Stolen from Reddit

[Bruce1981]

we ran the ball on 74% of our plays in 1995.

the game has changed. the most run-heavy, power football teams these days - like Michigan last year - still run the ball >60% of the time. and they run the ball on both 1st and 3rd down more than everyone else in the country (at will).

the analytics OP refers to about passing > running aren't wrong. they just exist in a vacuum, unlike actual football games where variables are omnipresent.

That's not the point. The point is Osborne already destroyed this argument by dominating the landscape after already having success. He even switched from a more balanced pro system to a committed rushing attack so it's not like he had the foundation already laid before him. If a savant like Osborne came along and replicated what he did, he too would have great success.

 

[RedMyMind]

I wouldn't call what any team is doing currently being really committed to the run, Mr Downs.

what percentage is "committed to the run?"

 

[Tuco Salamanca]

the best teams in the country run the ball more often than they throw it.

Is that because they are winning the game based on establishing a balanced offense and those rushing numbers are skewed by 4th quarter play calls.

I documented Oregon's play calling when Helfrich and Frost were calling plays there. The plays calling was 50/50 for the first 3 quarters and 70/30 in the 4th quarter, which affected the total percentage, especially in years where they were winning 9+ games per season. If my memory serves, they were actually a 55% throwing team in the 1st quarter and potentially the 1st half.

 

[king_kong_]

Is that because they are winning the game based on establishing a balanced offense and those rushing numbers are skewed by 4th quarter play calls.

could be.

could also be that they are winning the game based on establishing a run-heavy offense to both take and maintain a lead.

a fun homework assignment for anyone whose interested.

 

[Tuco Salamanca]

could be.

could also be that they are winning the game based on establishing a run-heavy offense to both take and maintain a lead.

a fun homework assignment for anyone whose interested.

I was interested and already did the homework for a team, for all appearances sake, looked like a team that was a run heavy team. Most of the runs were in the second half, when they had a lead and were running clock. The leads were established when they were passing more than they ran, or at a minimum, an equal amount of times as they ran.

 

[king_kong_]

I was interested and already did the homework for a team, for all appearances sake, looked like a team that was a run heavy team. Most of the runs were in the second half, when they had a lead and were running clock. The leads were established when they were passing more than they ran, or at a minimum, an equal amount of times as they ran.

So because Oregon did that 8 years ago it universally applies?

 

[c3o]

Clemson, Alabama, and LSU won their recent national championships in large part because of their hero QB/WR combinations.

This isn’t the 90s anymore, if your guy isnt good enough to be taking snaps on Sunday, you’re never gonna eclipse Pelini/Ferentz success

RB is a dying position relegated to guys who are too short/slow to play WR, and too short/stupid to play QB

quoted the wrong comment.

I'll do better next time.

maybe

 

[Tuco Salamanca]

So because Oregon did that 8 years ago it universally applies?

Yes, typically teams that are barely 60%/ 40% run/ pass AND win 9+ games in a season, will have closer to 65/35 or 70/30 in the 2nd half of games, after the games have been decided and those teams are running out the clock. A vast majority of teams that are winning 9+ games and barely have a 60/40 run ratio will be much closer to 50/50, in the first half when the game is still undecided.

It is simple, teams who are winning games aren't going to be throwing the ball unnecessarily in the second half of games. The run game will be called on more, the clock will run and the number of plays in the second half will be less because the clock doesn't stop as often.

It isn't rocket science

 

[drubendall]

View embedded media

No you don’t.

 

[king_kong_]

Yes, typically teams that are barely 60%/ 40% run/ pass AND win 9+ games in a season, will have closer to 65/35 or 70/30 in the 2nd half of games, after the games have been decided and those teams are running out the clock. A vast majority of teams that are winning 9+ games and barely have a 60/40 run ratio will be much closer to 50/50, in the first half when the game is still undecided.

It is simple, teams who are winning games aren't going to be throwing the ball unnecessarily in the second half of games. The run game will be called on more, the clock will run and the number of plays in the second half will be less because the clock doesn't stop as often.

It isn't rocket science

michigan last year ran 175 total plays to score their first TD and take a lead that they rarely relented

101 runs called, 74 passes called

58%, as opposed to their season long total of 61%. they'd run it more as the game wore on, because that's how physical attacks work - they wear their opponents down. something we used to know a little about.

they were very consistently run heavy, regardless of opponent, time in game, score, etc., etc., etc.

 

[Tuco Salamanca]

michigan last year ran 175 total plays to score their first TD and take a lead that they rarely relented

101 runs called, 74 passes called

58%, as opposed to their season long total of 61%. they'd run it more as the game wore on, because that's how physical attacks work - they wear their opponents down. something we used to know a little about.

they were very consistently run heavy, regardless of opponent, time in game, score, etc., etc., etc.

So 1 drive per game is your rebuttal.

What did they do on the other 5-7 drives in the first half, how much did they throw on their other 1-2 TDs per game in the 1st half?

 

[king_kong_]

So 1 drive per game is your rebuttal.

What did they do on the other 5-7 drives in the first half, how much did they throw on their other 1-2 TDs per game in the 1st half?

nope.

first TD drive, when they took a lead they'd hold all game. sometimes this was 1 drive, more often it was 2+ and through the first quarter.

it won't get better, but you're very welcome to do this yourself. it seems like it'd be a good practice in the folly of universal application of unproven theories based on a team that was likely an extreme outlier 8 years ago.

or, perhaps it's michigan that's the outlier. either way, they ran the ball at a consistent clip all year long.

 

[RBigredMax]

Alright boys, let’s settle this …