The Texans a run-first team, I think not!

[76Texan]

I have some numbers that I crunch when tallying up the first-half run/pass distribution last year.

But first off, I want to bring up another stat (one that I had brought up before.)
Advanced NFL stats chart it as Percentage of Deep Pass Attempts (pass attempts over 15 yards).

Basically, they involve routes longer than the 10-yd in/out routes by the receivers and all the screen passes, quick slants, etc.

It's a stat that charts the vertical passing game of a team.

Colt McCoy was at 14%. McNabb 15.4%, Kolb 16.6%, Alex Smith 17.3%, Brees 17.6%, Fitzpatrick 17.9%, Brady and Gabbert 18.6%, and so forth.

In the meantime, Schaub was at 21.6% and Yates 21.7%.
The numbers include play-off games.

The inference here is that we had more of a vertical attack than pass-oriented offenses such as the Pats and the Saints.
We were not a dink-and-dunk team even with Yates in the play-offs.

Let us be clear on that point.

http://wp.advancednflstats.com/playerstats.php

[76Texan]

Let's begin with some numbers:

Week 1 Colts

RUSHING ATT YDS AVG LG TD
B.Tate 10 61 6.1 14 1
D.Ward 11 39 3.5 9 1
Total 21 100 4.8 14 2

PASSING ATT CMP YDS SK/YD TD LG IN RT
M.Schaub 16 12 162 1/3 1 21 1 101.6

There was also a pass play in which the Colts was called for defensive holding (no play) and a sack while Schaub attempted to execute a pass play.

Overall, the run/pass distribution was 21/18
This was with the Texans leading all the way to a blow-out.

We did have 3 more running plays in the first half, so noted!

[76Texan]

Week 2 Miami

RUSHING ATT YDS AVG LG TD
A.Foster 10 33 3.3 14 0
B.Tate 4 21 5.3 15 0
Total 14 54 3.9 15 0

M.Schaub 22 16 170 1/5 1 43 0 110.0

There was also a sack just before we kicked a FG to end half-time.

Overall, the run/pass distribution was 14/23 with the Texans leading 16-3 at the half.

This is way in favor of the pass (by 9).

The updated distribution after week 2 was 6 more passing plays.

[76Texan]

Week 3 Saints

RUSHING ATT YDS AVG LG TD
B.Tate 12 66 5.5 19 0
S.Slaton 2 7 3.5 6 0

There was also a reverse to AJ for 8.
This was credited as a run, obviously.
In reality, a reverse is called as a play that combats a run defense.
Unless a team is known for trickery; ie. one that run the reverse on a more consistent basis (a couple of times almost every game), only then you can really consider this as a running play.

PASSING ATT CMP YDS SK/YD TD LG IN RT
M.Schaub 17 11 223 1/3 1 62 0 127.7

Including the sack, the run/pass distribution was 14/18 in favor of the pass.

The updated distribution after week 3 was 10 more passing plays.

[76Texan]

Week 4 Steelers

The run/pass distribution was 23/15 in favor of the run (including a QB sneak by Schaub for 2 yards - counting as a run.)

Up to now, the distribution was still skewed toward the passing game by 2 plays.

[76Texan]

Week 5 vs Raiders

RUSHING ATT YDS AVG LG TD
A.Foster 15 54 3.6 20 0 0
C.Ogbonnaya 1 2 2.0 2 0
Total 16 56 3.5 20 0

PASSING ATT CMP YDS SK/YD TD LG IN RT
M.Schaub 21 13 177 1/5 2 56 1 100.7

With the sack, the run/pass distribution was 16/22 in favor of the pass.

The updated distribution favored the pass by 8 plays.

[76Texan]

Week 6 Ravens

14/22 distribution (8 more passing plays).
The updated distribution favored the pass by 16 plays.

[76Texan]

Week 7 Tacks

Even Steven

[76Texan]

Week 8 Jags

17/22 distribution (5 more passing plays - even though the running plays included a 2-yd TD run by Schaub; we don't know for sure if it was a QB draw by design or an improvision by Schaub.)

The updated distribution favored the pass by 21 plays after 8 games.

....

Were the Texans a run-first team?

I think the answer should be quite clear: NO!

[Dutchrudder]

[DBCooper]

B-B-B-B-B-B-But, anyone that knows football, knows we are a run first team NOW..........

[JPPT1974]

Arian Foster with or without him, the team depends on him before Schuab. No matter where you look at it.

[Rey]

All this stuff is fine and dandy, but in a vacuum it doesn't mean a whole lot really.

For instance, against Miami Arian wasn't doing all that well. So instead of 2nd and 5 or 3rd and 3 were in 2nd and 8 and 3rd and 6.....

Basically we needed to rely more heavily on the pass than we did on the run because of how the game played out. I think the Raiders game was another game like that. I don't remember what was up with Tate that game, but you had Foster taking almost all the carrier with OBO getting 2 and not doing anything with them...

Also, I don't understand how you are tallying your totals. It seems like you are double dipping on plays. If we run a pass play and we take a sack or have a penalty that pushes us back it's not unreasonable that we would come out and pass again to try to make up that yardage.

Also, if it's third down or something we might come out an run it and concede the punt depending on the situation....

Basically my point is that there are so many situations and variables that can determine run or pass.

If anything I'd say overall we were balanced....

BUT my contention is that in today's pass happy NFL we are a running team. We led the league in rushing attempts and we were 30th in passing attempts. A team like the Saints, Packers or Pats will use the run as an afterthought and use their passing game a majority of the time. Those are teams that I'd call true passing teams.

Like I said, this is a pass happy league. If we had this same distribution 30 years ago then no way would people even think this was a running team. But I think the idea that we are a running team comes in relation to the rest of the league.

I said this in another thread and I'll say it here. If we aren't a running team. No one is.

Overall, we were balanced, but in comparison to the rest of the league we are a running team and we run the damn football.

[The Pencil Neck]

The numbers are great but you have to look at this in the context of the league as it exists.

The Texans had 1046 offensive plays. That's 6th most in the NFL.

546 of those plays were rushing attempts (they do not count sacks in that total.) That ties us for most in the league with the Denver Broncos.

We had 500 pass attempts (including sacks.) If you exclude sacks (because those numbers are readily available), we had 467 passing attempts. That's 30th in the league.

Although we were fairly balanced (500 pass plays to 546 rushing plays) for the entirety of the season, that balance places us among the most run oriented teams in the league.

If I had time, I'd pull out everyone's percentages to see where we sit, but I'm pretty sure that we were the 2nd or 3rd most rush-heavy team.

Now. I consider us a BALANCED team more than a Rush-first team. But in a league where everyone else is un-balanced in the direction of the pass, it makes us appear un-balanced in the direction of the run.

[76Texan]

Originally Posted by JPPT1974

Arian Foster with or without him, the team depends on him before Schuab. No matter where you look at it.

Except that we didn't have Foster in week 1 and we killed the Colts.
In week 2, Foster was 10 for 33.
In week 3, we didn't have Foster and the offense still ran great with Tate and Slaton combined for 23-90 yards. The running game did well against the Saints, even though it didn't quite catch up to the passing game.
In the last game, without Foster, Tate and Ward combined for 28-147.

Overall, the Texans were a good team that can both run and pass.
Who's going to say that with AJ, the passing game would'nt have been better?

[76Texan]

Originally Posted by Rey

All this stuff is fine and dandy, but in a vacuum it doesn't mean a whole lot really.

For instance, against Miami Arian wasn't doing all that well. So instead of 2nd and 5 or 3rd and 3 were in 2nd and 8 and 3rd and 6.....

Basically we needed to rely more heavily on the pass than we did on the run because of how the game played out. I think the Raiders game was another game like that. I don't remember what was up with Tate that game, but you had Foster taking almost all the carrier with OBO getting 2 and not doing anything with them...

Also, I don't understand how you are tallying your totals. It seems like you are double dipping on plays. If we run a pass play and we take a sack or have a penalty that pushes us back it's not unreasonable that we would come out and pass again to try to make up that yardage.

Also, if it's third down or something we might come out an run it and concede the punt depending on the situation....

Basically my point is that there are so many situations and variables that can determine run or pass.

If anything I'd say overall we were balanced....

BUT my contention is that in today's pass happy NFL we are a running team. We led the league in rushing attempts and we were 30th in passing attempts. A team like the Saints, Packers or Pats will use the run as an afterthought and use their passing game a majority of the time. Those are teams that I'd call true passing teams.

Like I said, this is a pass happy league. If we had this same distribution 30 years ago then no way would people even think this was a running team. But I think the idea that we are a running team comes in relation to the rest of the league.

I said this in another thread and I'll say it here. If we aren't a running team. No one is.

Overall, we were balanced, but in comparison to the rest of the league we are a running team and we run the damn football.

My contention is about a RUN-FIRST team.
The Texans were not a run-first team.
We ran the ball more at the end of the day, but we WERE NOT a run-first team.
A run-first team is one that establishes the game with its running ability in the first half.
We did not do that!

I will counter you point on point in later posts.

[dsorc]

I get the point that you're trying to make: the Texans look like a run-first team because they literally ran out the clock often. I like the idea of looking at 1st half since it reduces the effect of game-state. However, why not just look at run vs play on first down? Otherwise, the run/pass ratio would still be dependent on the yard/down scenario.

[eriadoc]

What's your definition of a run-first team? Is there one in the NFL?

As I have said elsewhere, Kubiak would like to be able to put up a lead int he first half and grind it out in the second. That doesn't always go his way.

[76Texan]

Originally Posted by dsorc

I get the point that you're trying to make: the Texans look like a run-first team because they literally ran out the clock often. I like the idea of looking at 1st half since it reduces the effect of game-state. However, why not just look at run vs play on first down? Otherwise, the run/pass ratio would still be dependent on the yard/down scenario.

I can tell you without looking it up because I've gone through this like "a million times"; there was no real tendency for the Texans on first and 10 (taken into consideration the distance to the end zone) in the first half - or on third down conversion, whatever.

Overall, they did not show their hand!

[TexansRule1]

76Texan, I appreciate very much your effort in this regard. I wanted to do the same statistical effort to show the "feelers" on the board that the numbers don't stand up to their feelings.

The Texans are a BALANCED TEAM not a RUN FIRST team.

I would recommend the following study
1) 1st down tendency. A RUN FIRST team would tend to run more on 1st down. A balanced team would tend to show a 50/50 split. I would exclude 2nd half since point differential will skew towards run (since Texans led in so many games). I would also exclude games started by TJ Yates since the team should be expected to run more to protect a 3rd string QB. (potentially you could do both to show)

2) As a basis for comparison, compare this to the rest of the league.