RayClay said:
When teams are always behind, they have to throw a lot.
Teams that are ahead run the ball.
Generally true, ideally you want a balance between pass and rush unless you are so dominant in one area that you can offset the difference. If one area is behind the other I would rather have the run be stronger especially with the defense doing well. The stats say the passing attack should be improved.
Examples - 2004 Pats - the best offense of the Superbowl teams
- hard to game plan, they could beat you either way, 27 PPG is sweet
27.3 PPG
- pass yards - 10th in NFL, 224 YPG, 3600 yards
- rush yards - 7th in NFL, 133.4 YPG, 2124 yards
- this is an ideal balance
Compare this to 2006 which was not a good offensive year.
- fell behind, forced to pass or ineffective run forced to pass
23.7 PPG
- in the playoffs, a good team with a good coach saw the imbalance and tried to take away the pass ( since their was no threat of the run)
- pass yards - 2nd in NFL, 257.5 YPG, 4120 yards
- rush - 24th in NFL, 94.5 YPG, 1512 yards
2006 YTD and projections
- pass offense needs to be increased for a better balance
- points per game needs to be brought up
- current trend is to ignore deep pass, cram box and stuff the run
- 21.6 PPG
- pass - 18 in NFL, 197.8 YPG, projected 3164
- rush - 6th in the NFL, 139.0 YYG projected 2224