First Impressions 2

[Deus Irae]

Lots of excuses for why we lost the game, but the fact is, we lost the game. Rams fans still have lots of excuses for why they lost in 2001 to what they consider to have been a vastly inferior team. But they lost, and so did we. No excuses.

Pointing out the reasons for a loss in the context of this discussion is not making excuses. It's analyzing the arguments based upon what actually happened on the field. People blaming the running game for that loss should know better, especially given the high posting quality of those people who have been making that argument on this thread. And, if you can't blame the running game, trying to make an argument for running games by using that Super Bowl inherently involves misleading data.

It sure as hell wasn't the running game that beat that same Giants team in week 17, for example, and the Super Bowl was played in 'perfect' conditions without rain, snow, high winds or any of the other factors that people often point to as problems for passing games.

 

[mayoclinic]

Pointing out the reasons for a loss in the context of this discussion is not making excuses. It's analyzing the arguments based upon what actually happened on the field. People blaming the running game for that loss should know better, especially given the high posting quality of those people who have been making that argument on this thread. And, if you can't blame the running game, trying to make an argument for running games by using that Super Bowl inherently involves misleading data.

It sure as hell wasn't the running game that beat that same Giants team in week 17, for example, and the Super Bowl was played in 'perfect' conditions without rain, snow, high winds or any of the other factors that people often point to as problems for passing games.

Hmm, let's see: "Logan Mankins having his worst game as a professional". No chance the Giants defense had anything to do with that?

 

[Deus Irae]

Hmm, let's see: "Logan Mankins having his worst game as a professional". No chance the Giants defense had anything to do with that?

Sure there is. Part of analyzing it would be to break it down further from there. Unoriginal did that for us in a thread, as a matter of fact. I just can't pull it up because the search function is not currently working and I'm not about to sort through every one of Unoriginal's posts hunting it down.

 

[Synovia]

They had one (1) running play in the 4th quarter. There are a lot more reasons to establish the run than to run out the clock.

Like what?


The only time frequency of running correlates to winning is in the 4th quarter. Teams that run more often earlier in the game don't win any more often.

 

[spacecrime]

They had one (1) running play in the 4th quarter. There are a lot more reasons to establish the run than to run out the clock.

By the way, that carry went for 9 yards and the Pats were never behind by more than three before the final score.

Umm, when I said, "No, it isn't," I was echoing your comment, "It's not."

I was agreeing with you 110%, Dude.

And I still do agree. Further, I agree that it is important to establish the run in the early part of the game.

 

[Synovia]

Further, I agree that it is important to establish the run in the early part of the game.

Why? Teams that run more early in the game don't win any more often.

 

[mayoclinic]

Like what?


The only time frequency of running correlates to winning is in the 4th quarter. Teams that run more often earlier in the game don't win any more often.

Like (1) to wear down the opposing defense, (2) to rest your own defense, and (3) to keep opposing defenses off balance so they can't key off against the pass.

 

[livinginthe past]

I think we need to pension Belichick off and get Bill Cowher in.

He was a great believer in beating teams down with physical, grind 'em down football.

You don't win as many Superbowls as Bill Cowher without knowing a simple truth like: physicality is everything.

 

[Synovia]

Like (1) to wear down the opposing defense, (2) to rest your own defense, and (3) to keep opposing defenses off balance so they can't key off against the pass.

If these actually worked, don't you think it would show up by leading to wins?


1) Does running actually wear down the defense more than passing? Any real evidence?

2) Rest your own defense? The patriots classic 12 play 5 yard pass based drives don't do that?

3) Teams key against the pass almost every down in the NFL today. A lot of teams play more out of the nickle than the base set. If anything, in today's NFL, you pass to set up the run.

 

[Patspsycho]

I think we need to pension Belichick off and get Bill Cowher in.

He was a great believer in beating teams down with physical, grind 'em down football.

You don't win as many Superbowls as Bill Cowher without knowing a simple truth like: physicality is everything.

Cowher has won a grand total of ONE superbowl!

 

[RayClay]

Like what?


The only time frequency of running correlates to winning is in the 4th quarter. Teams that run more often earlier in the game don't win any more often.

Not worth repeating posts since you're not making sense anyway. I put reasons with numbers next to them earlier.

Since search is disabled...

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england...-first-impressions-2-a-page7.html#post1468715

The only time frequency of running correlates to winning is in the 4th quarter. Teams that run more often earlier in the game don't win any more often.

Lombardi, Chuck Knoll, Joe Gibbs and Bill Belichick, among many others, might disagree with you.

 

[livinginthe past]

Cowher has won a grand total of ONE superbowl!

Yes.

And Bill B. has won 3.

You see where i'm goin with this?

 

[Patspsycho]

Yes.

And Bill B. has won 3.

You see where i'm goin with this?

My bad.. didn't understand the context of your post. Sorry.

 

[glm]

You know those #s off the top of your head?

Yeah.

Lately I've been trying to find out the greatest things in football, such certain positions, teams, offenses etc, from a statistical point of view. So I know a lot of these off the top of my head.