PDA

View Full Version : Red Zone Offense


Yankee_In_TX
10-16-2008, 05:15 PM
Since we were talking about the D....

How many 1st downs have we had that start a fresh set of downs inside the red zone and how many of those led to a TD?

Hooston Texan
10-16-2008, 06:00 PM
Per the site linked by Polo in the other thread, we have scored 10 TD's in 20 red-zone possessions.
http://wwwedit.profootballweekly.com/PFW/NFL+Statistics/Inside+the+Red+Zone/2008/6redzn.htm?mode=offense

Now, I'm not sure about how many of these possessions had a first-and-10 inside the 20 as opposed to merely ending inside the 20.

Yankee_In_TX
10-16-2008, 06:07 PM
I just remember, jokingly at first, fearing when we got a first inside the red zone... Then being amazed at our inability (sadly, much like the Buckeyes) to get it in the endzone when we were so close.

The Pencil Neck
10-16-2008, 06:35 PM
I think that part of the problem was shown in a link that TC had provided showing that last week, Matt was best throwing the long ball. Throwing short passes, he's less accurate.

I think that's why we have problems in the red zone. Matt's at his best at around the 30 for going into the end zone. :) He needs to work on those short passes and we need to mix the run and pass better. If we get a big run, we always seem to come back to a run play and get stuffed. We also seem to try to run on first down in the red zone and get stuffed.

b0ng
10-16-2008, 06:48 PM
Somebody needs to learn how to putt! We've got our own little Happy Gilmore.

barrett
10-17-2008, 01:25 PM
i stated in another thread that our red zone efficiency for both sides of the ball plus QB turnovers period are the three keys to us being a top 5 team in the league. so much is in place and if we can get this corrected we're going to be hard to stop.

Polo
10-17-2008, 01:31 PM
We're actually not "terrible" in the Red Zone:

Team Poss TD FG Scor
Pct TD
Pct
1. Mia. 14 11 1 .857 .786
2. Ind. 14 10 3 .929 .714
3. Ten. 16 11 5 1.000 .688
4. Det. 6 4 2 1.000 .667
5. Pitt. 12 8 3 .917 .667
6. G.B. 14 9 4 .929 .643
7. Ariz. 28 18 4 .786 .643
8. Den. 24 14 6 .833 .583
9. Wash. 21 12 7 .905 .571
10. N.Y.J. 21 12 5 .810 .571
11. Dall. 21 12 4 .762 .571
12. N.O. 22 12 5 .773 .545
13. Buff. 13 7 5 .923 .538
14. K.C. 13 7 3 .769 .538
15. Chi. 20 10 7 .850 .500
16. Hou. 20 10 7 .850 .500
17. Cin. 12 6 4 .833 .500
18. S.D. 23 11 10 .913 .478
19. N.Y.G. 21 10 9 .905 .476
20. S.F. 21 10 9 .905 .476
21. Phil. 26 12 11 .885 .462
22. Clev. 14 6 7 .929 .429
23. Sea. 14 6 6 .857 .429
24. Car. 14 6 5 .786 .429
25. T.B. 24 10 11 .875 .417
26. N.E. 17 7 7 .824 .412
27. Jax. 17 7 5 .706 .412
28. Atl. 20 8 8 .800 .400
29. Balt. 15 6 4 .667 .400
30. Oak. 13 4 8 .923 .308
31. St.L. 5 1 3 .800 .200
32. Minn. 15 3 9 .800 .200


http://wwwedit.profootballweekly.com/PFW/NFL+Statistics/Inside+the+Red+Zone/2008/6redzn.htm?mode=offense

Turnovers are what kill us.

One thing I did find interesting from a defensive perspective was that 4 teams that we've played are in the top 5 in Red Zone scoring... and we'll have played the entire top 5 after this Sunday...

Malloy
10-17-2008, 01:54 PM
One thing I did find interesting from a defensive perspective was that 4 teams that we've played are in the top 5 in Red Zone scoring... and we'll have played the entire top 5 after this Sunday...

LOL, that stat is actually REAL interesting! :)

disaacks3
10-17-2008, 02:03 PM
LOL, that stat is actually REAL interesting! :) Yep, it shows the fallacy of linking winning % w/ Red Zone (TD) efficiency.

Hooston Texan
10-17-2008, 02:25 PM
Yep, it shows the fallacy of linking winning % w/ Red Zone (TD) efficiency.

Not sure how that is a fallacy. The top 5 is Miami, Indy, Detroit, Tennessee and Pittsburgh. Four of the top five either have winning records or are a single last-second loss (to us) from having a winning record. As it is, their combined records are 14-6.

The only outlier in the top 5 is Detroit. But I think the reason they are 0-5 is that they have managed only six trips to the redzone in their first five games. Yes, they've done well on the rare occasions they get there, but that's more than trumped by their offensive anemia on the rest of the field.

No, we're not a horrible redzone offense--statistically, we're mediocre. But since we Texan diehards take every possession seriously (just as fans of other teams do), we feel every failure. Worse, the loss to the Titans can be attributed, more than anything else, to our misadventures in the redzone. Paraphrasing from Rounders: "Most card-players can't recall much about their winning hands, but they can remember, with remarkable clarity, the outstanding beats of their careers.

Our redzone offense is one of three things that must, must, must improve if we want to challenge for the playoffs. Defense (every aspect of it) and turnovers are the other two.

disaacks3
10-17-2008, 02:46 PM
Yep, it shows the fallacy of linking winning % w/ Red Zone (TD) efficiency.

The only outlier in the top 5 is Detroit. But I think the reason they are 0-5 is that they have managed only six trips to the redzone in their first five games. Yes, they've done well on the rare occasions they get there, but that's more than trumped by their offensive anemia on the rest of the field.

No excuses - 40% of those teams listed do NOT have a winning % = or > .500

Remember - we're talking about the TOP FIVE, not those in the top 1/3, etc.

Stats only tell part of the tale and I stand by the assertion that "hanging your hat" on this one is (obviously) a big mistake.

In the Texans case, what is OUR most telling stat? Turnover %.

The Pencil Neck
10-17-2008, 02:56 PM
To me, it's really about Red Zone Efficiency AND Red Zone Attempts.

The Cardinals have a much scarier offense than the Lions. Why? The Lions may have a better Red Zone Efficiency percentage, but the Cardinals have 3x the attempts and that translates to a ton more points. The Lions have 30 Red Zone points and the Cardinals have 120 Red Zone points. Heck, we've got 81 Red Zone points and we'd have a few more points if we had kicked field goals instead of going for 4th and short a few times.

EDIT: I should have quoted in this so that it was obvious that I was referring to Hooston Texan's post and not Disaacks3's post. Because I agree with Disaacks that turnovers are our biggest problem. Bigger than our Red Zone %.

hookinreds
10-17-2008, 03:24 PM
We're actually not "terrible" in the Red Zone:



http://wwwedit.profootballweekly.com/PFW/NFL+Statistics/Inside+the+Red+Zone/2008/6redzn.htm?mode=offense

Turnovers are what kill us.

One thing I did find interesting from a defensive perspective was that 4 teams that we've played are in the top 5 in Red Zone scoring... and we'll have played the entire top 5 after this Sunday...


What do 4 of the top 5 scoring teams inside the red zone have in common? They've played us. Just playing the half empty guy with that comment. Here's to the other team in the top 5 dropping out of the top 5 after this week! :d:

Hooston Texan
10-17-2008, 03:39 PM
I don't think anyone is saying one factor is more important than another. Turnovers, more than anything else, cost us one game (Indy) while redzone ineffeciency cost us another (Tennessee). Neither was a factor in the Jacksonville game. Against Pittsburgh, everything went wrong.

Nobody said redzone efficiency is an exact predicter of record, but when the top 5 redzone teams are 14-11 (and that includes Detroit's 0-5 record due to its inept offense) while the bottom five are 10-17, it does say something.

But I will argue with you that turnovers are the biggest reason we sit at 1-4. As I've already stated, turnovers killed us against Indy, no doubt about it, But, on the other side, turnovers played absolutely no role in the Jacksonville loss (we had none) while we beat Miami despite being -3 in takeaways.

So that leaves Tennessee and Pittsburgh. Pittsburgh is easy: turnovers were only part of the story; the whole team was overwhelmed. The offense was inept even when they weren't giving the ball away and, except for the two plays where Mario sacked Roethliswhatever, our D just could not stop them until the score was 35-3

As for Tennessee, we committed three turnovers on fourth down within the Titan redzone (two stops and one interception of a "what the hell" pass Schaub tossed up as VandenBosch was pulling him down). So, while those are turnovers, they have more to do with our failure to move the ball inside the redzone. We had two other turnovers: an interception on our 33 in the first quarter and a 4th-and-10 interception from the Titan 48. Neither led to points or really cost us points (I think we used up all our 4th-and-10 luck last Sunday). All in all, we had the ball in the Titan redzone on 6 times. Had we hit our own mediocre average for the year (50% TDs, 67% FGs), we're looking at 27 points. That would have, most likely, won that game for us.

So, on the whole, turnovers only cost us the Indy game--and I think we all agree that the turnovers in question that game were more the product of bad voodoo than anything else (even the most ardent StartSager probably hopes to never see the Rosencopter take flight again).

Hooston Texan
10-17-2008, 03:44 PM
What do 4 of the top 5 scoring teams inside the red zone have in common? They've played us. Just playing the half empty guy with that comment. Here's to the other team in the top 5 dropping out of the top 5 after this week! :d:

An even better result would be the Lions retaining their gaudy 66% TD rate because they never get to our 20. As it is, their redzone offense is akin to Michael Bourn on the basepaths: one of the best, if only they could get there.

Yankee_In_TX
10-17-2008, 03:46 PM
I think that part of the problem was shown in a link that TC had provided showing that last week, Matt was best throwing the long ball. Throwing short passes, he's less accurate.

I think that's why we have problems in the red zone. Matt's at his best at around the 30 for going into the end zone. :) He needs to work on those short passes and we need to mix the run and pass better. If we get a big run, we always seem to come back to a run play and get stuffed. We also seem to try to run on first down in the red zone and get stuffed.

I think that's what I was thinking. That from the 30, it was seemingly easy. But once we get near that endzone, the run gets stuffed and our passes go no where.

hookinreds
10-17-2008, 06:35 PM
An even better result would be the Lions retaining their gaudy 66% TD rate because they never get to our 20. As it is, their redzone offense is akin to Michael Bourn on the basepaths: one of the best, if only they could get there.

Roger that!