|
|
|
| Quote: |
| Matt@MattD366 Daniel Jones has a 6-24 record in games where he has had to throw the ball 32 or more times. NFL teams have averaged 32 or more pass attempts per game every year since 2005. Jones led offenses have failed to score 20 points in 17 of those 30 games. #giants |
Fill in the excuse du jour.
Those stats says nothing giving the full picture.
How many years have a certain segment of BBIers been saying some variation of this?
It's always another season...
And 3rd down conversions (minimum 31 throws) but only from this season.
Any other stats are unreliable and must be dismissed.
Fill in the excuse du jour.
How dare anyone consider the circumstances!
And any attempt to remake the 2000 Ravens is totally idiotic. We have better odds of drafting the next Pat Mahomes than we do banking on building the 2000 Ravens roster, a once in a generation event, to support a middling QB like Jones in a successful Super Bowl run.
When teams are losing, they throw more often, when teams are winning, they run the ball more. I'm not saying he's a franchise QB, I'm just saying stats don't tell the full story.
Exactly my thoughts.
I’m sure many dreamed of fumbles and interceptions and a juicy, embarrassing blow out loss in prime time. 10 glorious days of shitting on the QB for losing the game and proving what the smartest evaluators already know. I am truly sorry for your loss
Buck up campers. We still have 2 games with the eagles. We could still collapse down the stretch. So many things to look forward to. Hope springs eternal
Blame whatever you want - Jones has not shown he can sustain a real aerial attack
Pickett doesn't have mastery of his bowel movements in the NFL.
Quote:
Ball security and decision making from last year to this year. I would contend he will be even better next year. Perhaps a franchise tag would be the right call. Get him some weapons and another season in this system and then see where we are.
It's always another season...
Hardly an excuse. there has been a palpable improvement from last year to this year. Surely one cannot make an argument that he is playing with high caliber receivers right now. And yeah. We have a good coach and OC in place now. So maybe one more season is what it takes.
B. Teams throw the ball more when they are trailing.
C. The Giants throw less when they are winning, because the strength of their team is Barkley and the running game.
Not to be redundant but asking him to win games dropping back and throwing to the receivers and TE's hes had in his 4 years here, with mostly awful pass pro, is asking alot.
Even guys like Mahomes & Allen wouldn't look great with Darius Slayton, Hodgins, James, Marcus Johnson, Golladay, and Cager as their primary receiving weapons.
For all of the people who think the Giants should move on from Jones, I challenge you to find a better solution- I don't see anyone in FA, and don't think a trade up is realistic. Giants likely picking somewhere around #20, and alot of teams at the top of the draft (ATL, CAR, HOU off the top of my head) are even more desperate for a QB than they are.
As dumb as Francesa is, I don't even think he's dumb enough to do that.
Quote:
In comment 15922418 DC Gmen Fan said:
Quote:
Ball security and decision making from last year to this year. I would contend he will be even better next year. Perhaps a franchise tag would be the right call. Get him some weapons and another season in this system and then see where we are.
It's always another season...
Hardly an excuse. there has been a palpable improvement from last year to this year. Surely one cannot make an argument that he is playing with high caliber receivers right now. And yeah. We have a good coach and OC in place now. So maybe one more season is what it takes.
He’s not under contract.
Blame whatever you want - Jones has not shown he can sustain a real aerial attack
Sustain it with what? Where in the NFL do you see passing games being sustained with horrendous offensive linemen and nonexistent talent at wide receiver? Forget Daniel Jones was ever born… please edify me on where in the sport you see someone succeeding with similar talent to the Giants.
If you guys think the next QB is coming in and turning this same group into a high flying offense, you’re out of your fucking minds.
Quote:
this is a stat that cannot stand
Blame whatever you want - Jones has not shown he can sustain a real aerial attack
Sustain it with what? Where in the NFL do you see passing games being sustained with horrendous offensive linemen and nonexistent talent at wide receiver? Forget Daniel Jones was ever born… please edify me on where in the sport you see someone succeeding with similar talent to the Giants.
If you guys think the next QB is coming in and turning this same group into a high flying offense, you’re out of your fucking minds.
Well, LOL...
He'd be a lot cheaper for the same production.
He's not playing a 4th place schedule either.
And made almost zero improvement in passing yards and passing TDs.
Tagging DJ would be an anchor this team would struggle with for years because it would give Schoen no money to work with. Think about what you're saying...you want to pay a QB worse than Dak, Dak money? That's a Gettleman move!
Quote:
this is a stat that cannot stand
Blame whatever you want - Jones has not shown he can sustain a real aerial attack
Sustain it with what? Where in the NFL do you see passing games being sustained with horrendous offensive linemen and nonexistent talent at wide receiver? Forget Daniel Jones was ever born… please edify me on where in the sport you see someone succeeding with similar talent to the Giants.
If you guys think the next QB is coming in and turning this same group into a high flying offense, you’re out of your fucking minds.
That's the thing, you have no idea if that's true or not. Draft a QB, and if you hit, this team could be a SB contender in 2-3 years. Keep DJ and it'll still be average in 3 years.
I’m sure many dreamed of fumbles and interceptions and a juicy, embarrassing blow out loss in prime time. 10 glorious days of shitting on the QB for losing the game and proving what the smartest evaluators already know. I am truly sorry for your loss
Buck up campers. We still have 2 games with the eagles. We could still collapse down the stretch. So many things to look forward to. Hope springs eternal
There was only one off target pass?
Quote:
I guess he ain’t making chicken salad , huh?
You should check out strength of schedule. I mean it won’t fit your narrative so I doubt you will
NYG # 1 @ .68
LAC #26 @ .438
Do you like apples in your chicken salad?
He's not playing a 4th place schedule either.
I’m sure many dreamed of fumbles and interceptions and a juicy, embarrassing blow out loss in prime time. 10 glorious days of shitting on the QB for losing the game and proving what the smartest evaluators already know. I am truly sorry for your loss
Buck up campers. We still have 2 games with the eagles. We could still collapse down the stretch. So many things to look forward to. Hope springs eternal
I dream of multiple 300 yard passing games, 35+ passing TDs per year, a 30 point game at least once a year, and Saquon being able to run with 7 in the box.
Can't have it all, but in DJs case, can't have any of it.
Some people rather look good and lose than look bad and win
To each their own
I do. And I've said so previously.
Whether its the Giants or not, I believe that Jones will play in a Superbowl at some point in his career.
And you may not be wrong but there is a distinction.
As a fan we are certainly entitled to our opinions. Let’s be careful not to overvalue them
He's 18th in yards and 16th in attempts, that's with extra game (or two) more than a lot of the people ahead of him.
He's 19th in yds/attempt, which has actually gotten a bit better over the last three games.
Before these last two losses, he had three games with 20 or more completions. Against the Bears, he completed 8 passes.
When I watch him play, it seems to me like he simply lacks awareness of what's going on on the field. When I see him run the two minute drills, it always seems sloppy.
We can maybe win with a QB like this, if everything else falls into place, but we shouldn't give him a lot of money.
Quote:
So what are we talking about? There is a mountain of evidence that Daniel has serious flaws. Can he fix them? It's possible. But it is darned unlikely. Does he have a Trent Dilfer run in him? Perhaps, but we are not the 2000 Ravens. How many times do we have to be reminded of his limitations without it ever sinking in? We have seen what he is. His ceiling is a journeyman QB. He might be dragged to a Super Bowl but it is improbable he will ever lead anyone there.
I do. And I've said so previously.
Whether its the Giants or not, I believe that Jones will play in a Superbowl at some point in his career.
I wish I was your bookie!
I personally don’t assign full credit or blame to the QB. I view those a team stats. The coaches can assign blame and credit. Besides being qualified they actually know what was intended and who or what was the mistake.
WhAt I do know is we are in the mix with an undermanned AND injury ravaged roster. We beat some good teams already and come from behind 5 times.
Winning is the only sty that matters IMO.
Coaches have said repeatedly he’s playing exactly how we need him to play
The rest will take care of itself in the off season
The reason, it is not Daniel Jones but the New York Giants that are 6-24 when throwing 32+ times per game.
But, I have not yet seen a reason to believe that DJ is the answer to the Giants inability to be an effective passing team.
Fill in the excuse du jour.
I ve never understood how you and others can label the expressing of the obvious bad circumstances Jones has been saddled quarterback as excuse making.
It s common sense that quarterbacks surrounded by better players, are better, it s true for all of them, even the great ones
In about 5 months you're going to be very disappointed.
Fill in the excuse du jour.
So we shouldn't draft any receivers in upcoming draft or sign any FA either? Got it!
if you are an objective fan of the team - more so than the player - that should tell you everything you need to know. declining the 5th year option also all but sealed DJ’s fate as leaving for free agency next season.
fans need to stop lying to themselves to save face in this epic DJ argument.
Quote:
"Yeah, but Jones didn't have ____________."
Fill in the excuse du jour.
So we shouldn't draft any receivers in upcoming draft or sign any FA either? Got it!
Why would you? The won-loss record goes down the more we throw as noted above.
We should Draft Offensive Guards and Running Backs and rush the ball even more.
Quote:
I guess he ain’t making chicken salad , huh?
He's not playing a 4th place schedule either.
I’m not sure if this is official, but the only current played SOS I was able to find has us pretty even, yet we have a better record.
In response to the prior post about wr injuries (which is pretty comical coming from a Giants fan): Allen and Williams both played at least 30 games the last two years and they have a combined 11 games this year. I’m pretty sure we’d all signn up for that level of talent availability.
All these excuses by the Herbert apologists get so tiring! He has a career sub-500 record and has never gone to the SB. We must therefore conclude that Herbert is clearly replacement level and will never go to a SB.
Please note that one, and one, of these paragraphs contains sarcastic.
He's 18th in yards and 16th in attempts, that's with extra game (or two) more than a lot of the people ahead of him.
He's 19th in yds/attempt, which has actually gotten a bit better over the last three games.
Before these last two losses, he had three games with 20 or more completions. Against the Bears, he completed 8 passes.
When I watch him play, it seems to me like he simply lacks awareness of what's going on on the field. When I see him run the two minute drills, it always seems sloppy.
We can maybe win with a QB like this, if everything else falls into place, but we shouldn't give him a lot of money.
Short sighted post. Jones passing attempts have increased because the team has not been able to run the ball. They are 7-0 when when they run 30 plus times for over 4ypc. 0-4 when they don't.
The talent on the team right now leads to winning this way. We should be happy the coaches recognize it and Jones is a smaller part of that reasoning than some think and I am not even in pro Jones camp.
The passing attack was supposed to have 4 keys. Galloday/Toney have had 8 catches and one is now gone. Robinson has missed the bulk of the season with injuries. Bellinger has been out a few weeks.
The QBGC continues to show incompetence when looking at this position and offensive football but at least we can read about trimming the fat off and getting a filet mignon.
I keep asking about Herbert to the do it anywayz crowd. B..b...but....arm talent!
I keep asking about Herbert to the do it anywayz crowd. B..b...but....arm talent!
Only idiots don’t see the long term potential in Jones. Idiots like Sy, I guess.
I keep asking about Herbert to the do it anywayz crowd. B..b...but....arm talent!
The most heroic .500 quarterback you’ll ever see.
Before you start talking down to respected members of the site, you might want to at least be accurate.
The Giants beat the Panthers and the Ravens with 103 and 83 yards rushing respectively.
Quote:
getting owned by dancing blue bear, good stuff.
I keep asking about Herbert to the do it anywayz crowd. B..b...but....arm talent!
The most heroic .500 quarterback you’ll ever see.
Actually, he probably is. This hasn't even been close to a .500 team around him for the majority of his career.
Quote:
"Yeah, but Jones didn't have ____________."
Fill in the excuse du jour.
I ve never understood how you and others can label the expressing of the obvious bad circumstances Jones has been saddled quarterback as excuse making.
It s common sense that quarterbacks surrounded by better players, are better, it s true for all of them, even the great ones
The critiques of Herbert are especially hilarious. There is not one GM in the NFL who would not pick Herbert over Jones. SD is 6th in passing yards, 8th in td's and 14th in scoring despite having the 30th ranked rushing attack and the top two wideouts being Palmer and Carter. The Giants are 28th in passing yards, 28th in passing td's and 21st in scoring despite having a top 5 rushing attack. But according to the DJFC, Herbert and Jones are exactly the same!
I doubt Daboll wants to be hamstrung any further by the mediocrity taking the shotgun snap. Here's news: we are never going to have 10 All-Pros on offense to drag Jones into being a good qb. Say your goodbyes.
Quote:
this is a stat that cannot stand. Blame whatever you want - Jones has not shown he can sustain a real aerial attack
-----
Sustain it with what? Where in the NFL do you see passing games being sustained with horrendous offensive linemen and nonexistent talent at wide receiver? Forget Daniel Jones was ever born… please edify me on where in the sport you see someone succeeding with similar talent to the Giants.
If you guys think the next QB is coming in and turning this same group into a high flying offense, you’re out of your fucking minds.
There is no such thing as a franchise QB that can't sustain an arial attack and quickly and repeatedly lead their team down the field through the air in a shoot out and score. You can argue it how ever you like. The great ones do that. Simms did it. Eli did it. Jones has to be able to do it, and he has not shown he that he can. What ever the reason is - he hasn't.
Look at Tennessee - they are e very good team. Their QB is not able to do that -- and he has the weapons and the line. It has limited their ability to make a real run in the playoffs.
Look at Mahommes, Rodgers, Matt Ryan, Wilson, Allen, Brady and through out history -- you need an arm that can kick up a drive at any given point, and do it again in a successive drive(s), in successive games, in order to be a champion.
Barkley is wearing down, the WR talent is abysmal, the TE depth is poor, and now the OL is banged up.
Leaving the Giants and Jones in a classic state of plausible deniability.
Barkley is wearing down, the WR talent is abysmal, the TE depth is poor, and now the OL is banged up.
Leaving the Giants and Jones in a classic state of plausible deniability.
That is easier when he’s under contract for next season. The issue is, he isn’t. Joe Schoen doesn’t strike me as someone paying big money under that scenario. Looking towards the 2017 Bills seems more likely.
I think the only way he gets franchised is if the Giants win three more games and he's the primary reason why. I don't think there's any chance he gets a multi-year deal from the Giants.
I was talking about Herbert. He gets described as “heroic” around here. Not kidding. His team was predicted to make the playoffs by most, even the Super Bowl by many and yet .500.
Herbert would undoubtedly make an all pro of David Sills. Why he declines doing the same for his own guys is a mystery.
There are likely more than just that one. He is the only one so lost in his delusion that he would put it in writing. We criticize the Maras for running the team like a club where people you like get paid/promoted because they are ‘your guy,’ but it is clear there are a lot of fans on this board who would pay players largely on “I really want him to be good because he is a good dude.”
David Sills is the reason du jour Jones struggles. Even last week I was told Jones was struggling because all he had to throw to was Slayton and Sills despite Sills getting about 5 snaps in the game. They don’t know who the WRs are or what they are doing, just that they must be bad because look at how bad the passing game is.
It looks terrible but without context it’s kind of meaningless.
Quote:
Short sighted post. Jones passing attempts have increased because the team has not been able to run the ball. They are 7-0 when when they run 30 plus times for over 4ypc. 0-4 when they don't.
Before you start talking down to respected members of the site, you might want to at least be accurate.
The Giants beat the Panthers and the Ravens with 103 and 83 yards rushing respectively.
Who you? Bw? For some perhaps. Not me. But appreciate your Cap insights and clock building.
To your point. Both the Ravens and Panthers rushed for less than 30 times and in both games the Giants were over 30. Now there is important football basics from that "data" but I already have explained this to you. When you look at the Giants loses the other team has run all over them. This game always has a opponent and those HC's understand the value.
To the post I replied to I just pointed out that is what short sighted (pass attempts) with the make up of the roster.
The QBGC if for poster like Bw and you certainly fit in well with that small exclusive group.
However, winning or keeping the games close for 4qtrs typically allows them to run more often, add more carries and keep balance.
Your cause and effect has holes in its rational.
However, winning or keeping the games close for 4qtrs typically allows them to run more often, add more carries and keep balance.
Your cause and effect has holes in its rational.
I have never said that. I have pointed out the benefits of having a effective run game and how it impacts the pass game. In the Giants case it has led to wins (with other components) but I have never guaranteed victory. You will win more than you lose. This is what history shows.
Now if you give me a strong PB OL with a gifted group on the outside I will and have conceded you can get around having run production issues. If you don't have that element then expect tough sledding.
Go back and look at the Giants the last 17 years. Look at the teams record and the running game (carries, ypa). See what you find. Once you see that you will understand my point better. After that consider my point above and tell me how well the Giants have that "other" component.
What is the Giants record when DJ didn't start for the last 3 years?
They beat the Panthers rushing 33 times for 103 yards, which is 3.1 YPC.
They beat the Ravens rushing 31 for 83 yards, which is 2.7 YPC.
They are not 7-0 when rushing 30 times at 4 YPC. In 2 of their 7 wins, that didn’t happen.
But you don’t seem like the kind of guy to let facts get in the way of a good theory. So have at it.
Quote:
And they certainly didn’t run effectively in the Panther and Raven games and still won.
However, winning or keeping the games close for 4qtrs typically allows them to run more often, add more carries and keep balance.
Your cause and effect has holes in its rational.
I have never said that. I have pointed out the benefits of having a effective run game and how it impacts the pass game. In the Giants case it has led to wins (with other components) but I have never guaranteed victory. You will win more than you lose. This is what history shows.
Now if you give me a strong PB OL with a gifted group on the outside I will and have conceded you can get around having run production issues. If you don't have that element then expect tough sledding.
Go back and look at the Giants the last 17 years. Look at the teams record and the running game (carries, ypa). See what you find. Once you see that you will understand my point better. After that consider my point above and tell me how well the Giants have that "other" component.
So you aren’t touting 30 attempts above in your posts? Pivot as needed but that’s what you said.
Of course effective running helps the passing game, but not very interesting is it? Points come out of the passing game. Points are what wins. Effective running is a contributor but not the end all.
Quote:
They are 7-0 when when they run 30 plus times for over 4ypc. 0-4 when they don't.
They beat the Panthers rushing 33 times for 103 yards, which is 3.1 YPC.
They beat the Ravens rushing 31 for 83 yards, which is 2.7 YPC.
They are not 7-0 when rushing 30 times at 4 YPC. In 2 of their 7 wins, that didn’t happen.
But you don’t seem like the kind of guy to let facts get in the way of a good theory. So have at it.
And what happened in those two games? You tell me genius which is applicable to what I have consistently said regarding what has helped the Giants win. On top of that look at what the other team did when you apply that to what I have said.
Quote:
LOS you’re just making shit up.
Quote:
They are 7-0 when when they run 30 plus times for over 4ypc. 0-4 when they don't.
They beat the Panthers rushing 33 times for 103 yards, which is 3.1 YPC.
They beat the Ravens rushing 31 for 83 yards, which is 2.7 YPC.
They are not 7-0 when rushing 30 times at 4 YPC. In 2 of their 7 wins, that didn’t happen.
But you don’t seem like the kind of guy to let facts get in the way of a good theory. So have at it.
And what happened in those two games? You tell me genius which is applicable to what I have consistently said regarding what has helped the Giants win. On top of that look at what the other team did when you apply that to what I have said.
I think the simple way of putting that is: Oh yup. I’m wrong.
They’ll have to rip this one out of LOS’s frozen hands. He’ll hang on forever.
Never said that. I have said as most of the football community recognizes that if you are running the ball 30 times are more with success you will have a lot of favorable carry over to other parts on offense. It football 101. This is particularly important with the limitations the Giants have in PB and outside threats. Jones is certainly a part of it as well.
What Christian failed to consider in the two games against the Ravens and Panthers is the Giants won the turnover battle which helped overcome part of the formula that has worked for this Giants team.
We’ve been over it before how you’re not looking at the context. Winning teams run the ball more because at some point they have the lead and are killing the clock. That doesn’t mean that running it 30 times is why they won.
Quote:
Running it 30 times, whether it’s effective or not, is a recipe for winning games?
Never said that. I have said as most of the football community recognizes that if you are running the ball 30 times are more with success you will have a lot of favorable carry over to other parts on offense. It football 101. This is particularly important with the limitations the Giants have in PB and outside threats. Jones is certainly a part of it as well.
What Christian failed to consider in the two games against the Ravens and Panthers is the Giants won the turnover battle which helped overcome part of the formula that has worked for this Giants team.
So it’s either run 30 times or win the turnover battle?
Any other nuances or factors you want to consider like 3rd down success or red zone efficiency, or is it just mostly the 30 carries and turnovers?
In that thread LOS conceded teams with really good quarterbacks don’t need to hit his magical number.
So basically we’re left with: you need to have a really good quarterback, run the ball really well, or get a lot of turnovers, to be a good football team.
This is novel stuff guys.
Quote:
In comment 15923026 ajr2456 said:
Quote:
Running it 30 times, whether it’s effective or not, is a recipe for winning games?
Never said that. I have said as most of the football community recognizes that if you are running the ball 30 times are more with success you will have a lot of favorable carry over to other parts on offense. It football 101. This is particularly important with the limitations the Giants have in PB and outside threats. Jones is certainly a part of it as well.
What Christian failed to consider in the two games against the Ravens and Panthers is the Giants won the turnover battle which helped overcome part of the formula that has worked for this Giants team.
So it’s either run 30 times or win the turnover battle?
Any other nuances or factors you want to consider like 3rd down success or red zone efficiency, or is it just mostly the 30 carries and turnovers?
Not what I said. Did you look at those years I suggested you look at? I guess not.
Since you bring up 3rd down efficiency I guess you recognize the value of a good running game and how it creates favorable down/distance and uncertainty for the defense having to guard against running on say a 3rd and 3. The percentages are pretty clear on down/distance and positive outcomes. BD has talked about it many times and it is mentioned in the majority of broadcasts. The announcers last game mentioned how McCarthy said his team needs to get at least 30 carries. Go figure.
The majority of the WR’s on this team are jags at best. I am not sold on DJ, but this team is like watching a bad remake of the replacements.
Quote:
In comment 15923043 Lines of Scrimmage said:
Quote:
In comment 15923026 ajr2456 said:
Quote:
Running it 30 times, whether it’s effective or not, is a recipe for winning games?
Never said that. I have said as most of the football community recognizes that if you are running the ball 30 times are more with success you will have a lot of favorable carry over to other parts on offense. It football 101. This is particularly important with the limitations the Giants have in PB and outside threats. Jones is certainly a part of it as well.
What Christian failed to consider in the two games against the Ravens and Panthers is the Giants won the turnover battle which helped overcome part of the formula that has worked for this Giants team.
So it’s either run 30 times or win the turnover battle?
Any other nuances or factors you want to consider like 3rd down success or red zone efficiency, or is it just mostly the 30 carries and turnovers?
Not what I said. Did you look at those years I suggested you look at? I guess not.
Since you bring up 3rd down efficiency I guess you recognize the value of a good running game and how it creates favorable down/distance and uncertainty for the defense having to guard against running on say a 3rd and 3. The percentages are pretty clear on down/distance and positive outcomes. BD has talked about it many times and it is mentioned in the majority of broadcasts. The announcers last game mentioned how McCarthy said his team needs to get at least 30 carries. Go figure.
So now it’s also favorable down and distances that help too. Leading to more conversions and, what do you know, more carries.
Anything else?
In that thread LOS conceded teams with really good quarterbacks don’t need to hit his magical number.
So basically we’re left with: you need to have a really good quarterback, run the ball really well, or get a lot of turnovers, to be a good football team.
This is novel stuff guys.
And defense and specials must not matter.
Quote:
There was an outstanding thread a few months ago where Gatorade Dunk showed LOS how often teams compile rushing stats when they are winning.
In that thread LOS conceded teams with really good quarterbacks don’t need to hit his magical number.
So basically we’re left with: you need to have a really good quarterback, run the ball really well, or get a lot of turnovers, to be a good football team.
This is novel stuff guys.
And defense and specials must not matter.
I remember that thread. I believe the spreadsheet analysis and he was pointing out how teams in the lead run more in the 4th QTR. Really not relevant to what I say about the running game but I appreciated his effort.
I get it Christian. I rattled you because I call out your bullshit. But keep at it.
Perhaps take a break from the building the clocks and just give the time sometimes. This is one of those basic concepts that would suffice.
This is an out of context stat that ignores so many relevant variables that it is worthless except as supplemental info.
When all you really found is Salt makes food taste better.
When all you really found is Salt makes food taste better.
Again, do as I suggested with reviewing the seasons I mentioned. If you are not going to be prepared to make a argument don't do it with me please. I am not seeing one you are making.
Agree with the poster above regarding the variables. Pretty senseless stat overall without context.
I already pointed out the turnover difference.
I never said 30 carries guarantees victory. What I said is teams that can do it with success will win way more than they lose. History proves this and 30 has long been used as a good barometer. Go find a HC who disputes the value of rushing carries and its correlation to winning.
So instead of the few posters who like to challenge this (All thus far in the QBGC) show me teams who have had losing records where they had the advantages I stated. Its a small list. In the event you don't have this you better have a gifted group of skill WR's/TE's with a functional PB OL which I also have always pointed out.
Good luck.
Quote:
to the recipe for winning football with this 30 rushing attempt concept.
When all you really found is Salt makes food taste better.
Again, do as I suggested with reviewing the seasons I mentioned. If you are not going to be prepared to make a argument don't do it with me please. I am not seeing one you are making.
Agree with the poster above regarding the variables. Pretty senseless stat overall without context.
I did review and have made more than enough common sense statements to shed light on your cookie cutter wisdom. As have others.
There are a myriad of factors that go into why a team wins. Running effectively is certainly one but it’s obvious and not an interesting point. And 30 rushing attempts can be seen as the ends to a mean just as much as means to an end.
You can have the last word if you need it. Hopefully you use it better than any point above.
They didn’t hit 30 carries against Baltimore or Green Bay. So at best your theory is slightly over 50% for the Giants this year. Now that you’ve admitted all the other variables that go into winning a football game, it’s ok to admit that your theory isn’t actually a thing.
Look, I'm sorry you lied about the Giants W/L record this year when rushing for 120 yards and 4 YPC, and I called you on it. That must have been embarrassing for you.
So let's try this. Why don't you take another stab at a cogent point, and if you mess up again, I'll call up Gatorade Dunk to pull your pants down and spank you again like last time : )
Teams aren’t winning because they’re getting to 30 rushes, if that was the case teams would run the ball 50 times a game. They’re getting to 30 rushes because they’re winning the game.
Teams aren’t winning because they’re getting to 30 rushes, if that was the case teams would run the ball 50 times a game. They’re getting to 30 rushes because they’re winning the game.
What's mind numbing is a statement like this and what I have to read when you discuss QB's in general.
What's even more mind numbing is not understanding that many teams can't win the LOS to be able to have high rush carries and more so than not are poor teams overall.
Unless you don't value winning the lines as well.
Teams that throw for under 200 yards lose nearly 60% of the time. That’s a more meaningful statistic than some arbitrary rushing attempt total. 9 of the 14 teams in a playoff position don’t average 30 carries a game.
Teams that throw for under 200 yards lose nearly 60% of the time. That’s a more meaningful statistic than some arbitrary rushing attempt total. 9 of the 14 teams in a playoff position don’t average 30 carries a game.
I have never said anything about not throwing the ball for yardage or that it is not important. I like balance and in the end more times than that you will need it in the playoffs.
What I have said is that the running game creates opportunity in the passing game when you can do it with success. Creating dilemma on offense. Balance. Play action and big plays. The threat of run/pass because you can do both. Not many teams are equipped to win through the air alone.
Teams that can't do both with way more times get exposed in the playoffs.
For "this" Giants team they have to be able to run the ball. They are not equipped to beat teams through the air. How one wants to allocate blame is debatable. I think Jones is part of it but smaller in comparison to the OL and WR's. I would move on if the draft presents the opportunity. But he may be the best option and I also said long ago I am putting a premium on the last 7 games regarding him.
Of course, most of this won’t matter if you have an Uber, talented quarterback, but for the average offense, I think, running the ball, does tend to help both the office and the passing game. Of course, you need to have a quarterback who can make some hay out of these opportunities.
https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2018/rushing-success-and-play-action-passing
https://theathletic.com/980870/2019/07/26/teams-dont-have-to-establish-the-run-to-win-games-and-the-analytics-proves-it-but-the-run-isnt-dead-either/?source=user_shared_article
https://cowboyswire.usatoday.com/2020/01/18/nfl-analytics-study-running-the-ball-play-action-success-mike-mccarthy-dallas-cowboys/
https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2018/rushing-success-and-play-action-passing
https://theathletic.com/980870/2019/07/26/teams-dont-have-to-establish-the-run-to-win-games-and-the-analytics-proves-it-but-the-run-isnt-dead-either/?source=user_shared_article
https://cowboyswire.usatoday.com/2020/01/18/nfl-analytics-study-running-the-ball-play-action-success-mike-mccarthy-dallas-cowboys/
The first article explicitly states the argument it is making is that more rushes does not lead to bigger rushes in the game. It says it is not trying to downplay the value of rushing overall and its impact on the defense. I have never argues this.
The second article is 2011 and 2012. I guess they forgot to mention the difference in QB's. PM joined in 2012.
The McCarthy reference article. I will stick with what McCarthy said which is the standard for HC's.
The Atlantic article I could not open but it said something that you don't need the run to win but it is not dead yet either.
Again, as I have stated numerous times on different threads if you don't have a outstanding running attack you better have three components and which Homer above more or less said.
1. Functional PB OL.
2. QB who excels in processing and decision making.
3. Upper tier group of WR/TE's with ideally at least one elite option.
Your point is? That teams with a poor PB OL, poor WR group and a suspect PB OL should throw the ball to win? That a team that could run the ball very well that helped open PA and created favorable down/distance would not help the pass game? That running less ineffectively that created 2nd/3rd and longs would somehow help the pass game?
Brilliant.
And the second article is through 2017.
And you say “it’s the standard for head coaches” with zero proof. If it was standard why do 9 of the 14 playoff teams not run the ball to reach your arbitrary threshold?
Quote:
https://www.fieldgulls.com/2018/1/3/16808842/seahawks-establish-the-run-myth-nfl-analytics
https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2018/rushing-success-and-play-action-passing
https://theathletic.com/980870/2019/07/26/teams-dont-have-to-establish-the-run-to-win-games-and-the-analytics-proves-it-but-the-run-isnt-dead-either/?source=user_shared_article
https://cowboyswire.usatoday.com/2020/01/18/nfl-analytics-study-running-the-ball-play-action-success-mike-mccarthy-dallas-cowboys/
The first article explicitly states the argument it is making is that more rushes does not lead to bigger rushes in the game. It says it is not trying to downplay the value of rushing overall and its impact on the defense. I have never argues this.
The second article is 2011 and 2012. I guess they forgot to mention the difference in QB's. PM joined in 2012.
The McCarthy reference article. I will stick with what McCarthy said which is the standard for HC's.
The Atlantic article I could not open but it said something that you don't need the run to win but it is not dead yet either.
Again, as I have stated numerous times on different threads if you don't have a outstanding running attack you better have three components and which Homer above more or less said.
1. Functional PB OL.
2. QB who excels in processing and decision making.
3. Upper tier group of WR/TE's with ideally at least one elite option.
Your point is? That teams with a poor PB OL, poor WR group and a suspect PB OL should throw the ball to win? That a team that could run the ball very well that helped open PA and created favorable down/distance would not help the pass game? That running less ineffectively that created 2nd/3rd and longs would somehow help the pass game?
Brilliant.
The more you write the better off you were with a mythical statement that teams with 30 rushing attempts win. It has zero depth but at least it kept you from exposing this stunning thought process.
Good night.
You got it.
Giants last two SB's they had a plus 10 and 9 rushing carries advantage. Played a big role in the game keeping the highest scoring team in the league two times. Or maybe Gatorade was correct (that you highlighted his spreadsheet) about teams winning that battle was being ahead in the 4th Qtr......
The Denver/Seattle SB is another good one. Denver actually averaged 29 carries in season but boy did great defense sure did them in. It gets a bit tougher when you run the ball 13 times for under 2ypc. That LOS certainly shows up when it matters and a bit more difficult for PM facing those down/distances he did. Pete Carrol is a heck of a coach.
Stay with that 30 carries and see what the data tells you the next time you want to take a deep dive.
Maybe you will figure out the great destruction of 2012-17. It was Eli/TC right? Eli the phony as you say. Not the horrific drafts and destruction of the LOS and all that leads to. Don't forget that 2011 team that you said couldn't run. The old OL did pretty good in the SB with a week off in between. Too bad the front office could never replaced it. What a travesty.
Giants 7-0 rushing for over 30 carries. WFT team lags behind the other three in division at 29.8. All winning records. Perhaps the brilliant Googs "teams pass to run has some value"...does not seem the case in the NFCE.
Let's see how the division finishes up. Something tells me the LOS is going to be a big key and that 30 will have a lot of relevance.
But hey you can always go with Golfer and his football insights.-
Keep in mind, a few months ago it was 30 carries and 4.2 YPC, then yesterday it was 30 carries and 4 YPC, now today it's down to just 30 carries (ignoring kneel downs).
Notice how we're ignoring the shit we flat made up yesterday?
Also keep in mind the NFL average is 27 carries, 120 YPG, at 4.4 YPC.
So this great insight is basically if you're less efficient than the league rushing average, you're golden.
Unless you have a good pass offense. Or a very good defense.
This is some Beautiful Minds deep shit right here.
Quote:
So if you don't have a good run game, you can win with a good passing game? And if you don't have either of those, you can win with a good defense? This is earth shattering stuff.
You got it.
Giants last two SB's they had a plus 10 and 9 rushing carries advantage. Played a big role in the game keeping the highest scoring team in the league two times. Or maybe Gatorade was correct (that you highlighted his spreadsheet) about teams winning that battle was being ahead in the 4th Qtr......
The Denver/Seattle SB is another good one. Denver actually averaged 29 carries in season but boy did great defense sure did them in. It gets a bit tougher when you run the ball 13 times for under 2ypc. That LOS certainly shows up when it matters and a bit more difficult for PM facing those down/distances he did. Pete Carrol is a heck of a coach.
Stay with that 30 carries and see what the data tells you the next time you want to take a deep dive.
Maybe you will figure out the great destruction of 2012-17. It was Eli/TC right? Eli the phony as you say. Not the horrific drafts and destruction of the LOS and all that leads to. Don't forget that 2011 team that you said couldn't run. The old OL did pretty good in the SB with a week off in between. Too bad the front office could never replaced it. What a travesty.
Giants 7-0 rushing for over 30 carries. WFT team lags behind the other three in division at 29.8. All winning records. Perhaps the brilliant Googs "teams pass to run has some value"...does not seem the case in the NFCE.
Let's see how the division finishes up. Something tells me the LOS is going to be a big key and that 30 will have a lot of relevance.
But hey you can always go with Golfer and his football insights.-
You think telling this board that an effective running game and trying to get to 30 carries helps with winning football games is insightful stuff?
Mind-boggling. But keep patting yourself on the back with this dynamic game plan Coach.
We're one Jerry Reese Super Bowl clock mention away from the full compliment of the Irrelevant Greatest Hits.
You'll notice after a thorough analysis of the data, Al-Kindi actually never provides any real evidence. Just a few random examples.
It's pretty simple: what is the winning percentage of teams that rush the ball 30 time at 4 YPC versus teams that don't this year? How many of those carries and yards came in the 4th quarter while ahead?
We're one Jerry Reese Super Bowl clock mention away from the full compliment of the Irrelevant Greatest Hits.
You'll notice after a thorough analysis of the data, Al-Kindi actually never provides any real evidence. Just a few random examples.
It's pretty simple: what is the winning percentage of teams that rush the ball 30 time at 4 YPC versus teams that don't this year? How many of those carries and yards came in the 4th quarter while ahead?
Look at the NFCE. Your answers are right there which I already pointed out. Did you watch WFT today? 37 carries over 160 yards for 4.6. So I guess the bulk of those carries and yardage came in the 4th QTR right? Let's see what happens tonight with Philly. Add the WFT game to the Gatorade analysis.......any change to it? Seems the formula works for WFT as well like it does well over 50% of the time.
Yes because if the Giants had any other QB he would be lighting it up with Lawrence Cager, Richie James, Isaiah Hodgins, David Sills and 1.1 seconds to throw the ball. Simply brilliant!
C'mon with this.
It wasn't even this bad last season. Stop using the OL as excuse.
Quote:
If Jones is your QB, your best path to success is to have your QB do as little as possible. To Daboll's vast credit, he recognized this very early on and crafted an entire offensive scheme designed to cover up Jones's many limitations. We've seen the results- its not pretty or sustainable, but it does give us a chance to stay in games against mediocre/bad teams.
Yes because if the Giants had any other QB he would be lighting it up with Lawrence Cager, Richie James, Isaiah Hodgins, David Sills and 1.1 seconds to throw the ball. Simply brilliant!
You're right.
Why would you pay any QB $35M+ per year to throw to that bunch?
Well over 50% of the time? Well that's awesome! Sounds like you have some evidence to support that. It should be super easy to just post that right here.
Now, there's no chance you're making this one the fuck up like you did before about the Giants record? Because that was weird and lame.
So let's just make this simple: what years did you look? How many ges did a team rush for 120 yards and 4 YPC, and how many did they win?
Quote:
If Jones is your QB, your best path to success is to have your QB do as little as possible. To Daboll's vast credit, he recognized this very early on and crafted an entire offensive scheme designed to cover up Jones's many limitations. We've seen the results- its not pretty or sustainable, but it does give us a chance to stay in games against mediocre/bad teams.
Yes because if the Giants had any other QB he would be lighting it up with Lawrence Cager, Richie James, Isaiah Hodgins, David Sills and 1.1 seconds to throw the ball. Simply brilliant!
And the Employee of the Week for the DJFC is:
Walker Gillette.
Quote:
In comment 15923785 Jerry in_DC said:
Quote:
If Jones is your QB, your best path to success is to have your QB do as little as possible. To Daboll's vast credit, he recognized this very early on and crafted an entire offensive scheme designed to cover up Jones's many limitations. We've seen the results- its not pretty or sustainable, but it does give us a chance to stay in games against mediocre/bad teams.
Yes because if the Giants had any other QB he would be lighting it up with Lawrence Cager, Richie James, Isaiah Hodgins, David Sills and 1.1 seconds to throw the ball. Simply brilliant!
And the Employee of the Week for the DJFC is:
Walker Gillette.
You don't have an answer because all you do is spew, so you respond with this idiocy. I'm sure some morons are highly impressed. Your work is done here BW, sleep well tonight!
And the Employee of the Week for the DJFC is:
Walker Gillette.
You don't have an answer because all you do is spew, so you respond with this idiocy. I'm sure some morons are highly impressed. Your work is done here BW, sleep well tonight!
I'd like to apologize for assuming you had a sense of humor.
Quote:
And the Employee of the Week for the DJFC is:
Walker Gillette.
You don't have an answer because all you do is spew, so you respond with this idiocy. I'm sure some morons are highly impressed. Your work is done here BW, sleep well tonight!
I'd like to apologize for assuming you had a sense of humor.
A decent retort, I guess the best you could do.
Quote:
Seems the formula works for WFT as well like it does well over 50% of the time.
Well over 50% of the time? Well that's awesome! Sounds like you have some evidence to support that. It should be super easy to just post that right here.
Now, there's no chance you're making this one the fuck up like you did before about the Giants record? Because that was weird and lame.
So let's just make this simple: what years did you look? How many ges did a team rush for 120 yards and 4 YPC, and how many did they win?
You do your own work. I was taught the game. I am not playing your little question game you like to use on posters (that condescending one). What's next the "little man" comment you like to use on posters. I guess that reflection in the mirror runs pretty deep.
Good luck.
Quote:
In comment 15924064 Lines of Scrimmage said:
Quote:
Seems the formula works for WFT as well like it does well over 50% of the time.
Well over 50% of the time? Well that's awesome! Sounds like you have some evidence to support that. It should be super easy to just post that right here.
Now, there's no chance you're making this one the fuck up like you did before about the Giants record? Because that was weird and lame.
So let's just make this simple: what years did you look? How many ges did a team rush for 120 yards and 4 YPC, and how many did they win?
You do your own work. I was taught the game. I am not playing your little question game you like to use on posters (that condescending one). What's next the "little man" comment you like to use on posters. I guess that reflection in the mirror runs pretty deep.
Good luck.
Just so we're clear -- the little game you're referring to is the one where you make shit up, talk a bunch of crap to good posters, and then don't have the integrity to just admit you're full of it?
I know you don't want to, but for old time's sake, one more: what's the Giants record this year when they rush for 120 yards or more on 4 yards per run?
That all changed in the late '70's, when the NFL changed the passing game by not letting DB's contact WR's all down the field. The rules continued to change, favoring the passing game over the defense, and de-emphasizing the run game.
What we call the "run game" does not include WCO offenses, who use short passes on the edge (or behind the line, as in bubble screens and scrrens) as a run replacement. We should really include these types of passes as an extended hand off, and part of the run game.
To me, the difference between winning and losing today often comes down to the Red Zone. Can you run the ball inside the 20?
It does not matter if you can run between the 20's, if you can't run the ball in the Red Zone, then Defenses will simply drop back and make it almost impossible to pass, since they don't have much real estate to cover.
The best formula since the rule changes has been for offenses to be split 50-50 (Pass/Run), although it may be 60/40 now with the introduction of mobile QB's and RPO's.
Quote:
In comment 15924117 christian said:
Quote:
In comment 15924064 Lines of Scrimmage said:
Quote:
Seems the formula works for WFT as well like it does well over 50% of the time.
Well over 50% of the time? Well that's awesome! Sounds like you have some evidence to support that. It should be super easy to just post that right here.
Now, there's no chance you're making this one the fuck up like you did before about the Giants record? Because that was weird and lame.
So let's just make this simple: what years did you look? How many ges did a team rush for 120 yards and 4 YPC, and how many did they win?
You do your own work. I was taught the game. I am not playing your little question game you like to use on posters (that condescending one). What's next the "little man" comment you like to use on posters. I guess that reflection in the mirror runs pretty deep.
Good luck.
Just so we're clear -- the little game you're referring to is the one where you make shit up, talk a bunch of crap to good posters, and then don't have the integrity to just admit you're full of it?
I know you don't want to, but for old time's sake, one more: what's the Giants record this year when they rush for 120 yards or more on 4 yards per run?
Just so we are clear.
Just so we are clear I don't answer to you. Who are you to determine who is a good or bad poster? Each individual determines that.
But you can answer a question for me. Go back to 2005-2010.
Rushing carries, YPA. What was the record?
2012-17 Do it again. Report.
Perhaps you change your Eli was the problem and should be gone in 2012 and not the phony you accused him of.
Now let's go to Jones. Do the exercise for his three years and see what his record is.
You can let me know what you learn if you learn. You can figure out your percentages from that point. It's one time. Slight variation depending on team but good luck. Your the date guy.
And just so you can keep your fact sheet on my views up-to-date, I wanted the Giants to ditch Manning in 2017.
I think he's a phony on TV, and a total fake. If you enjoy yucking along with a dude who's a millionaire who scammed fans with fake memorabilia, have it.
So now your deep revelation isn't based on NFL averages, or recent NFL averages, but how the Giants played 17 years ago? This is too good. You almost had me. For a minute I thought you were serious. Honestly, really good one.
Quote:
In comment 15924188 Lines of Scrimmage said:
Quote:
In comment 15924117 christian said:
Quote:
In comment 15924064 Lines of Scrimmage said:
Quote:
Seems the formula works for WFT as well like it does well over 50% of the time.
Well over 50% of the time? Well that's awesome! Sounds like you have some evidence to support that. It should be super easy to just post that right here.
Now, there's no chance you're making this one the fuck up like you did before about the Giants record? Because that was weird and lame.
So let's just make this simple: what years did you look? How many ges did a team rush for 120 yards and 4 YPC, and how many did they win?
You do your own work. I was taught the game. I am not playing your little question game you like to use on posters (that condescending one). What's next the "little man" comment you like to use on posters. I guess that reflection in the mirror runs pretty deep.
Good luck.
Just so we're clear -- the little game you're referring to is the one where you make shit up, talk a bunch of crap to good posters, and then don't have the integrity to just admit you're full of it?
I know you don't want to, but for old time's sake, one more: what's the Giants record this year when they rush for 120 yards or more on 4 yards per run?
Just so we are clear.
Just so we are clear I don't answer to you. Who are you to determine who is a good or bad poster? Each individual determines that.
But you can answer a question for me. Go back to 2005-2010.
Rushing carries, YPA. What was the record?
2012-17 Do it again. Report.
Perhaps you change your Eli was the problem and should be gone in 2012 and not the phony you accused him of.
Now let's go to Jones. Do the exercise for his three years and see what his record is.
You can let me know what you learn if you learn. You can figure out your percentages from that point. It's one time. Slight variation depending on team but good luck. Your the date guy.
Why do you need to go back to 2012-2017? You must realize with your immense knowledge base Coach that the game continues to develop, and becomes generally more passing oriented than running as years go on.
Keep engaged on what on want you originally wanted to debate versus pivoting and modifying your stance.
Still here if you want to engage. So we are clear.
And just so you can keep your fact sheet on my views up-to-date, I wanted the Giants to ditch Manning in 2017.
I think he's a phony on TV, and a total fake. If you enjoy yucking along with a dude who's a millionaire who scammed fans with fake memorabilia, have it.
So now your deep revelation isn't based on NFL averages, or recent NFL averages, but how the Giants played 17 years ago? This is too good. You almost had me. For a minute I thought you were serious. Honestly, really good one.
2022
NYG 32 4.7 151 7-4
Dallas 30 4.6 139 8-3
Philly 34 4.7 162 10-1
WFT 33 4.0 121 6-5
2007 29.8 4.6 134
2011 25 3.5 89
2013 23 3.5 83
You can figure out the percentages. If you have some common sense you can see the clear differences. You can do the other years. 2011 was the one year they got around it but that was with a upper tier WR group. When that fell group fell apart it exposed the great destruction (2012-13). Also happening at this time was the destruction on the D lines but that took a bit longer for full effect. Giants did draft two players (JPP, Linval) to help with that. Unfortunately they let Linval go and that side of the line the destruction was complete.
So there it is. NFCE football. Your build clocks so you can figure out what this means or not.
Just so we are clear. You lied. You wanted Eli gone in 2012/13. 2015 (said numerous time) and 2017. Big Men like you should have some honor? Never mind.
Golfer. I have no issue with throwing the ball. This team is not constructed for that. You put a upper tier QB with a functional PB OL and upper tier skill group I have no issues. Who are these upper tier WR threats the Giants have? I have no issue with discussion but let's be real. You seem more like a smart ass. Your a passing coordinator right? What's the plan? I gave one and the results are up above. You see a prime Nicks? Cruz? Manningham?
You push this same theme for other pro teams, college teams, prior NYG teams, prior other pro teams. You have posts above giving reference to what happened a decade ago.
Of course this NYG team isn't well constructed to pass the ball efficiently as many others. And that is likely their fatal flaw when this season is all said and done. But that doesn't mean they should just run it 30 times in as many games that they can or build a team going forward that uses that particular strategy to underpin its goals of winning.
As posted earlier, 30 carries and doing it efficiently can be seen as much as the ends to a mean as it does means to an end.
You're out of your league. One of the divisions I run at a multiple-billion dollar technology company is predictive data analytics. I'm not just the clock maker, I am inventing the mother fucking clock in a lot of this. Go sit down, and stop making shit up.
One more time, what's the Giants record in 2022 when they run for 120 Yards on 4+ YPC? Do you have balls to admit you made that number up earlier in this thread, and I called you out on it?
Your logic is an absolute mess. I doubt you even know at this point what you're trying to prove.
If you're trying to prove in any given NFL game, you have a better chance of winning than losing if you rush for 120+ on 4 YPC+, you need to look at a lot more than one year or one division of data. You definitely cannot look at 16 game averages per team, on that small of a data set the outliers pull the numbers too severely.
You also need to take into account both teams can hit that threshold, and only one can win, so you need to look at the data for the entire W/L outputs for the league. Now you're getting closer to correlation.
Next, you'll probably want to run the data from 2005 to present, as the Ty Law rule changes in effect for the 2005 season.
And then cleanse the data. Are there more casual factors? You might want to take into account for the 2022 season, over the 100+ games so far the average is: 27 carries, 121 yards, 4.5 YPC. So 30 carries for 120 yards might not be a strong tipping point.
This arbitrary threshold might be as useful as claiming more teams win when they wear helmets. So then what are the factors that occur and are they more predictive?
But hey, you were taught the game. You know all of this. This is easy stuff to prove and debate. I'm all ears.
It would probably take you an hour to go through all of the games in 2022 and start there:
2022 Games - ( New Window )
If you like you can listen to the Bama/Texas game. He harped on a lot things I mentioned in that thread. Down/distance, run game, skill talent. Finebaum and McElroy have commented and wrote a lot on this as well this year as well. As others.... anyway I saw issues last season. One of the big reasons I am so impressed with young.
BTW you remind me of Googs. Maybe he can share a Saban video with you and see if he has thoughts on the topic. I have heard him in season discussing it and changing some OL to address. Even used the word "physical".
You're out of your league. One of the divisions I run at a multiple-billion dollar technology company is predictive data analytics. I'm not just the clock maker, I am inventing the mother fucking clock in a lot of this. Go sit down, and stop making shit up.
One more time, what's the Giants record in 2022 when they run for 120 Yards on 4+ YPC? Do you have balls to admit you made that number up earlier in this thread, and I called you out on it?
Your logic is an absolute mess. I doubt you even know at this point what you're trying to prove.
If you're trying to prove in any given NFL game, you have a better chance of winning than losing if you rush for 120+ on 4 YPC+, you need to look at a lot more than one year or one division of data. You definitely cannot look at 16 game averages per team, on that small of a data set the outliers pull the numbers too severely.
You also need to take into account both teams can hit that threshold, and only one can win, so you need to look at the data for the entire W/L outputs for the league. Now you're getting closer to correlation.
Next, you'll probably want to run the data from 2005 to present, as the Ty Law rule changes in effect for the 2005 season.
And then cleanse the data. Are there more casual factors? You might want to take into account for the 2022 season, over the 100+ games so far the average is: 27 carries, 121 yards, 4.5 YPC. So 30 carries for 120 yards might not be a strong tipping point.
This arbitrary threshold might be as useful as claiming more teams win when they wear helmets. So then what are the factors that occur and are they more predictive?
But hey, you were taught the game. You know all of this. This is easy stuff to prove and debate. I'm all ears.
It would probably take you an hour to go through all of the games in 2022 and start there: 2022 Games - ( New Window )
I see you're a talented data guy. You have mentioned it before in some threads and the consulting work. Why do you think I told you to go ahead and do that if you like? I just posted the Giants and the NFCE. Hopefully you saw that 2013 year. That was the bottoming of the great destruction from the drafts. Hopefully it is clear now. Far worse OL than that 2011 OL already on fumes and with a finished Nicks even worse OL tough sledding for a pocket passer no? Talent wise does not look a whole lot better to me for Jones depending on the year and position group. Good thing that run game is helping out though.
Yes, that post is somewhere. I had said something like you probably wanted TC or Eli gone in 2012/13. You replied "both". 2015 several times. I am not into searching threads that is your thing.
I already conceded the error on the YPA. Point remains. Look at the Giants and NFCE. That's my interest. You want to go league wide. Have at it. I
The statistical analysis that keep bringing up. See the Eagles game last night? 29 carries the first half in a close game. 20-20 but they scored at the end of the half to take the lead. Finished with I think 45. So a statistic like that would not really put accurate right? The running game was a big part of it from the get go and a big part of getting the lead. If you want to add those carries in the 4th have at it. For me its fluff. But I am not a huge data guy. My education and previous line of work taught me to see things a bit differently and that checking data is a good thing and not as always complete as you think. Include if you like but for me its senseless unless the story of the game comes with it.
Same can be said for not being near the league passing averages.
I suspect if you look at the individual game data, in most NFL games both teams are within one standard deviation of 30 carries and 120 yards. So if both teams are doing it, it’s probably not a great leading indicator, other than that’s what teams just normally do.
Now if a team regularly doesn’t come in near the league averages, I’d posit 3 things are likely at play:
1) They are behind a bunch and have to pass the ball a lot in the 2nd half
2) They pass so well, so they don’t bother running
3) They are a bottom tier offense, and don’t get a lot of possessions to run or pass
Again, this is all speculation, but I’d bet not hitting those targets is a better predictor of losing, than it is winning. Because remember, both teams are likely to hit those targets, but only one can win any given game.
What these numbers don’t show is a 30 rush, 120 yard game, is a signal of a team winning at the line of scrimmage, or being more dominant. These are pedestrian numbers that are par for the course.