Jump to content

Lesson From This Weekend For Falcons? Running Game Crucial


Kaptain Krazy
 Share

Recommended Posts

Indy was behind 31-10 at half, and 38-10 3 minutes into the 3rd quarter, so their relatively paltry 100 yards rushing on only 19 carries is somewhat anomalous. Here are the other three winners:

New Orleans - 185 yards on 36 carries

San Francisco - 167 yards on 30 carries

San Diego - 196 yards on 40 carries

Even the losing teams finished with

Cincy - 113 on 25 carries

KC - 150 on 32 carries

Philly - 80 on 22 carries

GB - 124 on 31carries

Here are the Falcons rushing totals each game: 88, 36, 146, 58, 64, 18, 27, 78, 64, 152, 91, 151, 83, 54, 61, and 76.

The Falcons had more games (5) with less than 60 yards rushing than they had games (3) where they had 100 or more. That is pathetic.

Teams with legitimate playoff expectations must be able to run the ball. We spend all week talking about the QBs, but New Orleans and San Diego were winning road games because they had an OL and RBs that could get yards on the ground. Neither Brees nor Rivers are running the read option, so it's not critical that your QB can run the ball. And Rivers is the ONLY one of the four winning QBs that didn't throw an INT...mostly because he only threw it 16 times! (and only had 128 yards passing). This board has been "Swift"-boated into talking about QB play incessantly when the real issue is the running game.

This off-season HAS to be about fixing the OL and committing to being able to run the ball.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Indy was behind 31-10 at half, and 38-10 3 minutes into the 3rd quarter, so their relatively paltry 100 yards rushing on only 19 carries is somewhat anomalous. Here are the other three winners:

New Orleans - 185 yards on 36 carries

San Francisco - 167 yards on 30 carries

San Diego - 196 yards on 40 carries

Even the losing teams finished with

Cincy - 113 on 25 carries

KC - 150 on 32 carries

Philly - 80 on 22 carries

GB - 124 on 31carries

Here are the Falcons rushing totals each game: 88, 36, 146, 58, 64, 18, 27, 78, 64, 152, 91, 151, 83, 54, 61, and 76.

The Falcons had more games (5) with less than 60 yards rushing than they had games (3) where they had 100 or more. That is pathetic.

Teams with legitimate playoff expectations must be able to run the ball. We spend all week talking about the QBs, but New Orleans and San Diego were winning road games because they had an OL and RBs that could get yards on the ground. Neither Brees nor Rivers are running the read option, so it's not critical that your QB can run the ball. And Rivers is the ONLY one of the four winning QBs that didn't throw an INT...mostly because he only threw it 16 times! (and only had 128 yards passing). This board has been "Swift"-boated into talking about QB play incessantly when the real issue is the running game.

This off-season HAS to be about fixing the OL and committing to being able to run the ball.

Ha ok

Did you watch the Falcons a few years ago when they had the best and most pyhiscal running game in the NFL with Micheal Turner

Playoff games are won with defense not a running game a good Defense need a solid running game but it doesn't need to be great the 49ers found that out when they found them selves down 17-3 last year fortunately the falcons had no defense to stop them otherwise it could have got out of hand quickly as we found out against the packers.

I'll take a top notch defense over a running game any day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We HAVE to balance out our Offense with a running game. Like you said, that is crucial!

We can't because the defense for the most part was horrible if we committed to the run say like the packers did against the 49ers the game would be over the bad defense forces the offense to be aggressive and throw the ball a lot and put points on the board and if healthy the can and have moved the ball at will but a solid running game is important as it slows a DL later in games but heck we don't do either play defense or run the ball.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

UUUGHHHHHHHHH

Correlation =/= causation.

Winning football games results in running the ball, usually not the other way around. A run game isn't useless or anything....its just not causal in the way you suggest it is.

Also, context matters when discussing running statistics. You say SF ran the ball well, but the majority of their running yards came on passing plays with man to man coverage. That's not "running the ball" thats improvising off of the pass. Their "run game" was fairly underwhelming.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Our main problem is we don't run enough. I don't even know if we've had any games where we ran the ball 30 times. Even if it looks like the run game isn't doing much we gotta keep churning. We get pass happy and abandon the run.

Checking w/ Pro Football Reference, we only ran the ball twice this season 30 times (which was the most this season), and that was Miami for 146 yds and Buffalo for 151 yds
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Our main problem is we don't run enough. I don't even know if we've had any games where we ran the ball 30 times. Even if it looks like the run game isn't doing much we gotta keep churning. We get pass happy and abandon the run.

Agreed, which is why i included the number of carries as well. A commitment to running the ball matters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

UUUGHHHHHHHHH

Correlation =/= causation.

Winning football games results in running the ball, usually not the other way around. A run game isn't useless or anything....its just not causal in the way you suggest it is.

Also, context matters when discussing running statistics. You say SF ran the ball well, but the majority of their running yards came on passing plays with man to man coverage. That's not "running the ball" thats improvising off of the pass. Their "run game" was fairly underwhelming.

i agree that causation is not the same as correlation. Running the football doesn't guarantee a Win. But being able to run the ball IS causally related to Ws. The reason why is simple: the ability to run the ball means when you get the lead, you can milk the clock and minimize how often the opponent's Offense gets on the field. It's funny that some responded to my original post by citing Luck and Indy. Ironically, that game proves my point from the other side: in the second half, with the lead, KC ran the ball 11 times and passed 26 times. Indy had nine possessions in the second half, the last of those in victory formation. Being able to run the ball allows you to maintain a lead and not being able to means you're forced to do something where three things can happen...and two of those are bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think there was even a 100 yard rusher this weekend, but there were HUGE passing numbers, so...no.

Dang, this a bad response. As another poster has already noted, whether a single RB gets 100 yards is much less relevant than whether the TEAM rushing total matters. And other than Luck, who as i noted in my original post was playing from multiple scores down for most of the game and had to air it out, you're just wrong factually.

Brees threw for 250 yards, only 1 TD

Rivers threw for 128 yards, 1 TD

Kaepernick threw for 227 yards, 1 TD

Outside of Luck, every other winning QB had rather pedestrian passing numbers, so you're just wrong on the facts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Note Breez had 4 QB Sneaks, their line pushed the DL about 4 yards each time. That would make all the difference for ATL.

i agree with this 100%. The middle of the Falcons OL has made it impossible for any running game up the middle...please take note of this DK before you call the next 3rd and short!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ha ok

Did you watch the Falcons a few years ago when they had the best and most pyhiscal running game in the NFL with Micheal Turner

Playoff games are won with defense not a running game a good Defense need a solid running game but it doesn't need to be great the 49ers found that out when they found them selves down 17-3 last year fortunately the falcons had no defense to stop them otherwise it could have got out of hand quickly as we found out against the packers.

I'll take a top notch defense over a running game any day.

First, yes, i watched them. Having been a STH since 2009, i get an up close and personal view of the team.

Second, my original post wasn't comparing whether it was more important to have a good running game or a good D. If i had to choose between the two, like you, i would rather the Falcons have a great D than a great running game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i agree with this 100%. The middle of the Falcons OL has made it impossible for any running game up the middle...please take note of this DK before you call the next 3rd and short!

I think what throws us off is balance. There were games where the running game was actually effective and we still abandoned it. I saw Rodgers struggling early and they used the run game to set the tone and they drove down the field. We may start with the running game setting the tone and still find a way to abandon it. Right now if say we're close to an 80/20 ratio and we need to be closer to 60/40. Collectively we need to run the ball 25-30 times a game. At some point one of the backs will break for chunk yardage and begin wearing the defense out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Checking w/ Pro Football Reference, we only ran the ball twice this season 30 times (which was the most this season), and that was Miami for 146 yds and Buffalo for 151 yds

That's a problem for me. That's exactly what happened to Mike Martz and the rams. They abandoned Marshall Faulk and the run game and teams pinned their ears back and went after Kurt Warner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because the league is so pass happy it does t matter about an individual 100 yard rusher. We need to rush for 100+ yards as a team. The year the saints won the SB they had a top 5 rushing attack but no 1000 yard individual rusher. That's the kind of team we are now. We don't need a workhorse rb but an affective running attack collectively.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...