Stop running the ball

[Sportster 72]

Weird how there are no studies saying teams should run more....

There are plenty of things that talk about the positives of running the ball effectively. You have decided you don't agree so you only look to support your theories. The answer lies somewhere in between which I have said to my many times. Yes, todays game features a lot more passing, the rules made that possible. There is still good reason to run the ball effectively.

 

[ehb5]

There are plenty of things that talk about the positives of running the ball effectively. You have decided you don't agree so you only look to support your theories. The answer lies somewhere in between which I have said to my many times. Yes, todays game features a lot more passing, the rules made that possible. There is still good reason to run the ball effectively.

I didnt make up my mind. Im just following the data and its pretty clear what it says.

 

[skinsdad62]

Weird how there are no studies saying teams should run more....

doesnt matter does it ?

 

[ehb5]

doesnt matter does it ?

What?

 

[Sportster 72]

I believe dad's point is you are blinded by your own opinion which is the same thing I said. I pointed out several times not only why but showed you were people who coach and play the game say you are wrong about the run and you blew them off as not knowing what they are talking about. Then you go find some article by some IT guy and tell it is gospel. Or we are all old and don't understand the modern game.

 

[skinsdad62]

What?

it doesnt matter if there are studies or not does it

on the filed it was 182 yds , the eagles had 100 yds rushing and 117 passing

2 examples , 2 wins and let not forget the eagles were a top rushing team while winning it all last season

so does it matter if there is a study recommending running ?

you need some sort of balance to account for changing game conditions

 

[ehb5]

it doesnt matter if there are studies or not does it

on the filed it was 182 yds , the eagles had 100 yds rushing and 117 passing

2 examples , 2 wins and let not forget the eagles were a top rushing team while winning it all last season

so does it matter if there is a study recommending running ?

you need some sort of balance to account for changing game conditions

Yes it literally does matter.

How would 2 examples (that dont even show what you think they show) be more important than the data as a whole? How does that make any sense?

Where do you think the data comes from?? Its from the field!!

What happens on the field shows passing to be far more valuable. Thats literally the entire point. There are no examples you cant point to that change that fact.

 

[ehb5]

I believe dad's point is you are blinded by your own opinion which is the same thing I said. I pointed out several times not only why but showed you were people who coach and play the game say you are wrong about the run and you blew them off as not knowing what they are talking about. Then you go find some article by some IT guy and tell it is gospel. Or we are all old and don't understand the modern game.

I think you grew up being taught the game was one way and it turned out to not be that way. You see the same thing happen to older coaches and players in baseball and basketball. Its tough to adjust and realize a lot of pre analytics decision making was subpar. I'll probably do that when i'm old too though lol. I get it.

But the fact is the data is by far the closest thing to objective truth. If the data showed running was better id be ranting about how we should be running more. Theres no blinded by opinion. My opinion comes FROM the data not before it. Yours clearly comes before the data. So who is blinded by opinion?

 

[Sportster 72]

I think you grew up being taught the game was one way and it turned out to not be that way. You see the same thing happen to older coaches and players in baseball and basketball. Its tough to adjust and realize a lot of pre analytics decision making was subpar. I'll probably do that when i'm old too though lol. I get it.

But the fact is the data is by far the closest thing to objective truth. If the data showed running was better id be ranting about how we should be running more. Theres no blinded by opinion. My opinion comes FROM the data not before it. Yours clearly comes before the data. So who is blinded by opinion?

Data:
Atlanta - 251 yards passing; 74 yards rushing
Philadelphia - 119 yards passing; 113 yards rushing
Winner - Philadelphia

Oakland - 303 yards passing; 95 yards rushing
Rams - 233 yards passing; 140 yards rushing
Winner - Los Angeles

Detroit - 300 yards passing; 39 yards rushing
NY Jets - 198 yards passing; 169 yards rushing
Winner - NY Jets

Indianapolis - 319 yards passing; 75 yards rushing
Cincinnati - 243 yards passing; 101 yards rushing
Winner - Cincinnati

New Orleans - 439 yards passing; 43 yards rushing
Tampa Bay - 417 yards passing; 112 yards rushing

So I cherry picked, but there were more where the team that ran the ball better won. Saints vs. Bucs they both aired it out but the better running team won.

I am not against analytics. It has a place in the game, before some IT guy came up with "analytics" they did something called "scouting" … old timey analytics. Most yards in any game are going to come through the air. That hasn't changed since the days I started watching football.

I was also young once. Not quite Sammy Baugh era but Unitas, Jurgensen, Starr etc. Jim Brown, Franco, Gale Sayers, Paul Horning and Jim Taylor. Funny thing is TOP, controlling the ball meant something. They meant something in the Joe Gibbs era when I was middle aged (you know 30ish.)I also remember being head strong and thinking I knew more than old people. Now I am not head strong …. wait, scratch that. I am still head strong. The point is sure everything advances and there are new strategies but that doesn't mean the old ones don't work at all.

I rest my case with this. Back when there were only 3 digits in the current year men used catapults to throw large flaming stones at castle walls. Now we have laser guided bombs and missiles. 1,000 plus years later bombing is still a technique used by men in war.

 

[SoCalWizFan]

I believe dad's point is you are blinded by your own opinion which is the same thing I said. I pointed out several times not only why but showed you were people who coach and play the game say you are wrong about the run and you blew them off as not knowing what they are talking about. Then you go find some article by some IT guy and tell it is gospel. Or we are all old and don't understand the modern game.

Yep - probably like perhaps some of us don't understand millennials in the workplace & need this type of training.

 

[gkekoa]

I think you grew up being taught the game was one way and it turned out to not be that way. You see the same thing happen to older coaches and players in baseball and basketball. Its tough to adjust and realize a lot of pre analytics decision making was subpar. I'll probably do that when i'm old too though lol. I get it.

But the fact is the data is by far the closest thing to objective truth. If the data showed running was better id be ranting about how we should be running more. Theres no blinded by opinion. My opinion comes FROM the data not before it. Yours clearly comes before the data. So who is blinded by opinion?

Well sonny...you gotta stop trying to teach these old timers to listen to science...

Damn young whippersnapper.

 

[skinsdad62]

Yes it literally does matter.

How would 2 examples (that dont even show what you think they show) be more important than the data as a whole? How does that make any sense?

Where do you think the data comes from?? Its from the field!!

What happens on the field shows passing to be far more valuable. Thats literally the entire point. There are no examples you cant point to that change that fact.

there are many more examples of this as i have listed above and i dont have the time or inclination to dig them up so you can be closed minded about it again

 

[ehb5]

Data:
Atlanta - 251 yards passing; 74 yards rushing
Philadelphia - 119 yards passing; 113 yards rushing
Winner - Philadelphia

Oakland - 303 yards passing; 95 yards rushing
Rams - 233 yards passing; 140 yards rushing
Winner - Los Angeles

Detroit - 300 yards passing; 39 yards rushing
NY Jets - 198 yards passing; 169 yards rushing
Winner - NY Jets

Indianapolis - 319 yards passing; 75 yards rushing
Cincinnati - 243 yards passing; 101 yards rushing
Winner - Cincinnati

New Orleans - 439 yards passing; 43 yards rushing
Tampa Bay - 417 yards passing; 112 yards rushing

So I cherry picked, but there were more where the team that ran the ball better won. Saints vs. Bucs they both aired it out but the better running team won.

I am not against analytics. It has a place in the game, before some IT guy came up with "analytics" they did something called "scouting" … old timey analytics. Most yards in any game are going to come through the air. That hasn't changed since the days I started watching football.

I was also young once. Not quite Sammy Baugh era but Unitas, Jurgensen, Starr etc. Jim Brown, Franco, Gale Sayers, Paul Horning and Jim Taylor. Funny thing is TOP, controlling the ball meant something. They meant something in the Joe Gibbs era when I was middle aged (you know 30ish.)I also remember being head strong and thinking I knew more than old people. Now I am not head strong …. wait, scratch that. I am still head strong. The point is sure everything advances and there are new strategies but that doesn't mean the old ones don't work at all.

I rest my case with this. Back when there were only 3 digits in the current year men used catapults to throw large flaming stones at castle walls. Now we have laser guided bombs and missiles. 1,000 plus years later bombing is still a technique used by men in war.

So several things.

1. Those teams all had more passing yards than rushing.

2. All those teams won. What do you do if you're winning in the 2nd half? You run out the clock. The running is usually the result of the winning not the cause.

3. Even if those games showed in a small sample what you are claiming they show (which they dont).... it wouldn't matter. All the games like that are ALREADY in the data set that shows passing as far more effective.

You could go back to week X of last season where team Y beat team Z 49-0 thanks to 800 rushing yards and it wouldn't change anything because thats already been accounted for.

If you took every game where the running game was a huge positive factor and put them all together... they are easily outweighed by the passing game. THATS what the data is showing. The awesome running games are being measured already and they still come out behind.

And of course not all the old strategies are bad. Dunks and layups are still awesome in basketball. Play action passing and defense are still important in football. Home runs and strikeouts are still important in baseball.

But now we know that 3 pointers dominate the NBA, passing dominates the nfl, and obp is hugely important in baseball. And the people who and coaches who realize that and incorporate those new findings into the things that you smart old guys realized years ago (and have been in many cases proven right by analytics) are the ones who win.

 

[ehb5]

Yep - probably like perhaps some of us don't understand millennials in the workplace & need this type of training.

Wait...so the millenial is the one ignoring the data in the video?? Are skinsdad and sportster secretly millenials?!

 

[ehb5]

there are many more examples of this as i have listed above and i dont have the time or inclination to dig them up so you can be closed minded about it again

It literally does not matter how many examples you have. EVERY example you have has already been factored into the data that shows passing as far more valuable.

I don't understand how you think posting a handful of games would outweigh posting a study based on hundreds of games.

And wouldnt it be more closed minded to refuse to admit you may be wrong in the face of extensive data and research?

 

[Kevin12773]

You guys will argue about everything and anything.

 

[skinsdad62]

It literally does not matter how many examples you have. EVERY example you have has already been factored into the data that shows passing as far more valuable.

I don't understand how you think posting a handful of games would outweigh posting a study based on hundreds of games.

And wouldnt it be more closed minded to refuse to admit you may be wrong in the face of extensive data and research?

i honestly dont buy that 2 games played this weekend were factored in . the team that won the championship was a top rushing team

 

[skinsdad62]

i tell you what ebb , you go buy a football team and pass on every down and see what that gets you

 

[ehb5]

i honestly dont buy that 2 games played this weekend were factored in . the team that won the championship was a top rushing team

So you think that those 2 games wouldve changed the data?

 

[ehb5]

i tell you what ebb , you go buy a football team and pass on every down and see what that gets you

Id buy the world's best analytics department thats for sure.