So Minnesota...... #1 against the run, 32nd against the pass.... is not as balanced as Indianapolis..... #2 against the pass, 32nd against the run??

Basically, I'm asking how important is it to stop the run.... we've been saying all year how important it is. But in the case of Indianapolis, it would appear stopping the pass is more important.

After all, points are generated out of the passing game..... right??

Kaiser Toro
01-16-2007, 10:41 AM
So Minnesota...... #1 against the run, 32nd against the pass.... is not as balanced as Indianapolis..... #2 against the pass, 32nd against the run??

Basically, I'm asking how important is it to stop the run.... we've been saying all year how important it is. But in the case of Indianapolis, it would appear stopping the pass is more important.

After all, points are generated out of the passing game..... right??

Indy was missing one important piece, a hard hitting Safety. They got Sanders back and it has changed the complexion of the defense. You must stop the run because that equates more to controlling the time of possession in my opinion than passing. Moreover, stopping the run is the penultimate, in your face, testosterone eruption football play that beer drinking hairy mammals like to talk about around the bbq pit or while working on an engine. Just don't feed the mammals beer after the third quarter.

Bubbajwp
01-16-2007, 11:24 AM
Basically, I'm asking how important is it to stop the run.... we've been saying all year how important it is. But in the case of Indianapolis, it would appear stopping the pass is more important.

After all, points are generated out of the passing game..... right??

If it wasnt because of the colts run defense we would not have beat them. You could say that more points are scored out of the passing game. Example Colts. But if your team is dominating the running game then the other team (Colts) cant score. You know the saying the best defense is a good offense or the best defense is a dominant running game. The best way to beat teams like the colts is Time of Possesion.

On the other hand TOP doesnt mean as much to teams like the colts who dominate the passing game and score in a few plays each drive. Seems like atleast.

Bubbajwp
01-16-2007, 11:25 AM
Yeah....... I lost a bet.

Just curious but when does your bet end.

Insideop
01-16-2007, 11:44 AM
Balance, ying and yang, Starsky and Hutch, Ginger and Mary Ann. Sure it is great to excel with a great Run Defense (Minnesota), but you must have an average Pass Defense or else they will always pass and expose you. Putting out a statistical analysis on just one side of the ball provides no actionaable data.

Off topic.
Kaiser, did you grow up watching re-runs or what? :tv: lol:

On topic.
I agree with you about balance in all areas of the game. Someone else mentioned the Patriots in this thread, but to me, and probably a few others, they are what "balance" is all about. No real superstars (except Brady), and a bunch of good solid team players at almost all positions. Sure they were ranked high at stopping the run, but where do they rank at stopping the pass and total defense? How about offense? You're right Kaiser, it's the total package. JMHO! Just hope the Texans are headed in that direction!

Texans Horror
01-16-2007, 02:20 PM
Basically, I'm asking how important is it to stop the run.... we've been saying all year how important it is.

After all, points are generated out of the passing game..... right??

Here are the teams the Texans play next year:

Denver
Kansas City
New Orleans
Tampa Bay
AFC East
Oakland
San Diego
Atlanta
Carolina
AFC North

Except for maybe Oakland, they are all teams with impressive running backs. According to NFL.com, eight of the Texans games next year (Denver, Atlanta, San Diego, Jacksonville twice, Tennessee twice, and Kansas City) will be against the top ten 2006 rushing teams (http://www.nfl.com/stats/teamsort/NFL/OFF-RUSHING/2006/regular?sort_col_1=7). That doesn't include New Orleans, who we are watching becoming a rushing powerhouse during the post season. In order for the Texans to win next year, they must be able to win the running game.

On the other hand, only three games next year (Indy twice and NO once) will be played against one of the top ten passing offenses (http://www.nfl.com/stats/teamsort/NFL/OFF-PASSING/2006/regular?sort_col_1=8).

Based on this information alone, drafting a powerhouse DT is more important to the Texans than drafting the Safety/Cornerback of the future.

On the other side of the ball, only two games (Atlanta and San Diego) have top ten rushing defenses (http://www.nfl.com/stats/teamsort/NFL/DEF-RUSHING/2006/regular?sort_col_1=4), but six games (twice at Indy, twice at Tennessee, New Orleans, and Oakland) are against the worst rushing defenses in the NFL.

So being able to put up rushing yards could have a fantastic impact. The question seems to be, then, whether the Texans want to draft a DT to stop the run or a running back to put up running yards. Since last year the Texans' two top draft picks (and most of their FA acquisitions) were defensive, I believe their is good argument that the Texans will draft a running back in the first and a defensive tackle in the second.

Kaiser Toro
01-16-2007, 02:52 PM
Here is our schedule for next year:

Denver
Kansas City
New Orleans
Tampa Bay
AFC East
Oakland
San Diego
Atlanta
Carolina
AFC North

Except for maybe Oakland, they are all teams with impressive running backs. According to NFL.com, eight of the Texans games next year (Denver, Atlanta, San Diego, Jacksonville twice, Tennessee twice, and Kansas City) will be against the top ten 2006 rushing teams (http://www.nfl.com/stats/teamsort/NFL/OFF-RUSHING/2006/regular?sort_col_1=7). That doesn't include New Orleans, who we are watching becoming a rushing powerhouse during the post season. In order for the Texans to win next year, they must be able to win the running game.

On the other hand, only three games next year (Indy twice and NO once) will be played against one of the top ten passing offenses (http://www.nfl.com/stats/teamsort/NFL/OFF-PASSING/2006/regular?sort_col_1=8).

Based on this information alone, drafting a powerhouse DT is more important to the Texans than drafting the Safety/Cornerback of the future.

On the other side of the ball, only two games (Atlanta and San Diego) have top ten rushing rushing defenses (http://www.nfl.com/stats/teamsort/NFL/DEF-RUSHING/2006/regular?sort_col_1=4), but six games (twice at Indy, twice at Tennessee, New Orleans, and Oakland) are against the worst rushing defenses in the NFL.

So being able to put up rushing yards could have a fantastic impact. The question seems to be, then, whether the Texans want to draft a DT to stop the run or a running back to put up running yards. Since last year the Texans' two top draft picks (and most of their FA acquisitions) were defensive, I believe their is good argument that the Texans will draft a running back in the first and a defensive tackle in the second.

Great post brutha.:mario:

TheCD
01-16-2007, 03:11 PM
My question concerning this is what are the passing yards allowed per game and passing yards per game. The discrepancy could be due to an over-emphasis on one side of the ball, resulting in a lack of balnce and opposing teams exploiting such weakness.

thunderkyss
01-16-2007, 04:59 PM
My question concerning this is what are the passing yards allowed per game and passing yards per game. The discrepancy could be due to an over-emphasis on one side of the ball, resulting in a lack of balnce and opposing teams exploiting such weakness.

I think we've already gone off on too many tangents already. Whatever the reason is, doesn't matter. The point is.....

Football folks say "to be successful, you must be able to stop the run, & you must be able to run"

The teams in the 2006 play-offs kind of disproves those old addages. We were better at stopping the run than 4 play-off teams, 2 of which are going to be in the AFC Championship game(Indianapolis), or the NFC Championship Game(New Orleans). We were also better at running the football than Baltimore, the #2 seed in the AFC.

9 teams not in the top 10 in the league running the football made it into the play-offs, when 7 teams in the top ten(including league leading Atlanta) did not.

7 teams outside of the top ten in defending against the run made it into the playoffs, when 5 teams in the top 10(including league leading Minnesota) did not.

So.... how important is it really to be able to run the ball?? Baltimore, New Orleans, Indianapolis, and the NYJs aren't really much better at it than we are.

How important is it to stop the run?? Indianapolis, Philadelphia, NYJets, NewOrleans, & Seattle don't do it as well as we do.

& we are 6-10.

MorKnolle
01-16-2007, 09:40 PM
Stopping the Run & Running the Ball

Common wisdom suggest there are certain keys to building a successful football team. Two of those keys are stopping the run, and running the ball. However, looking at the stats from the 2006 season may challenge such ideas.

First, you must define success. For me, success would be a play-off berth….. So for this, teams that made it into the play-offs were successful. Those that didn’t weren’t.

Looking at the Rushing Yards per Game stat, all together, 12 of 32 teams reach the play-offs. Of those 12 teams, only 5 were in the top 10 in yards/game allowed.

#2. Baltimore Ravens: 75.9 ypg allowed, 5 TDs
#5 New England: 94.2 ypg allowed, 11 TDs
#6 Chicago: 99.4 ypg allowed, 7 TDs
#7 San Diego: 100.8 ypg allowed, 13 TDs
#10 Dallas: 103.7 ypg allowed, 12 TDs

Other play-off teams…
#14 NYGiants: 103.7 ypg, 19 TDs
#18 Kansas City: 120.5 ypg, 14 TDs
#20 Houston: 122.2 ypg, 16 TDs
#22 Seattle: 126.8 ypg, 12 TDs
#23 New Orleans: 128.9 ypg, 10 TDs
#24 NYJets: 130.2 ypg, 14 TDs
#26 Philadelphia: 136.4 ypg, 12 TDs
#32 Indianapolis: 173.0 ypg, 20 TDs

Of course the Houston Texans are not a play off team, but I added them to the list to illustrate where our run defense stands compared to the play-off teams. Overall, our stats were better than 4 play-off teams, better than 2 AFC teams.


Looking at Rushing Yards per Game, only 3 of the top 10 teams made it into the play-offs in 2006.

#2 San Diego: 32 carries/game, 161 ypg, 32 TDs
#7 NYGiants: 28.4 carries/game, 134.8 ypg, 14 TDs
#9 Kansas City: 32 carries/game, 133 ypg, 17 TDs


Other play-off teams:
#11 Philadelphia: 26 carries/game, 124 ypg, 13 TDs
#12 New England: 31 carries/game, 123 ypg, 20 TDs
#13 Dallas: 29 carries/game, 121 ypg, 21TDs
#14 Seattle: 30.2 carries/game, 120.2 ypg, 8 TDs
#15 Chicago: 31.4 carries/game, 119.9 ypg, 14 TDs
#18 Indianapolis: 27 carries/game, 110 ypg, 17 TDs
#19 New Orleans: 29.5 carries/game, 110 ypg, 19 TDs
#20 NYJets: 30 carries/game, 108 ypg, 15 TDs
#21 Houston: 26.9 carries/game, 105 ypg, 13 TDs
#25 Baltimore: 29.8 carries/game, 102 ypg, 11 TDs

Again, Houston isn’t a play-off team…. Wasn’t even close…… but to compare where we stand compared to play-off teams, Houston was added to the list.

teams in blue are going to the conference championship games.

So, what can we conclude from these stats??

Interesting stuff. Another stat to consider is yards per carry allowed. These can be a little skewed too as good teams are generally up at the end of games more often than not so opposing teams will generally be throwing the ball on them more than running the ball, so that can alter the data a little, which is why I like adding yards per carry into that mix as it helps show if they truly stopped the run well or if they just weren't run on as many times.

Another thought, in my big post I wrote up before last draft investigating whether defense really won championships etc. I actually found that on average the teams that make it into the playoffs were ranked better in offense than in defense by a slight margin, however when comparing teams that actually won the championship each year their average defenses were much better than offensive ranking. It would be interesting to see how the Super Bowl winners and/or participants over the last several years ranked in running the ball and stopping the run, see if that is a key component to actually winning a championship vs. just making the playoffs. Just a thought if you feel like looking into that, if so I highly recommend the site www.pro-football-reference.com, there's a whole lot of good statistics on there, more than most people could ever need.

TheCD
01-16-2007, 09:50 PM
I think we've already gone off on too many tangents already. Whatever the reason is, doesn't matter. The point is.....

Football folks say "to be successful, you must be able to stop the run, & you must be able to run"

The teams in the 2006 play-offs kind of disproves those old addages. We were better at stopping the run than 4 play-off teams, 2 of which are going to be in the AFC Championship game(Indianapolis), or the NFC Championship Game(New Orleans). We were also better at running the football than Baltimore, the #2 seed in the AFC.

9 teams not in the top 10 in the league running the football made it into the play-offs, when 7 teams in the top ten(including league leading Atlanta) did not.

7 teams outside of the top ten in defending against the run made it into the playoffs, when 5 teams in the top 10(including league leading Minnesota) did not.

So.... how important is it really to be able to run the ball?? Baltimore, New Orleans, Indianapolis, and the NYJs aren't really much better at it than we are.

How important is it to stop the run?? Indianapolis, Philadelphia, NYJets, NewOrleans, & Seattle don't do it as well as we do.

& we are 6-10.


It's great to see this kind of fun insight concerning the NFL. The analysts look at it as being simply one way only. But I think the main disparity between us and the teams that you mentioned is that they have under a single coaching staff for long enough to develop some sort of consistency. Our players and personnel were constantly changing while we tried to forge an identity. That being said, it's encouraging to see that we still ranked up there with some of the best.

thunderkyss
01-17-2007, 12:04 AM
Interesting stuff. Another stat to consider is yards per carry allowed. These can be a little skewed too as good teams are generally up at the end of games more often than not so opposing teams will generally be throwing the ball on them more than running the ball, so that can alter the data a little, which is why I like adding yards per carry into that mix as it helps show if they truly stopped the run well or if they just weren't run on as many times.

Another thought, in my big post I wrote up before last draft investigating whether defense really won championships etc. I actually found that on average the teams that make it into the playoffs were ranked better in offense than in defense by a slight margin, however when comparing teams that actually won the championship each year their average defenses were much better than offensive ranking. It would be interesting to see how the Super Bowl winners and/or participants over the last several years ranked in running the ball and stopping the run, see if that is a key component to actually winning a championship vs. just making the playoffs. Just a thought if you feel like looking into that, if so I highly recommend the site www.pro-football-reference.com, there's a whole lot of good statistics on there, more than most people could ever need.

Thankyou.......... someone understands what I'm saying..... or asking.

Thankyou.

thunderkyss
01-17-2007, 12:06 AM
It's great to see this kind of fun insight concerning the NFL. The analysts look at it as being simply one way only. But I think the main disparity between us and the teams that you mentioned is that they have under a single coaching staff for long enough to develop some sort of consistency. Our players and personnel were constantly changing while we tried to forge an identity. That being said, it's encouraging to see that we still ranked up there with some of the best.

Good point...

so what is it that they are learning?? It's not about the run...... the pass... defense, offense......... it's about doing what it takes to win.

How do you teach that?? & where do you start??

threetoedpete
01-17-2007, 12:34 AM
Here are the teams the Texans play next year:

Denver
Kansas City
New Orleans
Tampa Bay
AFC East
Oakland
San Diego
Atlanta
Carolina
AFC North

Except for maybe Oakland, they are all teams with impressive running backs. According to NFL.com, eight of the Texans games next year (Denver, Atlanta, San Diego, Jacksonville twice, Tennessee twice, and Kansas City) will be against the top ten 2006 rushing teams (http://www.nfl.com/stats/teamsort/NFL/OFF-RUSHING/2006/regular?sort_col_1=7). That doesn't include New Orleans, who we are watching becoming a rushing powerhouse during the post season. In order for the Texans to win next year, they must be able to win the running game.

On the other hand, only three games next year (Indy twice and NO once) will be played against one of the top ten passing offenses (http://www.nfl.com/stats/teamsort/NFL/OFF-PASSING/2006/regular?sort_col_1=8).

Based on this information alone, drafting a powerhouse DT is more important to the Texans than drafting the Safety/Cornerback of the future.

On the other side of the ball, only two games (Atlanta and San Diego) have top ten rushing defenses (http://www.nfl.com/stats/teamsort/NFL/DEF-RUSHING/2006/regular?sort_col_1=4), but six games (twice at Indy, twice at Tennessee, New Orleans, and Oakland) are against the worst rushing defenses in the NFL.

So being able to put up rushing yards could have a fantastic impact. The question seems to be, then, whether the Texans want to draft a DT to stop the run or a running back to put up running yards. Since last year the Texans' two top draft picks (and most of their FA acquisitions) were defensive, I believe their is good argument that the Texans will draft a running back in the first and a defensive tackle in the second.

Rep your way, Very nice job.

Off topic: Mary Ann. The still water quite ones are always the hotest.

TheCD
01-17-2007, 09:24 AM
Good point...

so what is it that they are learning?? It's not about the run...... the pass... defense, offense......... it's about doing what it takes to win.

How do you teach that?? & where do you start??


Having been on a football team that went 1-9, I can tell you it's tough to take the losses again and again. After our 2nd game, we were 1-1 and optimism was high, but we slowly started a skid that kept going until we were finally through. By the last game, after we'd lost close games to our two city rivals, we were just going through the motions and trying to survive. The close games we had lost had pulled so much energy and emotion out of our guys that it was tough to play at a high level for the final few games.

Following my senior season, we hired a new coach who was there for 2 years and promptly resigned. It seemed as though our fledgling school was doomed to failure as its attendance grew smaller and smaller. However, the year after this coach resigned (this past season), the new coach came in, and with the same guys, went on to 7 wins and their first playoff run in 6 years. Granted, this is high school, but it is a good example of what good coaching can do.

It's often emphasized over and over again, but if you've been on a losing team for quite a while, you do need a head coach that can come in and teach you how to win. That's not always necessarily through better play, either. Simply making his players understand that if they give their best effort in every game, regardless of what happened the last game, can lead to several wins that probably shouldn't have happened (Take Vince Young for example...shouldn't have won some of those games, but they had faith in him, their coach and their team).


Some people disagree, but I think the thing that has solidified Kubiak's status here, and that he will be successful, was our win over Indy. Before he arrived, if there was two certainties in a season for us, it was that we would lose to the Colts, and the many blowouts that we received in those games tend to indicate that our players expected it as well. We all saw how our guys reacted when they kicked the game winning field goal. I think that this was the best possible scenario, because from now on Kubiak can refer to this game and say: "You see, not only can you guys beat teams that you're not supposed to, but if you are patient and execute the gameplan well, we can win with game winning drives, rather than game saving drives."


This all being said, I still think Carr can do the job. I think he deserves one last year to see what he can do...and if that means bringing someone else in to compete with him I have no problem with that, either. I felt throughout the season, and still do, that the lack of deep passes was more a result of the playcalling rather than his inability to see downfield, but as we all know he did miss several opportunities on his own. I have a feeling that towards the end of the season (as he alluded to in his final press conference this year) that Kubiak had counted on having most of his starters in and when they started dropping like flies, he had to rapidly adjust his gamplanning around it, which he was not accustomed to, and that cost us quite a bit. But I see quite a few positives in us going through this, especially that Kubiak has learned so much for the future.

I really like that Kubiak (as an offensive-minded coach) is willing to go out and bring a championship defense to Houston. To me, that speaks volumes about his knowledge of the game. He realizes that his weakness is in the defense, and he wants to provide the most talented personnel in that area because it is easier for him to work with less talented offensive players than defensive than vise-versa.

TheRealJoker
01-17-2007, 12:31 PM
So if we go running back in first and DT in 2nd then it may look like...

1) All Day

2) Quinn Pitcock

edo783
01-17-2007, 12:47 PM
IMO, at the pro level the talent is very close acrosse the league and the coaching and scheme are just as much the difference maker as is the talent.

coachdent
01-17-2007, 01:17 PM
I think we've already gone off on too many tangents already. Whatever the reason is, doesn't matter. The point is.....

Football folks say "to be successful, you must be able to stop the run, & you must be able to run"

The teams in the 2006 play-offs kind of disproves those old addages. We were better at stopping the run than 4 play-off teams, 2 of which are going to be in the AFC Championship game(Indianapolis), or the NFC Championship Game(New Orleans). We were also better at running the football than Baltimore, the #2 seed in the AFC.

9 teams not in the top 10 in the league running the football made it into the play-offs, when 7 teams in the top ten(including league leading Atlanta) did not.

7 teams outside of the top ten in defending against the run made it into the playoffs, when 5 teams in the top 10(including league leading Minnesota) did not.

So.... how important is it really to be able to run the ball?? Baltimore, New Orleans, Indianapolis, and the NYJs aren't really much better at it than we are.

How important is it to stop the run?? Indianapolis, Philadelphia, NYJets, NewOrleans, & Seattle don't do it as well as we do.

& we are 6-10.

We've spoken aobut this before Thunder, but I think the old adage of running the football is changing. The NFL has become a passing league. The Saints and the Colts are still in and are 1-2 in passing. Philly was #3.

NFL rules are driven to see the ball in the air. Philly got screwed royally against the Saints on a call that basically sealed the game. Third and long and Brees got sacked. The Saints get a first down on illegal contact beyond five yards with the QB still in the pocket. The LB might have lightly tapped the tight end on the shoulder at the 5.5 yard mark and he gets slapped with a penalty. It is just all weighted to the offense to throw the football.

Defensive teams are the anomaly and are usually driven to run the football so their offensive stats are going to be abnormally low. Chicago and Baltimore offenses are basically made not to lose games. San Diego has Tomlinson, so obviosuly they will run the ball a ton, Seattle as well.

Ultimately, running the football will help those marginal teams and .500 teams compete. Run the football, soak and sap the clock and hang with teams you don't belong on the field with. EX: See Texans over the Colts. But ultimately, it will not help you in games against people you are better than and can ultimately hurt you. EX: Texans v Browns. Running the football creates low scoring, close football games.

Bubbajwp
01-17-2007, 06:09 PM
We've spoken aobut this before Thunder, but I think the old adage of running the football is changing. The NFL has become a passing league. The Saints and the Colts are still in and are 1-2 in passing. Philly was #3.

NFL rules are driven to see the ball in the air. Philly got screwed royally against the Saints on a call that basically sealed the game. Third and long and Brees got sacked. The Saints get a first down on illegal contact beyond five yards with the QB still in the pocket. The LB might have lightly tapped the tight end on the shoulder at the 5.5 yard mark and he gets slapped with a penalty. It is just all weighted to the offense to throw the football.

Defensive teams are the anomaly and are usually driven to run the football so their offensive stats are going to be abnormally low. Chicago and Baltimore offenses are basically made not to lose games. San Diego has Tomlinson, so obviosuly they will run the ball a ton, Seattle as well.

Ultimately, running the football will help those marginal teams and .500 teams compete. Run the football, soak and sap the clock and hang with teams you don't belong on the field with. EX: See Texans over the Colts. But ultimately, it will not help you in games against people you are better than and can ultimately hurt you. EX: Texans v Browns. Running the football creates low scoring, close football games.
I dont understand how controlling the clock can help you loose a game.

Running the ball is the best way for any team to beat a team like the colts. Peyton cant score any TD's when he is sitting on the bench. High powered offensive teams like the Colt's usually play great during the regular season and end up with one of the best records. But when they get to the playoffs they run into teams with good running games and great defenses. Ex Ravens, Patriots, and Steelers. Remeber the sayings defense wins championships, Good pitching beats good hitting.

The Colts would already be out of the playoffs if there defense was not playing as good as they are.

MorKnolle
01-17-2007, 06:14 PM
So if we go running back in first and DT in 2nd then it may look like...

1) All Day

2) Quinn Pitcock

I still think they will generally look for a DE over a DT depending on who's available. Kubiak, Rick Smith, etc. have repeatedly said they need to improve the pass rush, the best way to do that would be move Weaver inside and get a full-time DE that can rush the pass better. Bringing in another high-end DT isn't the best solution for that, I don't know why I keep seeing so many people clamoring for a DT and why I see so many mock drafts with us taking a DT high rather than a DE. Just thought I'd point that out.

Bubbajwp
01-17-2007, 06:14 PM
We've spoken aobut this before Thunder, but I think the old adage of running the football is changing. The NFL has become a passing league. The Saints and the Colts are still in and are 1-2 in passing. Philly was #3.

NFL rules are driven to see the ball in the air. Philly got screwed royally against the Saints on a call that basically sealed the game. Third and long and Brees got sacked. The Saints get a first down on illegal contact beyond five yards with the QB still in the pocket. The LB might have lightly tapped the tight end on the shoulder at the 5.5 yard mark and he gets slapped with a penalty. It is just all weighted to the offense to throw the football.
Defensive teams are the anomaly and are usually driven to run the football so their offensive stats are going to be abnormally low. Chicago and Baltimore offenses are basically made not to lose games. San Diego has Tomlinson, so obviosuly they will run the ball a ton, Seattle as well.

Ultimately, running the football will help those marginal teams and .500 teams compete. Run the football, soak and sap the clock and hang with teams you don't belong on the field with. EX: See Texans over the Colts. But ultimately, it will not help you in games against people you are better than and can ultimately hurt you. EX: Texans v Browns. Running the football creates low scoring, close football games.

I can definetly agree with that. It seems like every year they are adding more and more penalties to keep the WR and QB Safe. The Roy Williams (horse collar) penalty. You cant hit to low to high or helmet to helmet. Because of the Colts WR's complaing about the Patriots DB cant hardly touch WR anymore.

Bubbajwp
01-17-2007, 06:18 PM
I still think they will generally look for a DE over a DT depending on who's available. Kubiak, Rick Smith, etc. have repeatedly said they need to improve the pass rush, the best way to do that would be move Weaver inside and get a full-time DE that can rush the pass better. Bringing in another high-end DT isn't the best solution for that, I don't know why I keep seeing so many people clamoring for a DT and why I see so many mock drafts with us taking a DT high rather than a DE. Just thought I'd point that out.

I wouldnt mind seeing a DT in the second round as long as it really is the best player available. Okoye, Tank Tyler, or Pitcock would be fine but unless one of them falls I think we should look somewhere else. Probably fourth round.

I agree I think they will be looking for a DE on the first day. With J Anderson declaring I could definetly see him or G Adams falling to the 8th spot. Both would probably be the bpa.

TheRealJoker
01-17-2007, 06:44 PM
Interesting take Mork. I was under the impression they moved Weaver back to DE during preseason because he was getting overpowered at DT. But was it because they knew Babin/Peek couldn't do it full time?

Titan "Tack" Fan
01-17-2007, 07:00 PM
Weren't the Titans the #1 rushing team this year

MorKnolle
01-17-2007, 07:57 PM
Interesting take Mork. I was under the impression they moved Weaver back to DE during preseason because he was getting overpowered at DT. But was it because they knew Babin/Peek couldn't do it full time?

I think they mainly did it so they would be stronger against the run, which we were much better against the run with Weaver and Mario at DEs than we were when Babin or Peek were at DE and Weaver was inside. I think that was their initial concern, but as the season went on they discovered they couldn't get as much of a pass rush with Weaver at DE since he can't get a whole lot of pressure from there and our DTs weren't providing much of any pressure either. Weaver was pretty solid inside, maybe not quite as stout against the run as Seth Payne (when healthy) or even Anthony Maddox, but he could provide some pretty decent pressure up the middle that the others weren't doing and that he wasn't able to get on the outside.

Weren't the Titans the #1 rushing team this year

Huh? The Titans were 5th in the league in rushing offense this year. Atlanta was the clear #1, San Diego and Jacksonville were a decent bit behind at #s 2-3, and then another decent gap to where Washington edged out the Titans for #4.

TheRealJoker
01-17-2007, 08:03 PM
Well when you look at it like that then if there is an equal rated DE/DT at #s 1 or 2 then it looks like we'll be going DE.

thunderkyss
01-18-2007, 09:25 AM
I dont understand how controlling the clock can help you loose a game.

Running the ball is the best way for any team to beat a team like the colts. Peyton cant score any TD's when he is sitting on the bench. High powered offensive teams like the Colt's usually play great during the regular season and end up with one of the best records. But when they get to the playoffs they run into teams with good running games and great defenses. Ex Ravens, Patriots, and Steelers. Remeber the sayings defense wins championships, Good pitching beats good hitting.

The Colts would already be out of the playoffs if there defense was not playing as good as they are.


Before you can start running the ball, you have to be more efficient than the Colts. Say you're running the ball, but only get into the endzone on 3 of your six possesions... you score field goals on 2 of the remaining three possessions. You have 27 points. But the Colts scored touch downs on 4 of their 5 possesions.......... they've got 28 points.

painekiller
01-18-2007, 11:00 AM
Interesting take Mork. I was under the impression they moved Weaver back to DE during preseason because he was getting overpowered at DT. But was it because they knew Babin/Peek couldn't do it full time?

The Redskins really exposed that plan. Weaver is just to light in the trunk to stand up a whole game to the bigger Guards in the league. I am having a hard understanding the guys who missed that.

Draft a guys like Dan Bazuin DE Central Michigan. He can come in on passing downs, will be cheaper than Peek. Or a guy like Brandon Mebane DT Cal. He gets good penatration from the middle and pushes the pocket at least in college. He is a late 2nd early 3rd type.

Maybe we can pull a trade down and get an extra 1st day pick and get a guy like them.