Analytic guesswork and the running game.

[iforgotmypassword]

Nothing annoys me more than the back and fourth offseason articles that swap year in and year out...."We need to run the ball better" (they run the ball better and thus the pass game suffers) followed by "We need to open it up" (they pass it the ball better and the the run game suffers) "We need to run the ball better, etc. etc.

I coach football, so I've dwelled on the following philosophy more than most of you would realize, but I certainly don't have the time or stat boys to do a legitimate study on it. I've suggested this to Woody Paige and Peter King with no luck.

Here is my thought.

Point A - Teams that throw the ball a lot are finish the season was less healthy than teams that run the ball a lot. It's simple, if you're running the ball and "grinding" out drives, the amount of plays you run in a game is going to be less, over the course of a 16 week season, these plays are going to add up drastically. Lets assume a player has a 1% chance of getting hurt on every play. A player who plays 1000 plays is 20% more likely to get hurt than a player who plays 800 plays.

Point B - Running teams are always going to have a "dominant" Defense. It's again very simple. Just look at the numbers. The year of Tebow, I felt we were playing solid Defense from week 1, yet once we started running the ball 80% of the time our defense, according to almost everybody, starting playing dominant over night. I can't tell you how many times I saw "Defensive ranks before/After Tebow" Charts that year. When in my mind it was so simple, we went from watching Kyle Orton sling the ball 45 times a game for 4 hours, to watching Tebow go 1-8 for a quick 2 1/2 hour game. If you really want to see how "dominant" a defense is YPP (yards per possession) or PPP (points per possession) is going to be much more relavent.


Point C - Turnovers are drastically magnified in importance when you are a running team. I won't go into details again here because you get the point. The number of possessions are lessened with a running team, therefore crunch the numbers. Boom, turnovers become way more important.

We did have the best offense of all-time last year, but did we have the greatest Points per possession offense of all-time? I highly doubt it. Did we have the highest Yards per possession of all time last year? Probably not.

Alright, you get the point.... thought

[Powderaddict]

Personally I love a good running game.

Go back and watch TD - that Bronco team imposed their will on opponents. The line, FB, and RB all worked together. At the end of games defenses were so worn down they had nothing left to give. I miss the more physical running games of the old NFL.

So many say that Tebow's late heroics were just blind luck and chance, but I believe the contstant battering for 3 quarters finally took its toll on the defenses and that gave Tebow the chance to take over at the end.

Not to say that I dislike a good passing attack, but my preference is a strong running game. That said, Manning and this offense I believe gives us a much better chance at a SB victory, as Tebow couldn't pass or read a defense.

Really Elway and TD ran the offense I enjoy watching more than any other.

[Guess Who]

I coach football, so I've dwelled on the following philosophy more than most of you would realize, but I certainly don't have the time or stat boys to do a legitimate study on it. I've suggested this to Woody Paige and Peter King with no luck.

You coach football

Dude, you cannot even remember your password.

[Guess Who]

The reason passing teams are less healthy is not because of fewer plays. It is because passing teams are passive. The OL is moving backward, the QB is vulnerable, the WRs take shots as they catch the ball. When running the ball the offense is aggressive, moving forward. They are doing the hitting moving the defense backward. WRs are blocking CBs and not vulnerable. the OL is moving forward.

I bet defenses that play strong running teams have more injuries because the offense is more aggressive.