YPC? or YPG? How do you rate successful rushing?

[Lawrence Owen]

I personally look at Yards per Carry more than Yards per game to determine if the offense or defense had a good game or not.

 

Yes 120 yards rushing looks good on paper, but if that RB had 40 attempts for 120 yards, do you still  consider it a successful day?

 

Indy's defense is in the bottom half at 18th in the NFL in yards per game,but teams on average have attempted to run the ball an average of 29 times/game -7th most-, giving them an average of 3.8 YPC so far this season.-Also 7th-

 

To me, this shows Indy as one of the better run defenses right now in the NFL.  

 

The issue is Indy is behind most games nowadays, and the opponents run the ball to eat clock, even though they are not doing it very effectively.  If Indy's offense picks up, you will see the YPG start to go down dramatically

 

On the other side of the coin you have the NE Pats.

 

They have played with the lead most games so their attempts against them are VERY low. But that is only part of the picture.

 

Teams have attempted to run against NE the league fewest 72/game. But NE gives up 117 YPG. -9th most- for a league leading average of 4.9 YPC.

 

 

Many analyst's say Indy still has a bad run defense, But I am a firm believer It is top notch ATM.

 

Yet looking at NE's,..I'd say they are the NFL's worst.

[Yoshinator]

I look at YPC as well. The Colts rarely run the ball a ton, but if Gore runs it for something lets say like 14 carries for 70 yards a td, that's 5 YPC and a TD that would really benefit us. That would also probably mean we had a lot of passing yds with Hasselback or Luck as well. That would be a much better situation than 28 rushes for 100 yds and no tds. 

[Warhorse]

I dont use stats because they dont take into consideration things like how many defenders were in the box, injuries to the RB or the supporting cast...or the defense for that matter.

 

Fantasy has ruined fans perception of reality. One RB could average 5 yds per carry and total 145 yards, but it was against a 4/3 where they rushed 4 for most of the game and dropped 7. Another RB could average 3.5 ypc and total 95 yards, but it was against a 3/4 rushing 6 with only 4 dropping into coverage for most of the night.

 

Stats can point you in the right direction, but stats can also lie, occlude, and mask truth.

[crazycolt1]

I look at YPC as well. The Colts rarely run the ball a ton, but if Gore runs it for something lets say like 14 carries for 70 yards a td, that's 5 YPC and a TD that would really benefit us. That would also probably mean we had a lot of passing yds with Hasselback or Luck as well. That would be a much better situation than 28 rushes for 100 yds and no tds. 

Game management and ball control are stats that don't show up. Good points.

[crazycolt1]

I dont use stats because they dont take into consideration things like how many defenders were in the box, injuries to the RB or the supporting cast...or the defense for that matter.

 

Fantasy has ruined fans perception of reality. One RB could average 5 yds per carry and total 145 yards, but it was against a 4/3 where they rushed 4 for most of the game and dropped 7. Another RB could average 3.5 ypc and total 95 yards, but it was against a 3/4 rushing 6 with only 4 dropping into coverage for most of the night.

 

Stats can point you in the right direction, but stats can also lie, occlude, and mask truth.

How true. I have been reminded that the only stat that really matters is in win and losses. The others are for fantasy football and fan discussion. Stats can be so misleading at times.

[Lawrence Owen]

I dont use stats because they dont take into consideration things like how many defenders were in the box, injuries to the RB or the supporting cast...or the defense for that matter.

 

Fantasy has ruined fans perception of reality. One RB could average 5 yds per carry and total 145 yards, but it was against a 4/3 where they rushed 4 for most of the game and dropped 7. Another RB could average 3.5 ypc and total 95 yards, but it was against a 3/4 rushing 6 with only 4 dropping into coverage for most of the night.

 

Stats can point you in the right direction, but stats can also lie, occlude, and mask truth.

To me, how many defenders are in the box makes no difference really.  There are run plays that have more blockers for heavy boxes, and passing plays that neutralize 7-8 man boxes to make defenses play more honestly.  Play calling on both sides of the ball determine the number in the box and how many blockers you have.  

Last game there were multiple times Gore ran vrs 7-8 man boxes yet still gained good yards because of the play call. Including the 20+ yarder.

The problem with stacking the box is this...it ends up averaging out. if a RB gets past the first level when you stack the box, he gains A LOT more yards than he it was not. Because less people in the secondary to come up to stop them for a good run, rather than a huge play.

[COLTS449]

I'm more on YPC too. Definitely.

[RealityIsLuck]

YPG. Overall it's where you able to establish a running attack, and if you run for 200 yards in a game, then you could. No matter how many attempts you took. 

 

With YPC, you could have a nice average of 5.5 YPC, but in reality it would be 4 carries for 22 yards. Not dominant.

[SteelDragon]

They're both useful measures.

If we're talking about over the course of a season:

Between the two, I care most about YPC because it demonstrates poignantly the effectiveness of the running game. YPG can be skewed with excessive running to compensate for, possibly, a poor passing game.

[ColtRider]

All stats can be useful and/or misleading, including YPG & YPC. Situational statistics are the ones I look at. Critical downs and scoring opportunities seem to pan out the best using stats. However, they also can be useful and/or incorrect as well. I'm of the mindset that agrees with crazycolt1 here. It's the W or L that matters. Anything else can be skewed into a mislead direction. It's liken to half a dozen of one, and six of the other. Don't get me wrong, stats are a good tool for evaluation. No doubt. It's how you gauge them and collect into context that matters. Just my opinion.

[mikey287]

Proper evaluation.

[oldunclemark]

I personally look at Yards per Carry more than Yards per game to determine if the offense or defense had a good game or not.

 

Yes 120 yards rushing looks good on paper, but if that RB had 40 attempts for 120 yards, do you still  consider it a successful day?

 

Indy's defense is in the bottom half at 18th in the NFL in yards per game,but teams on average have attempted to run the ball an average of 29 times/game -7th most-, giving them an average of 3.8 YPC so far this season.-Also 7th-

 

To me, this shows Indy as one of the better run defenses right now in the NFL.  

 

The issue is Indy is behind most games nowadays, and the opponents run the ball to eat clock, even though they are not doing it very effectively.  If Indy's offense picks up, you will see the YPG start to go down dramatically

 

On the other side of the coin you have the NE Pats.

 

They have played with the lead most games so their attempts against them are VERY low. But that is only part of the picture.

 

Teams have attempted to run against NE the league fewest 72/game. But NE gives up 117 YPG. -9th most- for a league leading average of 4.9 YPC.

 

 

Many analyst's say Indy still has a bad run defense, But I am a firm believer It is top notch ATM.

 

Yet looking at NE's,..I'd say they are the NFL's worst.

Good question.

I prefer yards per completion to yards per attempt for QBs as well because QBs occasionally throw the ball away by design.

That's why completion percentage..which is the heart of many QB ratings...is somewhat bogus