You mean with regard to running the ball? If so, I imagine there is probably a cutoff point teams can't go below with regard to YPC without suffering considerably with regard to their prospects for winning (i.e., you can't average a yard a carry, let's say, in the first half and be the favorite in the second half, regardless of your number of first half rushes). But I imagine that when that point is reached with regard to YPC (maybe 3.0 YPC, or even 2.5?), the number of first half rushes is more predictive of winning than YPC. I'm focusing on the first half here because it tends to take the "garbage time" rushing out of the equation, where one team is up by so much it simply runs the ball to run out the clock and thereby accumulates a high number of rushes in the game.
I would say analyze more run heavy teams, teams that are successful with the run. My thoughts are you are analyzing mainly pass heavy teams, in which case the run is being used merely to pull in the d.
But that pulling in of the defense may be the active ingredient in passing efficiency, i.e., it's possible that if teams don't run the ball frequently enough, if only for the purpose of keeping the defense honest, their passing efficiency suffers because the defense is able to focus on defending it more exclusively. In other words those offenses have one-dimensionalized themselves.
Sure. Hence why I would analyze run heavy teams. Maybe see how conducive passing attempts are to those teams. I would bet they are close to the same. In which case as you stated those teams are one dimensional. It's why I say efficiency in any area is going to be more conducive to winning. I would even be willing to bet they are all about winning when all is said and done. It's why balance is always needed. One must be able to pass when needed or run when needed or guard either when needed. Otherwise the system adjusts.
The NFL being a passing league isn't a fad that will pass, IMHO. And that's because it's not a fad, but a result of rule enforcement and $$$$$$$. Money always talks. While it's true this season has seen a bit of a resurgence in defense and the running game being a factor, passing is still the way teams are going to win games. And let's not forget Kaepernick has been outstanding at QB and so has Flacco (in the playoffs at least).
I don't think your question can be answered. You can pass efficiently with different QB qualities and varying styles of offense and defense. And how much the supporting players matter will likely depend on the style you play.
I think you can certainly make the argument that quarterback accuracy gives you a significant leg up on achieving the necessary level of passing efficiency. Hell, you can throw a 20-yard completion to start a game, and if your next pass is an overthrow, your YPA has then been cut in half. Ol' noodle-armed Chad Pennington had a great YPA the year we went 11-5 and he was the MVP runner-up. He also had a league-leading 67.4% completion percentage.
Its hard to say. I've been looking at a lot of game theory stuff regarding play calling. One theory I'm intrigued by is trying to get YPA for passing and rushing to an equilibrium. I think it also should be looked at through the prism of down and distance. IMO there still is too much running on first down.
Here's something you can chew on if you're so inclined, or if your Ambien isn't working: http://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/jqsprt/v5y2009i2n1.html
Which speaks to the idea that while we might isolate a stat that correlates most to winning, there are a lot of ways to produce that stat. Maybe it's easier to identify factors that frustrate the ability to create that key winning stat.
Interesting, though I see no reason why you would expect YPA to ever be the same for rushing and passing... seems like apples and oranges. What about seeking equilibrium in terms of how far above league average or opponent avg YPA you perform in passing, and a similar stat in rushing? Then you are comparing apples to apples. But it has nothing to do with play calling balance, I suppose, then.
I'd read it if it didn't require purchase. lol. Give us the summarized conclusions, Shou... if you've read it.
Perhaps turnovers need to be emphasized here. So passing is a big part of it as long as you don't chuck it to the defense.
I'll also add that I think with trying to reduce turnovers, the league is going more towards the "running QB" now. Drop back passing may be less prevalant going forward because there are obvious strategic advantages for running QBs blocking wise. I'm learning more and more as to how the college game's innovations are leading the way as to how NFL teams play. The wildcat is one example. Chip Kelly's atheletic QBs are a big part of his spread offense. Kelly will call his plays but his OC who is expected to be Pat Shumur is a running QB type coach who coached McNabb as an Eagle. Andrew Luck and Tannehill are more athletic than given credit for. With only 19 starts as a college QB you don't need to risk injury by using Tannehill that way yet but I'll bet we'll see a lot more of Tannehill running up field next year. The offensive lines are being more and more athletic extending plays to give QBs room to run on broken plays. I've seen zone read option plays that came from the college game get called more in the NFL than I have ever seen. So passing is still a big part of the league but i think the running QB is catching up.
But passing efficiency has been the key since at least 1958. I don't see that changing. The mistake people make is thinking that "passing league" refers to volume. The volume of passing has increased, but that has never been a correlated factor with winning. I expect that we'll see some teams run with their QB more if they have the talent at the position, but others will b/c they don't have the player to execute it. As for college leading the way, that has always been the case. The spread offense was common in college well before the NFL. Other examples include zone defense and I believe the forward pass. Technically, if you want to see what the NFL offenses and defenses will look like in 30 or 40 years you should probably check out the high schools. That's where most of the innovations start and then the best ones work their way up.
I ran the "swinging gate" in a flag football tournament about 20 years ago. It was fun and successful b/c we had some of the better athletes, but not something I suspect will evolve into an NFL offense. LOL
