Jump to content

Recommended Posts

31 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

That's what everyone says, and has always said, but studies don't support that hypothesis. Defenses load the box to stop the run situationally, and against big formations. If the offense stays in 11 personnel, defenses will rarely stack the box. This challenges the long-held belief that you stated. Stopping the run might be what teams pay lip service to, but on Sundays, defenses are much more concerned with containing the pass.

 

Also, play action works whether you have a good rushing attack or not. This is also validated by analysis. 

 

I'm all about having a good rushing attack, being balanced offensively, etc. But the whole 'run the ball, stop the run' mantra isn't really supported by what teams do, nor by what actually works on the field.

I've posted the links to both the thread where we discussed the same thing several months ago and all the links that point to the evidence both me and you have been hammering on in here. It doesn't matter to people. They have been listening to old fashioned football narratives since they were born and they continue to listen to them now... even by smart football people like Reich. Numbers and stats won't change their minds. They see NFL HC saying "run game sets up play action" and they believe it. There is no stat me or you can give that will convince people that sometimes even the best in their profession hold antiquated and not supported by evidence beliefs. This is the same thing that was happening with the NBA and the 3p shot. Just browse through old NBA message boards... like... mere 15 years ago and you can see the exact same arguments being held, just instead of the running game, it's about how jump shooting teams don't win in the league, or how you should establish low post presence or how when you are completely open, instead of taking the longer 3p shot you should take 2 steps inside the 3p line and take the off-the dribble long 2... things that nowadays are viewed as complete insanity. I truly believe in 10-20 years we will look at "establish the run" or "first stop the run" mantras of today's NFL the same way we look at "you should take more post ups" or "jump shooting teams will never win in the NBA"  nowadays. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

  Sounds all prepy but i have watched to much FB to buy it.

 Eberflus himself is totally commited to stopping the run on first down.
 And for those that say it is the pass that D's are worried about, you hear them complain about their team Not sticking to the run. 

 A team that can't stop the run soon gets flumoxed in all phases.

 And there are a few coaches that are great at coaching  the screen game, and some qb's are great in play action. And many struggle. 
 

 

The numbers bear it out. I totally respect your football knowledge and history of football watching, but you'll have to show me an analysis that refutes the data showing that teams don't stack the box against 11 personnel. Otherwise, it's just anecdotal.

 

The Rams, with a top three RB in the NFL, third in the NFL in rushing yards, third in yards/attempt, ran 11 personnel a majority of the season in 2018, and almost never faced a stacked box. This formula holds up throughout the data.

 

Just to clarify, I'm not saying that a defense doesn't need to be able to stop the run, nor am I saying that an offense shouldn't be able to run effectively. I'm saying it's a myth that having a great rushing attack makes defenses stack the box.

 

Also a point of clarification, there are absolutely coaches and players that have mastered play action, and there are teams that are better at running play action than others. But that expertise at play action is not dependent on the success of the run game. In other words, you don't have to establish the run or be a good rushing team to be effective at play action. 

 

I know a lot of this seems counter-intuitive, and contrary to fundamental football, but it's obvious if you look at these studies with an open mind.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, PrincetonTiger said:

Even if the run game is not “important” on Sundays

 

I never said the run game isn't important. 

 

You're projecting, and it makes me think you're entirely closed off to the possibility that your long held thinking on the 'run the ball, stop the run' principle might be wrong.

 

The game has changed, dramatically. Teams are pass happy because passing is more efficient than running, and we now have the ability to analyze the data and react to it. I don't know why anyone would want to fight against that, aside from nostalgia. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I never said the run game isn't important. 

 

You're projecting, and it makes me think you're entirely closed off to the possibility that your long held thinking on the 'run the ball, stop the run' principle might be wrong.

 

The game has changed, dramatically. Teams are pass happy because passing is more efficient than running, and we now have the ability to analyze the data and react to it. I don't know why anyone would want to fight against that, aside from nostalgia. 

Did you read the rest of my statement becauseI basically said and like I said yesterday I take my life experiences from playing, scouting, coaching et. al( Being a son of a NCAA football player and HS coachI have been around the game my entire life around the game)

 

     I have said more than once that I come from a Wing T background and therefore love the run game

  yes passing is efficient but also the riskiest play type in football just like the 3 pointer in basketball

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, PrincetonTiger said:

Did you read the rest of my statement becauseI basically said and like I said yesterday I take my life experiences from playing, scouting, coaching et. al( Being a son of a NCAA football player and HS coachI have been around the game my entire life around the game)

 

     I have said more than once that I come from a Wing T background and therefore love the run game

  yes passing is efficient but also the riskiest play type in football just like the 3 pointer in basketball

 

Like I said to BBZ, I have tremendous respect for your history with the game. But your history with the game doesn't outweigh the data. And your love for the run game doesn't outweigh the fact that the run game is significantly less efficient than the pass. You have a squirt gun, I have a power blaster. (By the way, efficiency includes risk analysis, turnovers, clock management, etc., and passing is still way more efficient than running.)

 

To the rest of your statement, it's obvious that the "success" of the run vs pass is highly dependent on the situation, the opponent, etc. And as I mentioned in my earlier post, I'm all about being effective on the ground and being balanced overall. I'm not opposed to the run game. I'm just opposed to inaccurate cliches about the run game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i think the running game is still pretty important.  i noticed the last two super bowl winners were both top 5 in rushing yards.  the rams were high on the list this year too

 

go back three years and the patriots finished 7th that time 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Like I said to BBZ, I have tremendous respect for your history with the game. But your history with the game doesn't outweigh the data. And your love for the run game doesn't outweigh the fact that the run game is significantly less efficient than the pass. You have a squirt gun, I have a power blaster. (By the way, efficiency includes risk analysis, turnovers, clock management, etc., and passing is still way more efficient than running.)

 

To the rest of your statement, it's obvious that the "success" of the run vs pass is highly dependent on the situation, the opponent, etc. And as I mentioned in my earlier post, I'm all about being effective on the ground and being balanced overall. I'm not opposed to the run game. I'm just opposed to inaccurate cliches about the run game.

In my world, I do not rely on stats without hard evidence and I was not given enough to outweigh my time in the film room

   BTW I took offense to the vilification of Coach Reich because he pronounced that he wants to improve the run Offense and that PA works no matter what Not that Passing is bad

3 minutes ago, aaron11 said:

i think the running game is still pretty important.  i noticed the last two super bowl winners were both top 5 in rushing yards.  this rams were high on the list this year too

 

go back three years and the patriots finished 7th that time 

A Good Run O always helps the Passing Game and visa versa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just gonna drop this here, and then I'll leave it alone: https://www.bigblueview.com/2018/8/24/17764412/having-a-smarter-conversation-about-the-run-game

 

Main takeaway from that piece, as it relates to this discussion: Defenses stack the box based on the offense's personnel, not whether the offense is effective running the ball. Against 11 personnel, the defense will have 6-7 defenders in the box 85% of the time, and will stack the box with 8 or more defenders only 7% of the time

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, PrincetonTiger said:

Did you read the rest of my statement becauseI basically said and like I said yesterday I take my life experiences from playing, scouting, coaching et. al( Being a son of a NCAA football player and HS coachI have been around the game my entire life around the game)

 

     I have said more than once that I come from a Wing T background and therefore love the run game

  yes passing is efficient but also the riskiest play type in football just like the 3 pointer in basketball

Today's NFL is not played the way you were taught during high school or college.

All the rules favor the offense and the fans do not want to see old school football. The FO of the NFL want's high scoring games, it pays the bills.

Most all the records set are being broken on a regular bases and that is what brings in new fans.

Admit it or not the NFL pays attention to the number of fantasy football players and how it effects the fan base of the NFL. Bottom line, money.

Coaches and players need the teachings you were taught and taught yourself are still needed at the high school and college level no doubt but when the NFL inters the picture it's a whole different thing.

I have much respect for coaches bringing out the talent level of players as kids and as young men. Once they are old enough for the NFL it's out of your hands.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

Today's NFL is not played the way you were taught during high school or college.

All the rules favor the offense and the fans do not want to see old school football. The FO of the NFL want's high scoring games, it pays the bills.

Most all the records set are being broken on a regular bases and that is what brings in new fans.

Admit it or not the NFL pays attention to the number of fantasy football players and how it effects the fan base of the NFL. Bottom line, money.

Coaches and players need the teachings you were taught and taught yourself are still needed at the high school and college level no doubt but when the NFL inters the picture it's a whole different thing.

I have much respect for coaches bringing out the talent level of players as kids and as young men. Once they are old enough for the NFL it's out of your hands.

 

 

I agree that why I used the days Monday thru Saturday in an earlier post and you can have both in today’s NFL and even though I use my personal experience the basic run to pass and pass to run stays the same

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, PrincetonTiger said:

I agree that why I used the days Monday thru Saturday in an earlier post and you can have both in today’s NFL and even though I use my personal experience the basic run to pass and pass to run stays the same

I think most coaches game plan to have 100-125 yds on the ground and 250 yds in the air for every game.

But when you have QBs throwing for 300-400 yds a game with 3 or 4 TDs it changes game plans quick. That is what today's NFL is all about.

Personally I have no problem with a 10-7 or 13-10 game. But that is not what most fans want so sadly we have what we have.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, crazycolt1 said:

I think most coaches game plan to have 100-125 yds on the ground and 250 yds in the air for every game.

But when you have QBs throwing for 300-400 yds a game with 3 or 4 TDs it changes game plans quick. That is what today's NFL is all about.

Personally I have no problem with a 10-7 or 13-10 game. But that is not what most fans want so sadly we have what we have.

 

Agreed 

   Game Plans can change quickly 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

Dang

 

 

he's tagged already at 20.5M, and coming out of his rookie contract, so not surprised. 

too rich for my blood.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Chloe6124 said:

Dang

 

 

Not surprised.  He has proved he is worth it.  If he was our player Ballard would have had him signed before the second tag.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, richard pallo said:

Not surprised.  He has proved he is worth it.  If he was our player Ballard would have had him signed before the second tag.  

Agreed and/or with a good contract for both sides

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, CR91 said:

 

Not sure the eagles would give any more then the colts. But he might want to stay a eagle. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, CR91 said:

 

This has got to be a draft issue. Otherwise what’s the hold up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Chloe6124 said:

This has got to be a draft issue. Otherwise what’s the hold up.

 

I doubt its a draft issue. I just think the colts don't wanna give him a multiple year deal 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Superman said:

 

The numbers bear it out. I totally respect your football knowledge and history of football watching, but you'll have to show me an analysis that refutes the data showing that teams don't stack the box against 11 personnel. Otherwise, it's just anecdotal.

 

The Rams, with a top three RB in the NFL, third in the NFL in rushing yards, third in yards/attempt, ran 11 personnel a majority of the season in 2018, and almost never faced a stacked box. This formula holds up throughout the data.

 

Just to clarify, I'm not saying that a defense doesn't need to be able to stop the run, nor am I saying that an offense shouldn't be able to run effectively. I'm saying it's a myth that having a great rushing attack makes defenses stack the box.

 

Also a point of clarification, there are absolutely coaches and players that have mastered play action, and there are teams that are better at running play action than others. But that expertise at play action is not dependent on the success of the run game. In other words, you don't have to establish the run or be a good rushing team to be effective at play action. 

 

I know a lot of this seems counter-intuitive, and contrary to fundamental football, but it's obvious if you look at these studies with an open mind.

No but a lot of times a great run game gets them to bite on Play action. I think it's about balance. You have to be able to run the ball at times. You have to have a good plan and mixture of both. It's a chess game

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if Dallas would send Lawrence here I'd gladly take his contract he is a game wrecker 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, CR91 said:

 

I doubt its a draft issue. I just think the colts don't wanna give him a multiple year deal 

Ok that’s fine. Then why not just cut ties with him. Or are they just letting it play out and letting him see if there is a multi year deal out there for him. Are they just saying here is our deal and hoping he will come back to the colts deal when there isn’t a multi year one out there. There doesn’t seem to be much interest in him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Chloe6124 said:

Ok that’s fine. Then why not just cut ties with him. Or are they just letting it play out and letting him see if there is a multi year deal out there for him. Are they just saying here is our deal and hoping he will come back to the colts deal when there isn’t a multi year one out there. There doesn’t seem to be much interest in him.

 

Colts did it with geathers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suppose Inman is hurting himself by not taking the offer if it is a one year deal. Because by not taking it the colts could draft a WR and take the offer off the table.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

If you have a twitter account, vote for the colts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

  Sounds all prepy but i have watched to much FB to buy it.

 Eberflus himself is totally commited to stopping the run on first down.
 And for those that say it is the pass that D's are worried about, you hear them complain about their team Not sticking to the run. 

 A team that can't stop the run soon gets flumoxed in all phases.

 And there are a few coaches that are great at coaching  the screen game, and some qb's are great in play action. And many struggle. 
 

I'll first say that I think you need balance on both O and D. 

That said, KC and LAR, two of the final 4 teams last year, were both on the bottom third of rush defense. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Chloe6124 said:

Wonder if the cowboys are going to try and trade Lawrence.

 

 

If you're ballard, do you bite  IF Lawerence hits the trade block?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Irish YJ said:

I'll first say that I think you need balance on both O and D. 

That said, KC and LAR, two of the final 4 teams last year, were both on the bottom third of rush defense. 

The style of D they played + the Offensive Juggernauts each had 

     

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, PrincetonTiger said:

The style of D they played + the Offensive Juggernauts each had 

     

point is, they were very out of balance against the run. but, both were very successful. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Irish YJ said:

point is, they were very out of balance against the run. but, both were very successful. 

This is one reason KC made a DC change and are switching from a 3-4 to 4-3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, csmopar said:

If you're ballard, do you bite  IF Lawerence hits the trade block?

Absolutely.  And I'm sure they would prefer to trade him to the AFC.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

 

Interesting

17 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

We would have to give up so many draft picks to get him.

That is why I would pass

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • With AD, LeBron and keeping Kuzma it is a good start. I have to see what they put around that. Kuzma is a good player. Ingram has health problems and without Ball the Lakers have no outside nonsense with daddy Ball. He was an outside soap opera distraction. Lakers still need shooting and a PG, so we will see.  
    • - Again, you're still in the minute few (and LA fans) that believe those players were equal to AD. I commend Demps for not bending to LA/Lebrons nonsense. NO literally got 1 mid-level starter, and 2 average bench players for a top-5 player. Sorry, but you're lying to yourself if you think NO benefited any from this trade. However, yes, you were right about the trade.    - What good is Kuzma when he's watching Zion eat up his minutes? There is at least some flexibility with the #4 pick that could be traded for another veteran. They could use an upgrade at SG.   - With the way LA is being built, I'd be surprised if they even make it past the Conference Finals, let alone make it to the Finals. 
    • Even though I am excited about the young WRs and even though I didn't like Grigs...I am going to have to defend him here a bit.   With Grigs there is 5 seasons of data points...Ballard only has two (because we haven't yet see how this one plays out from the WR standpoint)...so there are going to be more of these on-year WR "misses." I don't expect Ballard will continue to sign these stopgap WR types...but like Grigs...he was definitely not immune to paying money to crappy WRs.   So I don't think it's totally fair to discredit Grigs for having a "problem" with one-year WR busts...and then toss out the two that Ballard has had in his first seasons. It's been an issue for a long time.   Also...if we judge Ballard on the whole picture...we should Grigs as well. Grigs re-signed Reggie...when many thought they should move on. He signed Avery...the last good one-year WR deal (until this year hopefully). He drafted Hilton. He drafted Moncrief...who people were just as high on as they are Campbell or Cain. He brought in Chester Rogers. He made some pretty great moves...and some pretty bad ones as well.   And while we can be confident about Ballard...when it comes to WR...it's still  wait and see.     
    • Dickerson all-time is a top 5 RB ever. I have:   Jim Brown Emmitt Smith Walter Payton Barry Sanders Eric is #5.  I would take Tony Dorsett over Faulk. 1995 turned me off from Faulk. We would've won the SB had he played in 95 and he quit - BOOO. 
    • I am not a huge LeBron fan but LA is in great shape with AD and plenty of cap space. We will know more once Free Agency is over. I told you LA would get AD, I knew I would be right on that one. I thought Kuzma would be a part of it though. LA even kept Kuzma lol. When Magic offered the deal Kuzma was a part of it but Demps was dumb and didn't do the trade. Kuzma is by far better than any 4th pick they will get. There are only 3 sure picks = Zion, Ja, and RJ.
  • Members

    • esmort

      esmort 1,518

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • fanoftheteam

      fanoftheteam 11

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Colt Overseas

      Colt Overseas 468

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • PureLuck

      PureLuck 96

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • C0LT5

      C0LT5 101

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
×
×
  • Create New...