Passing efficiency, more than volume wins SBs

[chad72]

 

This is why QBs that use their legs can win by passing efficiently. If you all remember, Russell Wilson barely reached 25 attempts consistently but was very efficient with his passing and rushing that he helped the Seahawks win their SB. 

 

Yes, you have offenses like the Chiefs, Bengals and Bills with a high number of passing attempts but the success of Russell Wilson, Jalen Hurts has shown us that being efficient with your passing is far more important when you have a rushing element to your QB. So, just because a QB passes for less than 30 attempts on average, it doesn't mean they are not an efficient passer.

 

Just thought I'd share this, interesting read:

 

http://www.footballperspective.com/super-bowl-teams-and-passing-efficiency/

 

Granted, this article was in 2019. Mahomes with the #1 passing offense in terms of passing yardage, lost in the 2020 SB and won the 2022 SB.  So we saw both sides of it with Mahomes and the Chiefs. However, things revert to the norm, IMO.

[Smonroe]

Passing efficiency means moving the chains.  Moving the chains means points.  

 

Pretty simple equation.  Not so simple to accomplish.

[NewColtsFan]

42 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

This is why QBs that use their legs can win by passing efficiently. If you all remember, Russell Wilson barely reached 25 attempts consistently but was very efficient with his passing and rushing that he helped the Seahawks win their SB. 

 

Yes, you have offenses like the Chiefs, Bengals and Bills with a high number of passing attempts but the success of Russell Wilson, Jalen Hurts has shown us that being efficient with your passing is far more important when you have a rushing element to your QB. So, just because a QB passes for less than 30 attempts on average, it doesn't mean they are not an efficient passer.

 

Just thought I'd share this, interesting read:

 

http://www.footballperspective.com/super-bowl-teams-and-passing-efficiency/

 

Granted, this article was in 2019. Mahomes with the #1 passing offense in terms of passing yardage, lost in the 2020 SB and won the 2022 SB.  So we saw both sides of it with Mahomes and the Chiefs. However, things revert to the norm, IMO.

FWIW:  
 

IMO….

Mahomes and the Chiefs lost in the Super Bowl in Feb of 21 because they lost BOTH of their starting tackles in the AFC Championship game two weeks prior.   
 

Anyone remember Eric Fisher?   Torn Achilles.   The RT blew out a knee, I think.   Tough to win any game, much less a Super Bowl if BOTH of the OTs are out. 

[chad72]

23 minutes ago, Smonroe said:

Passing efficiency means moving the chains.  Moving the chains means points.  

 

Pretty simple equation.  Not so simple to accomplish.

 

Yeah, chunk plays are important but death by a thousand paper cuts, like shown by the Patriots offense over the years, is just as effective for passing efficiency. It was also shown by the Chiefs who moved it more methodically in 2022 than in previous years with Tyreek Hill around for bigger explosive plays. 

 

One thing I did notice is that as the game gets to the 4th qtr., offenses mostly have the upper hand and it is rare to see a team with OL issues win. Chiefs' OL was a Top 5 unit in 2022, and like @NewColtsFan pointed out, the OL was an issue in the 2020 SB. Saints' OL was a Top 5 unit in 2009, those storylines never change. QBs get all the credit but the OL is always more significant than anything else, which allowed teams like the Patriots and Seahawks to win SBs with no first round wideouts drafted because they gave their QB a chance with their OL, run or pass. You beat the OL, like the Saints pass rusher beats Charlie Johnson, and the Tracy Porter pick six happens. You beat the OL, like the Giants pass rushers beat the Patriots OL enough times, you give your team a big chance.

 

The end results give all the credit or blame to the QB while not noticing the OL significance. Ballard is not far off when he says the trenches always give you a chance but the QB puts you over the hump with the trenches providing what I call is the stalemate base, that is how it ends up typically. It has played out at the biggest games consistently.

[csmopar]

31 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

Yeah, chunk plays are important but death by a thousand paper cuts, like shown by the Patriots offense over the years, is just as effective for passing efficiency. It was also shown by the Chiefs who moved it more methodically in 2022 than in previous years with Tyreek Hill around for bigger explosive plays. 

 

One thing I did notice is that as the game gets to the 4th qtr., offenses mostly have the upper hand and it is rare to see a team with OL issues win. Chiefs' OL was a Top 5 unit in 2022, and like @NewColtsFan pointed out, the OL was an issue in the 2020 SB. Saints' OL was a Top 5 unit in 2009, those storylines never change. QBs get all the credit but the OL is always more significant than anything else, which allowed teams like the Patriots and Seahawks to win SBs with no first round wideouts drafted because they gave their QB a chance with their OL, run or pass. You beat the OL, like the Saints pass rusher beats Charlie Johnson, and the Tracy Porter pick six happens. You beat the OL, like the Giants pass rushers beat the Patriots OL enough times, you give your team a big chance.

 

The end results give all the credit or blame to the QB while not noticing the OL significance. Ballard is not far off when he says the trenches always give you a chance but the QB puts you over the hump with the trenches providing what I call is the stalemate base, that is how it ends up typically. It has played out at the biggest games consistently.

I would add that it took YEARS for KC to fight the right formula. Alex Smith was solid for them for years while they got all the pieces that finally landed them with a chance to plug a QB like Mahomes in and have a chance to succeed 

[chad72]

32 minutes ago, csmopar said:

I would add that it took YEARS for KC to fight the right formula. Alex Smith was solid for them for years while they got all the pieces that finally landed them with a chance to plug a QB like Mahomes in and have a chance to succeed 

 

Yes, you first need to get that high floor of division winner enough times and when you have the very good to elite QB, you then have a chance every year to take the next step to make it to the big dance.

[DougDew]

2 hours ago, chad72 said:

This is why QBs that use their legs can win by passing efficiently. If you all remember, Russell Wilson barely reached 25 attempts consistently but was very efficient with his passing and rushing that he helped the Seahawks win their SB. 

 

Yes, you have offenses like the Chiefs, Bengals and Bills with a high number of passing attempts but the success of Russell Wilson, Jalen Hurts has shown us that being efficient with your passing is far more important when you have a rushing element to your QB.

Why is it more successful to have that rushing element come from the QBs legs and not the RBs legs?    Be an efficient passing team, but have the QB turn around and hand the ball off to the RB, like QBs are supposed to do,  instead of running it himself.

 

With salary cap structure and the devaluation of the RB from a compensation amount, it seems smarter to split up the roles between two players rather than having one injury risk super star ball-hog.

 

You can find other guys to run the ball.  You only have one guy that can throw it.

 

Seems like there are a lot of data aggregators out there supplying data to support the idea that running QBs are just as good as passing QBs.  I wonder why they want to go through so much trouble.

[Gigc]

In the past several years we've seen the QB theory/philosophy pendulum swing wildly from wanting pure pocket passers like Peyton and Brady to dudes who are not only great athletes but who wanna run. While this adds a new offensive threat to spread and rpo offenses, I still think the pendulum is going to swing back. No matter how great an athlete these new generation QBs are, life expectancy for runners is short. And I think that's going to hold true for QBs. 

hard to build a team around a QB whose career is shortened after 6-7 years. That's small Super Bowl window. Look at us. Right now we should be enjoying Luck pushing us toward a world championship. And we're starting over from scratch.

It's great to be able to run. But I don't like it as a staple of a long-running offense.

[coming on strong]

4 hours ago, chad72 said:

 

This is why QBs that use their legs can win by passing efficiently. If you all remember, Russell Wilson barely reached 25 attempts consistently but was very efficient with his passing and rushing that he helped the Seahawks win their SB. 

 

Yes, you have offenses like the Chiefs, Bengals and Bills with a high number of passing attempts but the success of Russell Wilson, Jalen Hurts has shown us that being efficient with your passing is far more important when you have a rushing element to your QB. So, just because a QB passes for less than 30 attempts on average, it doesn't mean they are not an efficient passer.

 

Just thought I'd share this, interesting read:

 

http://www.footballperspective.com/super-bowl-teams-and-passing-efficiency/

 

Granted, this article was in 2019. Mahomes with the #1 passing offense in terms of passing yardage, lost in the 2020 SB and won the 2022 SB.  So we saw both sides of it with Mahomes and the Chiefs. However, things revert to the norm, IMO.

i dont think russell wilson is the best example because the seahawks defense was one of the greatest of all time .   they held manning to 8 points and scored a touchdown on defense .   special teams and defense scored 16 points while holding the broncos to 8  . wilson didnt have to do anything but take a knee every play and they still win .

 

if it was just about being a efficient passer i would think game managers would be winning super bowls non stop .   the trend seems to be good QB play to win super bowls with tom brady and mahomes winning 6 in the last ten years .      the broncos and seahawks are the only exceptions and they had elite all time great defenses .   even nick foles went off for almost 400 yards for the eagles to win a super bowl  .    matt stafford  had a great year and good QB play  carried the rams over the top almost averaging 300 yards a playoff game .     even the ravens got flacco to put up huge numbers in the playoffs .     

 

to me the trend of super winners shows you need solid passing volume at some point in the playoffs to win .    hurts proved in the super bowl he can put up volume stats .   to win a super bowl with a low volume passer you need a great defense and run game or it doesnt work .  

[chad72]

1 hour ago, coming on strong said:

 to win a super bowl with a low volume passer you need a great defense and run game or it doesnt work .  

You need a good defense and run game but not a great one. Mahomes just won a SB attempting 27 passes and completing 21 for 3 TD passes for 182 yards. That’s efficient for me. Chiefs D and run game did just enough but weren’t world beaters.

 

Broncos and Seahawks were exceptional Ds, no doubt but there was timely passing from RW and Peyton during the playoff runs.
 

 

[AwesomeAustin]

I think the common ground will be QBs that are athletic pocket passers.  Ones that can work from the pocket but also extend plays and pick up the first down on 3rd and 7 with their feet.  I do not see running QBs as the future for the NFL.  Lamar Jackson is a great example.  He is a very good QB but has injury concerns.  Part of it is wanting fully guaranteed contract and the other is teams know he won’t make it another 5 years playing the way he plays at a high level. Cam Newton was a great QB but when his athleticism was basically pounded out of him by the hits he took…he was done. Teams will eventually move on from this type of QB bc the 2nd contract will handcuff the team when the injuries begin.
 

 Mahomes, Burrow, Herbert, Lawerence etc are the future of the league. You have to be able to read a defense and make plays with your arm.  The running QB will be seen as an exciting effective but temporary period in the nfl.  Eventually it will mostly return to what we have known.  Pocket passers but with very good athleticism for the first half of their careers. 

[stitches]

7 hours ago, DougDew said:

Why is it more successful to have that rushing element come from the QBs legs and not the RBs legs?    Be an efficient passing team, but have the QB turn around and hand the ball off to the RB, like QBs are supposed to do,  instead of running it himself.

 

With salary cap structure and the devaluation of the RB from a compensation amount, it seems smarter to split up the roles between two players rather than having one injury risk super star ball-hog.

 

You can find other guys to run the ball.  You only have one guy that can throw it.

I'm not sure where I saw this, but I saw last week some stat that said running QBs are not getting any more injured than pocket QBs. The true differentiating factor is how much you are getting hit, not how much you are running. For example, even with Lamar, if you look at his last 2 season ending injuries - both of them happened when defenders landed on his feet... on pass play, not on run plays! 

7 hours ago, DougDew said:

Seems like there are a lot of data aggregators out there supplying data to support the idea that running QBs are just as good as passing QBs.  I wonder why they want to go through so much trouble.

That's some really weird conspiratorial thinking here... There are running QBs throughout the whole spectrum from great(Josh Allen) to average(Daniel Jones) to bad (Marcus Mariota, Trey Lance?) and anything in between... just like there are passing QBs throughout the whole spectrum. 

[stitches]

On the topic at hand... this reminds me of what Steichen said in his intro presser - "Throw to score, run to win the game". If you run an efficient passing offense, you are likely going to be playing with the lead for a lot of the game, and at the end you run the ball to drain clock/win the game... which reduces the passing volume. 

 

I wonder if there is any correlation between passing volume in game neutral situations(while the game is close and there is a lot of time to be played, normal downs, i.e. it's not 3d or 4th and 1) and winning? 

[jbaron04]

16 hours ago, Smonroe said:

Passing efficiency means moving the chains.  Moving the chains means points.  

 

Pretty simple equation.  Not so simple to accomplish.

If you remember what Frank said a QB scramble picking up a first down is one of the Highest graded things with QBR etc… 2-3 a game is the difference as we all no being colts fans getting our zones broken by a I’ll advised scramble by tanehill or one of them guys

[jbaron04]

10 hours ago, AwesomeAustin said:

I think the common ground will be QBs that are athletic pocket passers.  Ones that can work from the pocket but also extend plays and pick up the first down on 3rd and 7 with their feet.  I do not see running QBs as the future for the NFL.  Lamar Jackson is a great example.  He is a very good QB but has injury concerns.  Part of it is wanting fully guaranteed contract and the other is teams know he won’t make it another 5 years playing the way he plays at a high level. Cam Newton was a great QB but when his athleticism was basically pounded out of him by the hits he took…he was done. Teams will eventually move on from this type of QB bc the 2nd contract will handcuff the team when the injuries begin.
 

 Mahomes, Burrow, Herbert, Lawerence etc are the future of the league. You have to be able to read a defense and make plays with your arm.  The running QB will be seen as an exciting effective but temporary period in the nfl.  Eventually it will mostly return to what we have known.  Pocket passers but with very good athleticism for the first half of their careers. 

I think what killed cam was the shoulder injury you are never the same after one of them. 

[chad72]

23 minutes ago, jbaron04 said:

I think what killed cam was the shoulder injury you are never the same after one of them. 

 

That is what folks are afraid of with Lamar, any injury close to the knee can take away that elite ability of his as a rusher for him to dip into that well too much. Yes, it was a business decision he made not to be in the playoffs but it was also a health decision grounded in reality that any pats in the back for him playing in the playoffs with a less than healthy PCL could have been at the cost of his NFL future. 

 

That is why the Chiefs haven't tried a QB sneak since 2020 for Mahomes when his patella turned sideways and led to his first few missed games of his career. Teams and OCs/HCs have a responsibility as well to prolong the careers of their star QBs.

[DougDew]

8 hours ago, stitches said:

I'm not sure where I saw this, but I saw last week some stat that said running QBs are not getting any more injured than pocket QBs. The true differentiating factor is how much you are getting hit, not how much you are running. For example, even with Lamar, if you look at his last 2 season ending injuries - both of them happened when defenders landed on his feet... on pass play, not on run plays! 

That's some really weird conspiratorial thinking here... There are running QBs throughout the whole spectrum from great(Josh Allen) to average(Daniel Jones) to bad (Marcus Mariota, Trey Lance?) and anything in between... just like there are passing QBs throughout the whole spectrum. 

You're missing the point of how this entire metric of passing efficiency is being looked at.  

 

Rushing yards are measured by yards on scrambles (and sacks) as well as designed running plays.   The only reason we are lumping those rushing yards into one particular player's accomplishments ....and not spreading out those rushing yards over more ball carriers ...is to measure the impact that one particular player has.   A fine thing to do if you want to glorify that one player.

 

But if you look at how football games are won with a rushing yards and efficient passing, it doesn't matter how many different players earn those yards (provided they are good football players).

 

A QB accounts for 100% of the passing yards...by definition... and now in modern times, some account for about 70%? of the rushing yards via scrambles (which are often the result of failed pass attempts or a dumbed-down first-read then Go offense).  That is the equivalent of a basketball ball-hog who dribbles, drives and shoots, and shoots three pointers nearly every play.

 

So , yeah, if you want to tout Alan Iverson to the sports fans who like that kind of thing, go ahead and trade for him so you can have his stats and his impact on his team....and you can justify the contract.  But another team doesn't need all of those dribbling, driving, and shooting stats concentrated into one player in order to have a great offense. 

 

So it depends upon what the fan/media values...individual heros, or overall team results.  The hero stuff is simple to look at.  The team results is more complex to appreciate.  Cater to your fan base.  And maybe the football fan base is looking at football players the same way basketball fans appreciated Allen Iverson, Michael Jordan, and to an extent Larry Bird (who didn't score every way possible)

[throwing BBZ]

15 hours ago, DougDew said:

Why is it more successful to have that rushing element come from the QBs legs and not the RBs legs?    Be an efficient passing team, but have the QB turn around and hand the ball off to the RB, like QBs are supposed to do,  instead of running it himself.

 

With salary cap structure and the devaluation of the RB from a compensation amount, it seems smarter to split up the roles between two players rather than having one injury risk super star ball-hog.

 

You can find other guys to run the ball.  You only have one guy that can throw it.

 

Seems like there are a lot of data aggregators out there supplying data to support the idea that running QBs are just as good as passing QBs.  I wonder why they want to go through so much trouble.

 

 Seems you are looking to argue about quarterbacks who run called plays against those who run when opportunity knocks. Then not separating between the value of having a QB that is fast compared to a Brady type.

 A "running QB" that can get that 10 yd 1st down run 3 times a game without getting killed doing it is a big deal and a real threat to a D.

 Why having QB's that are fast enough runners running it effectively, because running backs can't wait for the pass play to break down and the D to spread out. 

 Lamar, Justin Fields, no thanks. I suppose this type of QB/athlete will become more common. Baltimore made a amazing and very risky offer if true of 3 years $135M Fully guaranteed. He should run to the bank with it when negotiating time runs out.

 

[DougDew]

18 minutes ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

 Seems you are looking to argue about quarterbacks who run called plays against those who run when opportunity knocks. Then not separating between the value of having a QB that is fast compared to a Brady type.

 A "running QB" that can get that 10 yd 1st down run 3 times a game without getting killed doing it is a big deal and a real threat to a D.

 Why having QB's that are fast enough runners running it effectively, because running backs can't wait for the pass play to break down and the D to spread out. 

 Lamar, Justin Fields, no thanks. I suppose this type of QB/athlete will become more common. Baltimore made a amazing and very risky offer if true of 3 years $135M Fully guaranteed. He should run to the bank with it when negotiating time runs out.

 

I'm simply talking about where the rushing yards come from as being an alternative to, or a set up for, the passing game.  Since rushing yards were presented as being a part of an efficient passing game (which they are and always have been).

 

Some seem to arguing FOR the running QB when it doesn't matter where the rushing yards come from, IMO.

 

If someone just enjoys watching the football version of Alan Iverson make all of the good offensive plays for their team, be my guest.

[sb41champs]

20 hours ago, chad72 said:

 

This is why QBs that use their legs can win by passing efficiently. If you all remember, Russell Wilson barely reached 25 attempts consistently but was very efficient with his passing and rushing that he helped the Seahawks win their SB. 

 

Yes, you have offenses like the Chiefs, Bengals and Bills with a high number of passing attempts but the success of Russell Wilson, Jalen Hurts has shown us that being efficient with your passing is far more important when you have a rushing element to your QB. So, just because a QB passes for less than 30 attempts on average, it doesn't mean they are not an efficient passer.

 

Just thought I'd share this, interesting read:

 

http://www.footballperspective.com/super-bowl-teams-and-passing-efficiency/

 

Granted, this article was in 2019. Mahomes with the #1 passing offense in terms of passing yardage, lost in the 2020 SB and won the 2022 SB.  So we saw both sides of it with Mahomes and the Chiefs. However, things revert to the norm, IMO.

I concur.

[jbaron04]

3 hours ago, chad72 said:

 

That is what folks are afraid of with Lamar, any injury close to the knee can take away that elite ability of his as a rusher for him to dip into that well too much. Yes, it was a business decision he made not to be in the playoffs but it was also a health decision grounded in reality that any pats in the back for him playing in the playoffs with a less than healthy PCL could have been at the cost of his NFL future. 

 

That is why the Chiefs haven't tried a QB sneak since 2020 for Mahomes when his patella turned sideways and led to his first few missed games of his career. Teams and OCs/HCs have a responsibility as well to prolong the careers of their star QBs.

That reminds me of how the Washington (RS) commanders ran rg3 to the ground and made him play on a bad knee and end up ending his career 

[crazycolt1]

15 hours ago, jbaron04 said:

That reminds me of how the Washington (RS) commanders ran rg3 to the ground and made him play on a bad knee and end up ending his career 

That was Mike Shanahan.  He did the same thing to Terrell Davis when he coached the Broncos.  

[Moosejawcolt]

On 3/29/2023 at 3:26 PM, NewColtsFan said:

FWIW:  
 

IMO….

Mahomes and the Chiefs lost in the Super Bowl in Feb of 21 because they lost BOTH of their starting tackles in the AFC Championship game two weeks prior.   
 

Anyone remember Eric Fisher?   Torn Achilles.   The RT blew out a knee, I think.   Tough to win any game, much less a Super Bowl if BOTH of the OTs are out. 

Even thr great ones need a stable Oline