(no message)
All the top 5 teams except Ohio State had mor yards passing than rushing and Ohio State the difference was only 4 ypg.
National Champion LSU 167.2 ypg rushing, 401.6 ypg passing
Notre Dame 179 ypg rushing, 252.2 ypg passing
plays typically cover more yards. However, if you look back throughout the years the team that rushes for more yards in a game usually is the winner. It appears that if you have an offensive mix, yes you will get more yards passing than rushing in your own offense. However the team that rushes for more yards will more often win the game. That said, these days the QB rushing game has become such an integral part of key plays that the stats can be skewed. The one great exception is Navy who will generally out rush every team they play win or lose.
A play mix to me is the best offensive system and to be an undefeated team, you have to pass and run well. The rare exception to this general rule is when the QB is such an effective runner that he can beat a team by having a dominating game on his own. Mahones and the kid from the Ravens are doing it at a pro level and so is Watson to an extent. Their effectiveness with their feet makes it incredibly difficult for defenses to stop them for the whole game because defenses can cover the pass for only so long and it opens up big play potential. It appears running strong teams field more consistent teams while passing teams can more likely spring upsets.
Bill is a genius at creating whatever mismatches he can repeatedly exploit.
San Fran for instance had nearly double the passing yards than rushing yards this season, yet they had slightly more rush attempts than pass attempts and were the #2 rushing team in the league (and only 13th in the league in passing).
A balanced offense is not one that has similar rushing and passing yards (that would be an unbalanced offense likely resulting from one of two things: either having a tremendous rush attack with very high yds per rush attempt or a poor pass offense with very low yds per pass attempt). A balanced offense is one that has similar rushing and passing attempts, and specifically designed rush attempts by RBs (with the rare exception being the teams who have legitimate running threats at QB and run lots of designed runs for the QB).
If balanced "and" successful, an offense should average around 4 yds or more per rush attempt while around 8 yds or more per pass attempt would be expected, so yeah if a team is balanced on offense they "should" have around double the passing yds.
The idea that there's some golden ratio of "designed runs" to passes is complete and utter bullshit. Game plans, team strengths, defensive tendencies, etc dictate play calls. Games won by running the ball are worth no more than games won by passing it, regardless of your preferences.
worth of data.
Just keep on broadcasting..
Unsurprisingly, they went with their strength.
they outrushed Clemson 165-160 in the championship game, but I don't think you'll find anyone disputing that they were the dominant team.
I don't understand what this rushing ideal is for ND fans. The top running teams in the country this year were Navy, Air Force, Army and Kentucky. Not terribly fun teams to watch. Ohio State was 5th. Then the rest of the top 15 was Louisiana-Lafayette, Georgia Southern, Boston College, Ole Miss, Buffalo, Tulane, Georgia State before Clemson, Oklahoma and Wisconsin.
Clemson and Oklahoma were both waxed by LSU's superior passing offense. Wisconsin relied on the running game all year and then lost the Rose Bowl to a team who rushed for 66 yards.
Running is fine and serves an important purpose, especially situationally, but it's less important in modern football than passing.
(no message)
So much so that their rushing stats are basically meaningless.
Burrow threw for 400 yards and 7 TD in the first half against OK. Anyone that tries to tie their success to "designed runs" simply hasn't been paying attention.
day against their opponent usually and I mean often, win the game. That does not say they won't win when they have more passing yards but sometimes great passing yards can be indicative of being in a "catch up" mode. If you can control the game and strong running attack usually does that, than you probably win if the passing stats aren't outlandishly high for one team over the other.
Personally I like passing the ball but I love play action that has been effectively set up with a good running game. When this happens there is a lot of YAC and a good passer becomes a great passer and an average passer becomes a good passer because play action passes are wide open and it requires less pin point accuracy because the coverage is difficult.
But yes, just win baby and I hate Al Davis.
You ignorant fool, you!
(no message)
(no message)