Discussion in 'Texans Talk' started by Vinny, Aug 5, 2005.
Pretty good. #6 in the whole NFL. Just need to get to the red zone more.
It would be interesting to see how many attempts in the red zone each of these teams had. I'd bet KC had the fewest being a big play team. I'd also bet that a team could win a SB with a low red zone effeciency ( low being like bottom 10 in the league ).
Notice how the 2 top teams had the two best TEs in the league. (Also great RBS). In my opinion, I bet there is a huge correlation between TE/RB ability and Red Zone conversion. Indy is in there bc manning was insane last year.
The Texans number was actually well above average in 2003 also. In that year I think they were dead last in the number of red zone attempts. The 2004 attempts in the Red zone were a marked improvemnt. If the team gets in the top half and maintains clsoe to that type of efficiency then points should not be an issue.
we have big receivers and a running back thats not afraid to pound it in the endzone.
That's a nice stat after seeing the pass-n-shoot offense go up and down the field for years but have really bad red-zone efficiency. At least that's how I remember it.
Actually, the Oilers run-and-shoot was one of the better teams at scoring in the red zone.
Their problem was running time off the clock with a lead.
That wasn't any reference to a particular playoff game was it?
I'm not sure I'd take that stat as saying anything too encouraging about our prospects for this season. Just speculating here, but it wouldn't surprise me if, given the comparative rarity of red zone attempts, red zone efficiency was one of those stats highly prone to regression to the "mean" of offensive efficiency in general - it could be that a team that played much better in the red zone in year x was just fluky, in terms of happening by chance to have its best plays where they mattered most. A similar phenomenon certainly holds good for performance on third down (see http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/07/sports/football/07score.html?).
Separate names with a comma.