Finding the Winning Factors - Yards per Carry

by mgrex03 on Apr 23, 2009 11:52 PM EDT in Winning Stats Comment 33 comments

This week in the Finding the Winning Factors series, let's take a look at a very conventional stat: Yards per Carry. Everyone uses this stat to show how well a running game is, so let's find out if all the "experts" are right. Here's the (simple) formula:

Rushing Yards / Rushing Attempts

I went back to 2001 to see how teams do. That means I'll be looking at 4,080 games over the past 8 years. I did this calculation for every game, then found the overall average for a game. I then went back and compared every game to this average, and found wins/losses based on being above or below average.

Let's get to the numbers:

The Overall Average over the past 8 years is 4.13 Yds/Carry. I figured it to be over 4, so this seems about right.
I've finally found a stat that the Colts were not #1 in, as they finished 26th at 3.89 Yds/Carry. Yikes. But guess what? The Colts are still better than the Patriots (barely). So who was #1 in the NFL? The Vikings at 4.64 Yds/Carry. That's pretty good, and makes sense that it would be the Vikings.
Defensively, the Ravens are #1 (again) at 3.45 Yds/Carry. The Cowboys finishing 4th surprises me a little. Who knew they stopped the run so well? How about the Colts? 30th at 4.49 Yds/Carry. Only the Rams and Chiefs have been worse. But we knew all this already. The Colts really haven't stopped the run.
Now the important stuff: How often do teams win when they are Above Average on Offense? 955-855-2, which is 52.8%. This is the worst stat so far. Who'd have thought that? Having an Above Average defense produces a record of 1184-1082-2, which is 52.2%, pretty much the same as the offense. Anyone else like this, because I sure don't.
When both the Offense and Defense are Above Average, their record is 548-448, or 55.0%. This is not much better than just one side of the ball, and the worst we've seen so far (RB Success Rate was 59%)
The best game since 2001? Week 12 in 2008, where the Chiefs averaged huge 12.23 Yds/Carry against the Bills. Guess what? The Chiefs lost 54-31. That game that was the lowest of the low in 2006? 6th best game at 8.93 Yds/Carry. Unfortunately for the Colts, the defense was in 3 of the top 5 games, and 5 of the top 11. Best game for the Colts offense? Week 15 in 2001 against the Jets (29-28 loss), when they had 7.39 Yds/Carry.
The worst game since 2001? Week 10 in 2007, where the Lions averaged -2.25 Yds/Carry against the Cardinals. That is 8 carries, -18 yards. The Lions had the 2nd worst game as well, at -0.30 Yds/Carry. These were the only 2 games that had negative yards per carry.
The only team that had less games where both sides were above average than the Colts was the Texans, and they had 1 less season. Needless to say, the Colts didn't have this happen very often. On the flip side, they had the most games where both sides were below average at almost 6 games per season. But as we've seen, it really didn't matter in terms of wins.
When the Colts defense was Above Average (held teams under 4.1 Yds/Carry), they had the best record in the league, winning 77.4% of the time. This is slightly better than the offense when they are above average, as they won 73.9% of the time, good for 3rd best in the league.

So what did we learn today? You shouldn't use Yards per Carry if you want to predict football games. This further lends credence that a Above Average passing game is much more valuable than an Above Average running game.

After the jump you'll see the offensive and defensive numbers for each team, as well as Win/Loss records when going above/below the league average. Click on the headers to sort. Here's a link to the last 5 years worth of data. There's not much of a difference, especially since it only took out 3 years worth of data.

Here are the Offensive and Defensive Numbers...

Team	Offense			Defense
Team	Rush Yds	Rush Atts	Yds/Carry	Rush Yds	Rush Atts	Yds/Carry
Vikings	16541	3565	4.64	13091	3253	4.02
Falcons	18199	3934	4.63	15786	3554	4.44
Broncos	17615	3861	4.56	13893	3321	4.18
Giants	16146	3616	4.47	14012	3510	3.99
Chargers	16578	3736	4.44	13083	3329	3.93
Chiefs	16187	3648	4.44	16515	3596	4.59
Eagles	14739	3323	4.44	14540	3564	4.08
Jaguars	16277	3717	4.38	13344	3507	3.80
49ers	15153	3531	4.29	14281	3613	3.95
Seahawks	15547	3670	4.24	15034	3575	4.21
Packers	14509	3463	4.19	14933	3468	4.31
Rams	13068	3176	4.11	16173	3586	4.51
Jets	14466	3524	4.10	15930	3813	4.18
Redskins	15621	3816	4.09	14010	3534	3.96
Steelers	16915	4144	4.08	11120	3065	3.63
Raiders	13494	3336	4.04	17045	3975	4.29
Cowboys	14969	3705	4.04	13326	3417	3.90
Dolphins	14349	3558	4.03	14552	3713	3.92
Titans	15287	3802	4.02	13254	3267	4.06
Ravens	15754	3919	4.02	11771	3407	3.45
Saints	13586	3382	4.02	15939	3621	4.40
Bills	13621	3439	3.96	15864	3741	4.24
Bengals	13883	3515	3.95	15485	3702	4.18
Panthers	14230	3615	3.94	14465	3638	3.98
Lions	11210	2876	3.90	16344	3874	4.22
Colts	13519	3472	3.89	16331	3634	4.49
Patriots	14650	3767	3.89	13440	3302	4.07
Texans	11815	3043	3.88	14348	3267	4.39
Buccaneers	13123	3396	3.86	14044	3586	3.92
Browns	12637	3291	3.84	17694	4008	4.41
Bears	13493	3578	3.77	13994	3558	3.93
Cardinals	11573	3212	3.60	15113	3632	4.16
Total	468754	113630	4.13	468754	113630	4.13

Here are the Win/Loss records of teams when they go above/below average:

Team	Offense								Defense
	Above Average				Below Average				Above Average				Below Average
	Win	Loss	Tie	Pct	Win	Loss	Tie	Pct	Win	Loss	Tie	Pct	Win	Loss	Tie	Pct
Patriots	38	13	0	0.745	59	18	0	0.766	56	19	0	0.747	41	12	0	0.774
Steelers	44	10	1	0.809	41	32	0	0.562	60	28	0	0.682	25	14	1	0.638
Colts	34	12	0	0.739	57	25	0	0.695	41	12	0	0.774	50	25	0	0.667
Chargers	37	25	0	0.597	34	32	0	0.515	44	36	0	0.550	27	21	0	0.563
Packers	35	24	0	0.593	40	29	0	0.580	37	22	0	0.627	38	31	0	0.551
Cowboys	32	24	0	0.571	34	38	0	0.472	44	38	0	0.537	22	24	0	0.478
Eagles	48	23	0	0.676	33	23	1	0.588	39	31	1	0.556	42	15	0	0.737
Ravens	26	24	0	0.520	45	33	0	0.577	47	48	0	0.495	24	9	0	0.727
Seahawks	39	25	0	0.609	32	32	0	0.500	42	26	0	0.618	29	31	0	0.483
Jets	29	23	0	0.558	33	43	0	0.434	35	35	0	0.500	27	31	0	0.466
Broncos	47	29	0	0.618	27	25	0	0.519	40	29	0	0.580	34	25	0	0.576
Rams	34	24	0	0.586	26	44	0	0.371	28	28	0	0.500	32	40	0	0.444
Dolphins	31	27	0	0.534	30	40	0	0.429	38	41	0	0.481	23	26	0	0.469
Panthers	27	22	0	0.551	37	42	0	0.468	45	38	0	0.542	19	26	0	0.422
Bears	21	19	0	0.525	48	40	0	0.545	42	32	0	0.568	28	26	0	0.519
Giants	37	35	0	0.514	31	25	0	0.554	39	37	0	0.513	29	23	0	0.558
Titans	28	23	0	0.549	42	35	0	0.545	43	26	0	0.623	27	32	0	0.458
Falcons	37	37	1	0.500	25	28	0	0.472	29	27	0	0.518	33	38	1	0.465
Buccaneers	26	21	0	0.553	40	41	0	0.494	45	42	0	0.517	21	20	0	0.512
Saints	25	23	0	0.521	35	45	0	0.438	29	33	0	0.468	31	35	0	0.470
Chiefs	34	39	0	0.466	25	30	0	0.455	30	24	0	0.556	29	45	0	0.392
Vikings	37	41	0	0.474	24	26	0	0.480	39	37	0	0.513	22	30	0	0.423
Bills	20	35	0	0.364	32	41	0	0.438	26	39	0	0.400	26	37	0	0.413
Jaguars	32	39	0	0.451	30	27	0	0.526	42	41	0	0.506	20	25	0	0.444
Browns	18	26	0	0.409	31	53	0	0.369	24	39	0	0.381	25	40	0	0.385
49ers	30	34	0	0.469	23	41	0	0.359	33	42	0	0.440	21	32	0	0.396
Bengals	26	29	0	0.473	28	44	1	0.390	32	38	1	0.458	22	35	0	0.386
Redskins	27	27	0	0.500	31	43	0	0.419	40	34	0	0.541	18	36	0	0.333
Cardinals	12	25	0	0.324	37	54	0	0.407	32	38	0	0.457	17	41	0	0.293
Raiders	19	34	0	0.358	26	49	0	0.347	26	37	0	0.413	19	46	0	0.292
Texans	11	26	0	0.297	29	46	0	0.387	14	36	0	0.280	26	36	0	0.419
Lions	14	37	0	0.275	17	60	0	0.221	23	49	0	0.319	8	48	0	0.143
Total	955	855	2	0.528	1082	1184	2	0.478	1184	1082	2	0.522	855	955	2	0.472

And finally, Win/Loss records when the offense is above average, and the defense holds the other team below average

Team	Above Average				Below Average
Team	Win	Loss	Tie	Pct	Win	Loss	Tie	Pct
Patriots	23	8	0	0.742	26	7	0	0.788
Steelers	28	7	0	0.800	9	11	0	0.450
Jets	15	12	0	0.556	13	20	0	0.394
Packers	18	8	0	0.692	21	15	0	0.583
Falcons	17	16	0	0.515	13	17	0	0.433
Chargers	24	13	0	0.649	14	9	0	0.609
Giants	19	23	0	0.452	11	11	0	0.500
Ravens	15	19	0	0.441	13	4	0	0.765
Seahawks	22	13	0	0.629	12	19	0	0.387
Rams	14	10	0	0.583	12	26	0	0.316
Eagles	24	15	0	0.615	18	7	0	0.720
Jaguars	20	24	0	0.455	8	10	0	0.444
Bears	14	8	0	0.636	21	15	0	0.583
Broncos	26	14	0	0.650	13	10	0	0.565
Cowboys	20	13	0	0.606	10	13	0	0.435
Panthers	19	12	0	0.613	11	16	0	0.407
Colts	13	5	0	0.722	29	18	0	0.617
Buccaneers	20	15	0	0.571	15	14	0	0.517
Dolphins	22	16	0	0.579	14	15	0	0.483
49ers	21	20	0	0.512	12	18	0	0.400
Chiefs	17	18	0	0.486	12	24	0	0.333
Saints	10	12	0	0.455	16	24	0	0.400
Titans	18	10	0	0.643	17	19	0	0.472
Raiders	9	16	0	0.360	9	28	0	0.243
Cardinals	9	11	0	0.450	14	27	0	0.341
Vikings	26	22	0	0.542	11	11	0	0.500
Bengals	15	17	0	0.469	11	23	0	0.324
Browns	8	14	0	0.364	15	28	0	0.349
Bills	11	17	0	0.393	17	19	0	0.472
Redskins	18	10	0	0.643	9	19	0	0.321
Texans	4	13	0	0.235	19	23	0	0.452
Lions	9	17	0	0.346	3	28	0	0.097
Total	548	448	0	0.550	448	548	0	0.450

1 recs | Comment 33 comments | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

It's a passing league baby

I got Summer hatin' on me cuz I'm hotter than the sun. Spring hatin' on me cuz I ain't never sprung
Winter hatin' on me cuz I'm colder than Y'all. And I will never, I will never, I will never Fall.
-Lil Wayne, Mr. Carter

by shake n bake on Apr 24, 2009 12:26 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Wrong

They are both important. The more things you can do well in terms of passing, running, kicking, punting, pass defense, run defense, special teams coverage then the more success you will have because they all have a synergy. For instance, a good running game with a good passing game forces teams out of nickel defenses and opens up play action. If you are really good at only 1-2 of those things you probably won’t be successful. You have to do many of those things well especially in playoff games.

by MasterRWayne on Apr 24, 2009 1:47 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

but this series is showing which things are most important

of course you want to be good at everything, but there are limits to the players and the quality of your players so usually you have to choose a few things at the expense of the rest. The data says that passing efficiency has more to do winning than running efficiency or TOP.

by shake n bake on Apr 24, 2009 1:59 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Actually, what this post and all of the other ones mgrex has made shows just how fortunate we and the Colts organization is to have Peyton Manning. This team would be a perennial 6-10 team each year without him, that’s just how good he is. It’s time we started helping his ass out a little and beef up that defense like Coyer is doing and fix the running game. He isn’t going to be able to bail out the rest of the team forever.

This line will remain in my signature until the Colts draft Rashad Jennings in 2009.
Oh and I write words and stuff for Stampede Blue.

by KingRichard on Apr 24, 2009 7:09 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Similar to Dan Marion

the Dolphins never had a good running game or good defense and, in the end, he couldn’t get it all done by himself and with his 2-3 good receivers.

by AceOfSpades on Apr 24, 2009 9:01 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Marino

by AceOfSpades on Apr 24, 2009 9:01 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Dan Marion

was Marino’s evil alter-ego that ended up being his stunt double in Ace Ventura…..little known fact.

by AceOfSpades on Apr 24, 2009 9:03 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

lol

by LovinBlue on Apr 24, 2009 11:48 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeap. It’s no coincidence that the one year the rest of the team decided to show up was the year their won it all.

This line will remain in my signature until the Colts draft Rashad Jennings in 2009.
Oh and I write words and stuff for Stampede Blue.

by KingRichard on Apr 24, 2009 9:12 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I do plan to look at playoff games as well

Just to see if the dynamics change at all. I don’t think they will, but we’ll find out for sure.

NFC North and NFC South writer for SB Nation's NFL Draft blog: Mocking the Draft

by mgrex03 on Apr 24, 2009 9:40 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

You proved my point

just how fortunate we and the Colts organization is to have Peyton Manning

Because Passing > Running. We’ve had a shit running game, and a shit stopping the run game, but because the Colts can pass the ball (thanks to #18) they win games. Same goes for every other team in the league. When they pass the ball well, they win.

The best team in the league, in terms of Yards / Carry, the Vikings, have won 1 division title, and have 1 other playoff appearance (an 8-8 record to go with it) in this time frame. It just doesn’t lead to as many wins as Passing the ball (and stopping the pass).

It’s time we started helping his ass out a little and beef up that defense like Coyer is doing

Whole heartedly agree, as there isn’t 1 thing we’ve looked at so far that doesn’t need improvement defensively.

and fix the running game

Just as long as it isn’t at the expense of other aspects of the game that lead to more wins. If the Colts are comfortable that they will maintain their high level in the other parts of the offense, then it is time to improve the running game. It could very well be right now, but I’ll leave that to Polian and Co. to decide that.

And just so we are clear, I’m very much in favor of taking a RB somewhere in the draft, and I’d lean to it being earlier in the draft, rather than later. But again, the Colts need to make sure it isn’t at the expense of other, more valuable, areas.

NFC North and NFC South writer for SB Nation's NFL Draft blog: Mocking the Draft

by mgrex03 on Apr 24, 2009 9:38 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Because Passing > Running. We’ve had a shit running game, and a shit stopping the run game, but because the Colts can pass the ball (thanks to #18) they win games. Same goes for every other team in the league. When they pass the ball well, they win.

Defense > all. I didn’t prove any point, because using Peyton Manning as an example of how teams “win” is extremely flawed. There’s no question that the Colts win a lot of regular season games because of him, but they hardly win ANY playoff games because of him. Like I said earlier, the reason the Colts finally won a Super Bowl was because of the RUNNING GAME and the DEFENSE. Just like every other team before them. Yeah, winning regular season games is nice and all, because you have to win them to get in the playoffs, but Peyton isn’t the winning factor, a great team is. I seriously don’t care if passing wins you 3.59875% more regular season games, no one cares, or at least they shouldn’t because that doesn’t win games in the playoffs. Really, you need not look any further than the 2007 Patriots.

The best team in the league, in terms of Yards / Carry, the Vikings, have won 1 division title, and have 1 other playoff appearance (an 8-8 record to go with it) in this time frame. It just doesn’t lead to as many wins as Passing the ball (and stopping the pass).

The best passing offense has won 592835 division titles, 598235 playoff appearances, and ONE SB title. Explain that one.

Just as long as it isn’t at the expense of other aspects of the game that lead to more wins. If the Colts are comfortable that they will maintain their high level in the other parts of the offense, then it is time to improve the running game. It could very well be right now, but I’ll leave that to Polian and Co. to decide that.

More like as long as it isn’t at the expense of the one and only aspect of the game that leads to more wins, as in Peyton Manning right? I don’t think anyone is advocating his removal, that’d be counter-productive.

This line will remain in my signature until the Colts draft Rashad Jennings in 2009.
Oh and I write words and stuff for Stampede Blue.

by KingRichard on Apr 24, 2009 10:02 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

the plural of anecdote is anecdotes not data

there hasn’t been a significant split between offense and defense in any of Mgrex’s stats.

A yard stopped is a yard gained.

by shake n bake on Apr 24, 2009 10:11 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Defense > all.

I’ve proven this to be false. It should be Offense = Defense. Every single stat I’ve looked at has been almost equal, in terms of Win Pct. It may seem that defense is better, but the numbers say otherwise.

Like I said earlier, the reason the Colts finally won a Super Bowl was because of the RUNNING GAME and the DEFENSE. Just like every other team before them.

I’m going to look at all playoff games since 2001 today, in terms of ANPY/A and Yds/Carry (unless you want me to use some other measure for the Running game). I’ll analyze them the exact same way, and see which one leads to more wins. We’ll find out if the playoffs are fundamentally different than the regular season.

Really, you need not look any further than the 2007 Patriots.

The Giants stopped the pass in the Super Bowl, and they won. These aren’t offense only arguments. Stopping the pass leads to just as many wins as passing the ball well. We’ll find out about the playoffs later today.

The best passing offense has won 592835 division titles, 598235 playoff appearances, and ONE SB title. Explain that one.

I’ve never claimed having a good passing offense is the only thing you need to win games. On average, teams only win 70% of the time when they are above average passing the ball (much better than 52% with above average running). There isn’t an end-all be-all stat. If I had to choose 1 though, it would be passing over running.

More like as long as it isn’t at the expense of the one and only aspect of the game that leads to more wins, as in Peyton Manning right?

Does he block for himself, or catch the passes (this is not an endorsement for drafting a WR high)? There are more aspects to the passing game than Manning, and you know that. Wouldn’t it be great, while maintaining the pass game with OL or a RB that can catch/block, that we improved the run game as well? Of course, and I hope the Colts do that.

NFC North and NFC South writer for SB Nation's NFL Draft blog: Mocking the Draft

by mgrex03 on Apr 24, 2009 10:41 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

k

This line will remain in my signature until the Colts draft Rashad Jennings in 2009.
Oh and I write words and stuff for Stampede Blue.

by KingRichard on Apr 24, 2009 10:47 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Here's the 2007 Super Bowl, since you brought it up

Giants Offense ANPY/A: 6.0 (Above Average)
Patriots Offense ANPY/A: 4.5 (Below Average)

Giants win both, and win the game (Giants Win % is 91.1 %).
Patriots lose both, and lose the game (Pats Win % is 18.4 %).

Giants Offense Yds/Carry: 3.5 (Below Average)
Patriots Offense Yds/Carry: 2.8 (Below Average)

Both teams couldn’t run the ball, although the Giants were better.

The Patriots actually had a better Win % when their Yds/Carry was Below Average since 2001.

NFC North and NFC South writer for SB Nation's NFL Draft blog: Mocking the Draft

by mgrex03 on Apr 24, 2009 11:00 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Btw, I’m not trying to say your analysis is stupid or a waste of time, because it’s not. It just bothers me that certain people will cling onto something like this and be like, “SEE! SEE! TEH PASSING GAME IS TEH MOST IMPORTANT!!111” When in reality it’s not.

This line will remain in my signature until the Colts draft Rashad Jennings in 2009.
Oh and I write words and stuff for Stampede Blue.

by KingRichard on Apr 24, 2009 10:10 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

why is it not other than you say so

even though the data says it is

by shake n bake on Apr 24, 2009 10:12 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I wonder if you figured out that I was referring to you in my quote.

Refer to the stuff I said above. Explain to me what the point in having a dominant passing game is in the playoffs when the passing game is NEVER DOMINANT IN THE PLAYOFFS! The only time the Colts passing game ever played up to snuff was twice against the Broncos, and the second half of the 2006 AFCCG.

This line will remain in my signature until the Colts draft Rashad Jennings in 2009.
Oh and I write words and stuff for Stampede Blue.

by KingRichard on Apr 24, 2009 10:15 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

so you think it's better to draw your conclusions

from 15 games of the Colts playoffs under Manning, as opposed to

4,080 games over the past 8 years.

You think the 15 tells you more about what matters in the league?

by shake n bake on Apr 24, 2009 10:25 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

lol

Considering these numbers are all based on REGULAR SEASON GAMES, and only 12 TEAMS OUT OF THE ENTIRE LEAGUE MAKE THE PLAYOFFS, then yes, I do.

Seriously man, it’s not hard to grasp what I’m saying here.

This line will remain in my signature until the Colts draft Rashad Jennings in 2009.
Oh and I write words and stuff for Stampede Blue.

by KingRichard on Apr 24, 2009 10:27 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

what is so different about the playoffs?

same rules.

The only thing I’d expect to see in the playoffs when mgrex runs the numbers is for all the correlations to winning to fall because teams are more evenly matched.

Since we don’t have data on it yet. Propose a mechanism. What about the playoffs suddenly increases the importance of running the ball and stopping the run, and decreases the importance of passing and stopping the pass?

by shake n bake on Apr 24, 2009 10:33 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

You won’t have shit teams like the Lions to influence the results, etc.

This line will remain in my signature until the Colts draft Rashad Jennings in 2009.
Oh and I write words and stuff for Stampede Blue.

by KingRichard on Apr 24, 2009 10:40 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm not cherry picking anything though

When the Lions have passed the ball well, and stopped the pass, they’ve won 73% of the time!

When they have run the ball well, and stop the run, they win 36% of the time.

That kind of spread is not just for the Lions, but every team in the league.

NFC North and NFC South writer for SB Nation's NFL Draft blog: Mocking the Draft

by mgrex03 on Apr 24, 2009 10:45 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I know, I’m just more interested in the playoffs.

This line will remain in my signature until the Colts draft Rashad Jennings in 2009.
Oh and I write words and stuff for Stampede Blue.

by KingRichard on Apr 24, 2009 11:47 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I never claimed they both weren't important

I said:

an Above Average passing game is much more valuable than an Above Average running game

This includes defensively too. These aren’t just Offensive arguments.

Everything I state for the rest of the paragraph will involve the Offense and Defense both being Above Average for a particular game. The worst team in the NFL, in terms of Win Pct, for Adj. Net Pass Yds / Att is the Detroit Lions, who have gone 33-12 (73.3 %) since 1996. When looking at Yards / Carry, there are only 2 teams with a better Win % than that of the Lions! Not even the Colts are that good.

And check out the flip side (both sides of the ball being Below Average). The best team, in terms of Win Pct., for Adj. Net Pass Yds / Att is the Titans at 12-47 (20.3 %). When looking at Yards / Carry, only 1 team is worse than that! This is overwhelming evidence as to the relative importance, both offensively and defensively, for these 2 phases of the game.

All of this, by no means, says running the ball (or stopping the run) is not important. But it should not be improved at the expense of other areas. The Colts clearly don’t have to improve the passing game, they just have to maintain it. They should be sure to maintain the passing game first before improving the running game though. The numbers are extremely clear on this.

NFC North and NFC South writer for SB Nation's NFL Draft blog: Mocking the Draft

by mgrex03 on Apr 24, 2009 9:24 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Defense Line and Offensive Line play are still the keys to victory.

Visit FanIQ.com for sports news, bloggings, polls, and more!

by MrNFL on Apr 24, 2009 10:17 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

protecting the passer and rushing the passer are very very very important

and both of those units are also quite helpful in the run game.

by shake n bake on Apr 24, 2009 10:22 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Excellent article.

Alhough I saw the heat coming after shake’s first post last night. Check in this mornng, and I am a prophet.

by coltsfanawalt on Apr 24, 2009 10:22 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Way too much for me to read

But I’d like to ask if you included all the rushing attempts throughout the game? You had an aversion to doing it in the previous one because you said when you’re ahead, you run the ball, and you wanted to cut them off at the third quarter. So are you including kneeldowns and running the ball at the end of the game? Running the ball at the end of the game generally lowers ypc. To be consistent, it has to remain the same across the board.

Your last one was time of possession wasn’t it? And generally, aside from the abnormal Colts, time of possession was a strong argument for winning correct? Well, throwing an incomplete pass stops the clock and running doesn’t. Your next one should be along the lines of what the average rushing attempts were per game, what the rushing attempts were during games in which the team had a ToP advantage, and what the rushing attempts were when the team was on the wrong end of ToP.

Perfect example, pretty much every playoff game we had with the Patriots.

2003 : Patriots 24 Colts 14
Colts – 25 rushes, 98 yards, 3.9 ypc, ToP = 27:46, 237 passing yards
Patriots – 32 rushes, 112 yards, 3.5 ypc, ToP = 32:14, 237 passing yards

2004 : Patriots 20 Colts 3
Colts – 15 rush, 46 yards, 3.06 ypc, ToP = 22:17, 230 passing yards
Patriots – 39 rush, 210 yards, 5.4 ypc, ToP = 37:43, 115 passing yards

2006 : Colts 38 Patriots 31
Colts – 30 rushes, 125 yards, 4.2 ypc, ToP = 31:15, 349 passing yards
Patriots – 24 rushes, 93 yards, 3.9 ypc, ToP = 28:45, 232 passing yards

Jim Sorgi runs a 4.6 40. That's all I've got to say about that.

by monstersbox on Apr 24, 2009 1:09 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Didn’t mean to imply I didn’t read your writeup, I meant the comments.

Jim Sorgi runs a 4.6 40. That's all I've got to say about that.

by monstersbox on Apr 24, 2009 1:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yes all rushing attempts are included, because it is the official NFL data

Which includes kneel downs. They really should stop that.

I don’t know the exact number of kneel downs (I can find it, but just don’t have it now), but on average, I’d say there is 1 per game combined for both teams, which would be 2040 games. Subtracting 2040 attempts, and adding back in 2040 yards, it bumps the average YPC to 4.22, rather than 4.13. It may change some things, but doesn’t change it drastically, especially with over 100K rushing attempts. I’ll get the data though and adjust accordingly, because it shouldn’t be in there.

For RB Success Rate, I definitely included 4th quarter stats. I realize teams have different philosophies w/r/t how the game is going, but you can’t completely disregard roughly 1/4 the numbers. I didn’t do it for passing yards. I did look specifically at 4th quarter runs on their own, and found being good at RB Success Rate in the 4th quarter leads to losing more than winning. Passing the ball while down in the 4th quarter could lead to more INTs, thus making ANPY/A to go down too. I’m using all the data, as that’s all we know before games.

Yes, Time of Possession per Drive had a strong argument for winning at 79.6% when both sides are above average. Straight ToP was about 10% less than the per Drive number. That means that drives in the First Quarter had the same importance as those late in the game. I also think ToP / Drive rewards teams who run the ball more throughout the game, rather than just the 4th quarter. I don’t know for a fact, but I’m guessing that teams that are winning in the 4th quarter decrease their ToP / Drive, since, for a good majority of teams, late drives last under 2:00 long. That may be something to look into for next off season, as I’ve got enough to look at at this level this year.

I can find those numbers on a high level now:

Avg Rush Atts / Game: 27.85
Avg Rush Atts / Game w/ToP Advantage: 32.65
Avg Rush Atts / Game without ToP Advantage: 23.05

I’m also trying to stay away from absolute stats, such as Rush Attempts, as that starts leading to cause and effect arguments, which I think we agree on. Efficiency stats are much better. If I find that teams win 80% of the time when they go over 32 Rush Atts, that doesn’t tell us much, because of exactly what you said. Teams (usually) only run a lot when they are winning. My predictor from last year only used absolute stats, and kept picking the Raiders to win, because they ran the ball alot. I’m trying to avoid that.

NFC North and NFC South writer for SB Nation's NFL Draft blog: Mocking the Draft

by mgrex03 on Apr 24, 2009 3:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think you bring up a very good point, but a very time consuming one to figure out with “I also think ToP / Drive rewards teams who run the ball more throughout the game, rather than just the 4th quarter.” Finding out the winning % of a team that averages 5+ rushes per drive is probably a much better way to account for those teams running out the 4th quarter. Especially since some of those teams simply suck at running the ball. I think having 8 rushes per quarter shows quite a bit more success than building up a lead and putting out a subpar rushing attack that skews the stats.

For example, if the Colts (last season) or Cards built up a 17 point lead going into the 4th, but only averaged running the ball at 3-4 rushes per quarter through the first 3 quarters and 15 in the 4th, it wouldn’t be a true reflection of successful running. The results would be showing “Ok, their passing attack is good and can win games. And since they’re now ahead, they’re going to put out their crap running game and tank their ypc.” And teams that are run first teams like the Vikings, could be averaging 8-9 rushes per quarter consistently, and while ahead, could be putting out huge 4th quarter amounts that aren’t as efficient as their other runs throughout the game.

I do think that the average attempts per game leading to a ToP advantage is pretty telling. Some teams may run the ball 40+ times in a game at like a 5.8 ypc clip and the next game they could rush 12 times at a 1 ypc clip, but the end result would look like a 5+ ypc with a .500 record.

Jim Sorgi runs a 4.6 40. That's all I've got to say about that.

by monstersbox on Apr 24, 2009 3:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs