Interesting read. At first look at the title of this thread my answer was simple just run the ball more. After reading the article I still think that is the answer. I think we do have a good running game given the chance and focus (in practice) will get us there. Now we are dealing with some injuries to the OL right now but over the past 8 weeks I just think we need to run the ball more. On first down, second, third or heck fourth we just need to run it more to keep the defense off the field which happens a lot with 3 and outs with 35 seconds ticking off the clock (Steeler's game).
I hear this rationale a lot -- either phrased conversely as "keeping the opposing QB off the field" -- and I've never been able to make sense of it. Controlling the ball might keep the defense off the field in terms of the game clock, but it doesn't change the 1:1 ratio of offensive and defensive possessions. Essentially, you're keeping your defense off the field by keeping your offense out of the endzone. It's pretty much a wash.
All you can really hope to accomplish is to reduce the overall number of possessions for both teams for that game. Now, this is actually a pretty robust strategy if you are a bad team trying to beat a significantly better one. Reducing the number of iterations increases the ability of any aberrant outcome to a drive to decide the game. But the Pats are rarely in the position where increasing the fluke potential of a game is to their advantage.
The other problem your logic is that is that, as the study I linked to demonstrates, running on early downs won't actually help "keep the defense off the field" because it increases the chances the offense will go three-and-out. Gaining 3 yards on first down results in a net negative change in the probability of getting a 1st down -- i.e. teams facing 2nd and 7 have converted the down series at a lower rate than teams with a 1st and 10. And since a significant majority of rushing attempts gain 3 or fewer yards, more than half of all rushes hurt their teams chances of getting a first down.
Thus, teams should run on first down just often enough to prevent diminishing returns from passing attempts. Which brings me to your second point...
The article does make some good points but most teams do not have Tom Brady which totally changes things. Alex Smith, Flacco, McCoy, Tebow run the ball on First down because of their QB. Heck Matt Ryan, Schaub, Fitzpatick and even Ben Roethlisberger depend on a strong running game. As a defensive coach you can commit the extra guy to the box but Tom Brady?? you just cannot take that chance too often. He gets too much respect and with the TE play down field catching the ball keeps those safety's playing soft. Do not change so much as execute what the defense is giving you but the last 8 weeks I find the offense is trying to force the pass too much.
Well this is just my opinion and I coach and play in the Canadian rules where we hardly see the run. I just think you have to be able to run the ball especially in December and January so we better establish a running game to get us to a Superbowl. We all know Tom can throw but when we can dominate on the ground as well might get us over the top.
Quick look at our three losses.
Bills - 25 runs 45 passes. We were up 14 points early and IMO should have commited more to the run that game.
Steelers - 12 runs 35 passes. Again I think we went away from the run too quickly. I like our set with Soldier at TE but with the injuries at OT that set may have to wait till playoffs.
Giants - 22 runs 49 passes. HOF QB I get it but with our defense we just need to even this up to avoid three and outs and putting our young defense which is has been transitioning from the 3-4 to get comfortable.
My point is do not abandon the run make it something you work on to be successful in the playoffs. When I see eight or nine men in the box against Brady I will change my opinion but we need to focus on the run more going forward.
So, basically what you're saying is that because we have have one of the best QBs in the game, and therefore one of the best passing attacks in the league, we should...
run more than teams that don't?
Look, the Pats run and pass games are both above average, but the Pats' passing game is much, much more above average than the running game. Clearly, if teams are bailing out on the snap and leaving a ton of running room, it makes sense to take advantage of that. This is why Brady has carte blanche to audible to whatever he wants at the line. Again, this goes back to running enough, and in the right circumstances, to prevent diminishing returns in the passing attack.
But when it becomes a matter of principle to the point that we're getting away from what we do best more than is strictly necessary, than we're hurting the offense. This is all the more true when what we do best has historically proven to be more likely to produce first downs than running early.
(Also, it's worth mentioning that we are converting on 76% of down series, 2nd in the league, despite facing a a demonstrably tougher slate of defenses than any of the other top 5 offenses in down-series conversion rate.)
