Time of possession

[Summerhill]

I've been reading and posting on NFL message boards for 20 years and not just with the Falcons. For 20 years I've read fans' fantasies about building a smashmouth team that will control the clock and dominate time of possession to such an extent that the opponents won't even be able to score. 

But is any of this realistic? Does it actually happen in the NFL? If you do dominate time of possession, does it lead to winning or is it a nonfactor? 

Here is the complete list of time of possession rankings for 2022 followed by the team's record: 

1. 33:05, 8-8-1
2. 31:33, 7-10
3. 31:29, 12-4
4. 31:29, 13-4
5. 31:24, 14-3 (lost Super Bowl)
6. 31:18, 9-8
7. 31:14, 10-7
8. 31:13, 8-9
9. 30:34, 10-7
10. 30:10, 6-11
11. 30:04, 9-7-1
12. 29:55, 9-8
13. 29:50, 14-3 (won Super Bowl)
14. 29:50, 4-13
15. 29:47, 4-12
16. 29:45, 5-12
17. 29:39, 7-10
18. 29:38, 13-3
19. 29:34, 5-12
20. 29:31, 7-10
21. 29:30, 3-14
22. 29:27, 12-5
23. 29:23, 7-10
24. 29:21, 9-8
25. 29:14, 9-8
26. 29:05, 8-9
27. 29:05, 13-4
28. 28:54, 8-9
29. 28:44, 7-10
30. 28:38, 3-13-1
31. 28:35, 9-8
32. 28:26, 7-10

What are the lessons? 

• A random team with a high time of possession holds the ball for about 90 seconds more than a random team with a lower time of possession. We can assume this means the team with higher time of possession gets between 2-4 extra plays in a game. 
• The top 9 teams in time of possession were all at least decent. There weren't any stinky teams with high time of possession. But once you get past that it is completely random. The 13-4 Vikings were #27 and the 12-5 Cowboys were #22. 

[FalconFanSince1969]

Could have been a good discussion if your sample size wasnt a single season. 

[Brewcrew]

Today's NFL is built around passing oriented, quick strike, big play offense and bend-don't-break defense focused on preventing big plays.   This modern strategy belies your point that time of possession could definitely be overrated.  

[H2O]

Gives the D time to rest.

[JayOzOne]

There are a lot of variables that go into where teams wind up. Minnesota and Dallas are great examples for why this is true. Both teams' records were due to different circumstances. For example, Dallas had a very good defense, so they gave their offense plenty of opportunities. Minnesota's offense was good, but their defense was poop and they caught a lot of breaks last season and won close games at the end.

The best formula to success is to have sustainable performance and having a team built for ball control assumes that the team passes less and will consequentially have fewer turnovers. If that bears out, ToP is likely to be higher and the chance to score on drives increases. ToP may be an overrated statistic and goal, but if you have top 10 ToP and a top-10 defense, your chances of winning have to be much higher.

It all comes down to keeping the ball and then being able to get it back. It seems counter-intuitive to suggest that that's not a formula for success.

[Summerhill]

2 minutes ago, H2O said:

Gives the D time to rest.

DVOA defense:

1. SF #4 T.O.P.
2. DAL #22 T.O.P.
3. NE #26 T.O.P.
4. BUF #18 T.O.P.
5. NYJ #29 T.O.P.

There is not any correlation between good defenses and high time of possession. 

[Tribal Chief]

I've never been a believer in TOP playing a role in success. For years the Falcons would control the clock only to finish the drive with a field goal most times yet give up touchdowns in no time at all. Does no good to keep the ball 10 minutes just to give up a score in 2. It only matters in the 4th quarter with a lead if you can manage to play error free football

[SwampyMux12]

Time of possession only matters if you score tds at the end of drives. You can hold the ball all day long, but if you end up kicking the ball, you're probably going to lose.

[PokerSteve]

2 hours ago, Brewcrew said:

Today's NFL is built around passing oriented, quick strike, big play offense and bend-don't-break defense focused on preventing big plays.   This modern strategy belies your point that time of possession could definitely be overrated.  

Yeah if you grind up 12 minutes of clock and only score a FG, then your D gives up a TD on four plays, what really did you gain? Asking because we've specialized in that strategy before. 🤣

[Mid-Nite-Toker]

36 minutes ago, SwampyMux12 said:

Time of possession only matters if you score tds at the end of drives. You can hold the ball all day long, but if you end up kicking the ball, you're probably going to lose.

Circa 2008-2010 it was a recipe for success, but yeah you have to get tds.

 

[DownvoteDon]

I'm much more concerned about number of plays than TOP, particularly in warm weather games.

More than anything, Smith's offense compresses games.  If the offense is functioning well, the defense should be on the field for less than 50 plays per game.  The fast strike 2016 offense put tremendous pressure on the defense.  Our achilles heel was exposed throughout the season when teams would frequently stage comebacks (not enough to win but enough to make us nervous.)  Bellichick exploited that tendency in the Super Bowl, of course.  Robert Alford was on the field for 95 freakin' plays. 

My hope is that our defense will be in a better position to keep up a pass rush in the fourth quarter if they have played the equivalent of half a game rather than a game and a half!

Along the same lines, our offense is built to grind out the clock late in games to limit possessions by the opposing offense.

[Dirtybird56]

TOP is overrated

Play-action works just as well regardless of whether you have a good run game 

defense wins championships isn’t true

Wide receivers are not shiny ornaments but one of the most valuable positions

trying to think of more, but off the top of my head these are the I’ve learned about that I initially didn’t understand when first watching the game, instead believing the typical cliches/myths

all that said, we are building a high level offense that I expect to be top 7 in PPG this season

[Diesel_Bird]

Just score touchdowns. Don’t care how long it takes 

[gazoo]

There is a very good reason our first and top free agent Jessie Bates is an eraser who excels playing on the backend of the defense.  He’s considered an eraser because he cleans up mistakes that may have been made in front of him and prevents them from turning into a quick 6.

If you are a ball control offense, you cannot afford to give up cheap, quick, long touchdowns or points of any kind. But in todays NFL you also have to be able to take the top off a defense, which is why we have guys who can do that in Pitts, London and Bijan.
 

We have players who can move the ball down the field quickly if need be. Mack Hollis is an underrated signing at WR who had 690 receiving yards last year at a 12.1 yards per catch average. Jonnu Smith is fantastic in space. Bijan should be fantastic anywhere on the field.

And if you are ball control you better be able to punch the ball in for a TD on those 80 yard drives. 3 points doesn’t cut it, and we have the best red zone options of possibly any team in the NFL. We are going to be lethal in the red zone with the kind of packages we can run. Jonnu Smith had 12 TDs last time he played in an AS offense. 
 

So it’s not just ball control that we have. We have a blend of ball control with guys who can hit home runs and the ability to score quickly if need be. We are multiple on offense, it’s a blend of yesterdays smash mouth with todays superstar skill chess pieces on offense.

[Mid-Nite-Toker]

Most if not all stats need "context."

The 3 lies: Lies, **** lies, and statistics. Mark Twain.

[Hashbrown3]

3 hours ago, Summerhill said:

I've been reading and posting on NFL message boards for 20 years and not just with the Falcons. For 20 years I've read fans' fantasies about building a smashmouth team that will control the clock and dominate time of possession to such an extent that the opponents won't even be able to score. 

But is any of this realistic? Does it actually happen in the NFL? If you do dominate time of possession, does it lead to winning or is it a nonfactor? 

Here is the complete list of time of possession rankings for 2022 followed by the team's record: 

1. 33:05, 8-8-1
2. 31:33, 7-10
3. 31:29, 12-4
4. 31:29, 13-4
5. 31:24, 14-3 (lost Super Bowl)
6. 31:18, 9-8
7. 31:14, 10-7
8. 31:13, 8-9
9. 30:34, 10-7
10. 30:10, 6-11
11. 30:04, 9-7-1
12. 29:55, 9-8
13. 29:50, 14-3 (won Super Bowl)
14. 29:50, 4-13
15. 29:47, 4-12
16. 29:45, 5-12
17. 29:39, 7-10
18. 29:38, 13-3
19. 29:34, 5-12
20. 29:31, 7-10
21. 29:30, 3-14
22. 29:27, 12-5
23. 29:23, 7-10
24. 29:21, 9-8
25. 29:14, 9-8
26. 29:05, 8-9
27. 29:05, 13-4
28. 28:54, 8-9
29. 28:44, 7-10
30. 28:38, 3-13-1
31. 28:35, 9-8
32. 28:26, 7-10

What are the lessons? 

• A random team with a high time of possession holds the ball for about 90 seconds more than a random team with a lower time of possession. We can assume this means the team with higher time of possession gets between 2-4 extra plays in a game. 
• The top 9 teams in time of possession were all at least decent. There weren't any stinky teams with high time of possession. But once you get past that it is completely random. The 13-4 Vikings were #27 and the 12-5 Cowboys were #22. 

Hold up…

[Hashbrown3]

For me, our ground & pound may help TOP but it’s more about wearing a team down by kicking their ***. This, in turn, opens up quick strikes, more scoring drives & keeps your D fresh. So it’s all related & singularly important.

[Freddies 3rd Cuz]

I just be **** if I know what to think…I’m totally bum fuzzed 

[PokerSteve]

21 minutes ago, Hashbrown3 said:

For me, our ground & pound may help TOP but it’s more about wearing a team down by kicking their ***. This, in turn, opens up quick strikes, more scoring drives & keeps your D fresh. So it’s all related & singularly important.

Yeah, I know Smith likes to just run the piss outta the ball, but his scheme will include a whole lot more passing this season. He's going to be looking to take full advantage of defenses having to load up the LOS to try to stop the run to deliver some long strikes for TD's. He didn't have that option with Mariota.

[Mid-Nite-Toker]

9 minutes ago, Freddies 3rd Cuz said:

I just be **** if I know what to think…I’m totally bum fuzzed 

Looking at Atlanta 2008-2010 vs 2016 and 2023 might put TOP in better perspective.

2008-2010 TOP was important because it kept the run game involved all 4qtrs and we finished in the red zone. Even with a bend but don't break D.

2016 - our offense was wickedly efficient so I don't think it mattered as much.  Still had a bend but don't break D.

2023 - inefficient passing game with a defense that couldn't get off the field.  We kept points down but the offense didn't get enough opportunities needed with an anemic passing game. TOP on offense might've been more significant.

[Tim Mazetti]

5 hours ago, Summerhill said:

29:05, 13-4

Offensive juggernaut?  No, just efficient.

[Brehus]

Time of possession gives the D time to rest and gives the other team fewer plays

If you are the standard Falcons that play for FGs vs TDs you will still lose a lot of games 

[Tribal Chief]

1 minute ago, Brehus said:

Time of possession gives the D time to rest and gives the other team fewer plays

If you are the standard Falcons that play for FGs vs TDs you will still lose a lot of games 

You also give the other teams offense time to rest. double edged sword for both teams

[takeitdown]

It's a football truism that's a myth that time of possession helps the defense rest.  Rest is based on how much time you're off the field...not how much "clock time."  Running 10 passes that take 2 min off the clock lets a defense rest just as much as 10 runs that take 5 minutes off the clock.  That's because the real clock is going to have 40 sec per play either way.  It's just the game clock that is different.

The relevant factors for time of possession that do correlate with winning aren't related to run vs pass.

If your defense gets off the field on 3rd down, you'll end up with a better time of possession and that will be meaningful.  If your offense has very few 3 and outs and multiple long drives, you will have better time of possession and that will be meaningful.

But the run vs pass aspect of bleeding clock is only relevant in the late 4th quarter.

[Summerhill]

4 minutes ago, Brehus said:

Time of possession gives the D time to rest and gives the other team fewer plays

But as the numbers show, the average team with a high time of possession holds the ball an extra 60-90 seconds of game time.