Running the ball, and stopping the run: KEY

[pats1]

I'll let the stats do the talking right now:

THE BOTTOM LINE: OUTRUSH YOUR OPPONENT. IT DOESN'T HAVE TO SPECTACULAR AS LONG AS THE DEFENSE STOPS THE RUN:

 

[Ring 6]

I had said before the Buc game one of the few keys to me to say whether this team is all the way back was the run game on both sides.

I dont look at yards, but rushes.
I said if we run well enough to run 30 times we win.

And if we stop the run well enough that they cant run 30 times, we win.

Rushing yardage is tricky, because all 109 yard games are not created equal.
The key is the ability to use the run well enough to be able to say on the field and run more times. The impact is long reaching.

Never was it more apparent than Saturday.

 

[pats1]

It does go back to what you said in the other thread, though.

Everything's connected.

 

[pats1]

So, I plugged in AJ's rushing attempts premise:

Buffalo remains the lone anomaly, a game we technically should have lost. Oakland drifts into that category, but it's much closer.

There doesn't seem to be too much cohesion between the rushing attempts, rushing yards, and points per game, as AJ pointed out before (not every 100 yard rushing game, or 50-0 game is the same)

 

[jczxohn1]

IMO, most 30+ rushes per game happen in games when you are ahead and are trying to play ball control. Ergo, you tend to win those. Bad stat.
More important, IMO, statistically, is having a balance between rushing and passing.

 

[pats1]

If I were to go through and calculate the standard deviation of rushing attempt disparity over/under an opponent, you can probably bet you have some of the top teams with the most consistent disparity (be it over or under) and vise versa.

But that still brings about the question on whether rushing puts you in game leads, or game leads put you in a rushing mode.

It's all about time of possesion and the difference between leading or trailing in a game. Take the last Buffalo game for example - the Bills trailed all game and McGahee didn't get a carry. The Bills finished with 4 rushing attempts/18:08 minutes of possesion, while the Pats finished with 31 rushing attempts/41:59 minutes of possesion.

I suppose what it boils down to is ball control and time of possesion wins games. Staying ahead of an opponent by presenting a balanced attack of rushing and short-medium passes to prevent 3rd and longs will win games.

 

[pats1]

IMO, most 30+ rushes per game happen in games when you are ahead and are trying to play ball control. Ergo, you tend to win those. Bad stat.
More important, IMO, statistically, is having a balance between rushing and passing.

I'll take a look there. But again, chances are, you're going to pass more when you're down and run more when you're up. It's getting there that counts, I suppose.

Although, if you think about it, clock management plays a role. If you can keep your defense off the field, by stopping the opponent's running game when they're up on you, the clock can be on your side, allowing the balanced attack to resume.

Maybe it all boils down to run defense...but more when it counts, not necessarily statistically.

 

[onegameatatime]

IMO, most 30+ rushes per game happen in games when you are ahead and are trying to play ball control. Ergo, you tend to win those. Bad stat.
More important, IMO, statistically, is having a balance between rushing and passing.

I tend to agree with this. Rushes are often a product of being ahead -- what you might call a result statistic arther than a cause statistic. A team that has ten 3 and out rushing possessions will not win.

The Pats still do not look like a very good rushing team to me, although maybe healthy Dillon and Faulk will help. I'd like to see even more screens.

 

[pats1]

The Pats still do not look like a very good rushing team to me, although maybe healthy Dillon and Faulk will help.

But an excellent rush defense will offset that, and then some.


Like I've said, it doesn't matter if you have NEM playing corner. If you can stop the run, and even get the slimest of leads, 9 times out of 10 you will win the game.

 

[pats1]

I noticed all of my numbers were off so I fixed everything and got this even better representation:

Ranking of games by disparity in rushing attempts:

Buffalo remains the lone anomaly, although it's still better than the 5 losses:

Ranking of games by disparity in rushing yards:

Buffalo slips a bit, again the lone anomaly:

Ranking of games by point disparity:

This is just to see where the games with the slimmest and widest margins stack up in the other two categories.