Patriots offense: Pass-run ratio analysis Data (in descending order of pass %) Score Pass % Y/rush (non QB) 17-25 74% 3.6 38-24 69% 4.9 20-24 67% 4.4 34-27 65% 4.4 31-34 63% 4.1 35-21 62% 4 20-16 62% 4 31-24 61% 3.1 27-24 60% 4.6 37-16 58% 2.3 31-19 50% 6.3 30-21 49% 4.4 38-20 49% 2.9 41-23 49% 4.6 34-3 44% 4.5 Note: I define a balanced attack as a pass% < 60%. Observation:When Patriots have pass % less than 60%, they are 6-0 with average score of 35-16.5 When Pats have pass % greater than 60%, they are 6-3 with average score of 28-23 Causal relationships. I. It is assumed that the reason the Pats offense is a TD a game better when committing to the run is because (i)the pats tend to favor the run over the pass when leading by a large margin (defined here as two scores) and (ii) In close games the run game was stuffed, and the Pats had to pass to win. Counterargument: The Past did not favor the run over the pass when leading by a two scores vs Miami in week 1, vs SD in week 2 , vs Buffalo in week 3 (ahead 21-0), vs Indy in week 9. Therefore the run pass ratio is not a clear consequence of having or not having a large lead. In those instances the coaching staff preferred to pass, even when the run game was effective (over 4 yards per non-QB carry in each of those games except Indy). A stuffed run game here is defined as less than 4 yards per attempt. In 7 of the 9 games in which the pass ratio exceeded 60%, the non-QB rush yards per attempt also exceeded 4. In 5 of the 7 games decided by 1 score or less, the yards per attempt exceeded 4. The only exceptions were Pittsburgh (3.6) and Indy (3.1). I actually believe 3.6 is a respectable YPA vs Pittsburgh, but the running game was not in the game plan (74% pass). Therefore the Pats decision not to run was not a result of the run game being ineffective. It was a strategic choice by the coaching staff. II. It is assumed that the pats defense performs a TD better in games when the offense commits to the run because in games where the defense performs well, the Pats tend to have a big lead and the offense runs out the clock. Counterargument: See previous counterargument. Pats are at least as likely to pass as run with two score leads. Conclusion:When the Pats staff commits to a balanced attack, here defined as less than 60 % passing, the entire team, both offense and defense, seems to perform better. The offense scores a TD per game more and the defense allows a TD per game less than when the pass % exceeds 60 %. Some assume that pass % declines when the Pats have a big lead, but this is not a trend. the Pats have often shown a preference for passing while holding leads of 2+ scores. This decision to pass when leading by 2+ scores may contribute to worse performance on the defensive side of the ball. This may be because passing with a big lead increases the number of plays available to the opposition, giving them more opportunities to score and come back. Maintaining a balanced offense with a 2+ score lead tends to limit the offensive opportunities of the opposition, helping the defense. That is complimentary football. When the Pats are in close games, they tend to abandon a balanced attack, even when the run game is working, in favor of the heavy passing attack. I do not understand this strategic decision by the coaching staff. This makes the offense predictable. IMO If the Pats commit to a balanced offensive game plan in the postseason, even in close games, they have a much better chance to win the SB. It will also help protect a vulnerable defense.