Words from John Gruden: rushing offenses= thing of the past

It could seem that way, but actually no. I'm saying that the difference is the fact that NO is now coming out scoring points quickly which is placing a tremendous strain on opposing offenses to catch up, hence making their defense seem like they're playing better.

We both know that there are occasions where defense will reign supreme, but those times are less frequent than offenses dominating a game. A great offense can score points, which can in turn make their mediocre defense seem much better b/c oposing offenses are now forced into a more predictable, one-dimensional attack. A great offense can mask a lot of defensive deficiencies, but a tremendous defense can't really mask a poor offense.

I dont know. I'd have to see the Colts play the Saints to know that answer. I don't think I'd spit hairs between the 2 and say one is not very good b/c the other is better. They're both the top 2 teams in the NFL who can score a lot of points at will. Indy proved that again Sunday night.

The Saint's could conceivably regress to 25th in the league in rushing if they didn't have the passing attack that they do to open it up. If NO isn't scoring points early and often, then it's very unlikely that they are a top 16 rushing team. Defenses this year absolutely have to respect the pass which opens up the ground game.

Stats can be misleading and should be taken with a grain of salt. I've gone to my local sports bar nearly every Sunday this year so that I could watch all the games simultaneously. The stats are not a clear indication of the truth. What I've seen as a reoccuring theme is the teams that jump out to an early lead usually dominate the game and their opponents rarely have a chance to recover, similary to the theory I've been speaking of. I've watched NO. They blow away people in the beginning, with their passing attack not their ground game. They can run the ball better b/c they have a lead as apposed to playing catch up like much of last year. Yes, they have a better ability to run the ball than last year which helps the pass, but it's definitely pass dominated. Once they have a lead they bleed the clock with the run game b/c defenses cant crowd the box or Brees will exploit it.

The biggest key IMO for their run success is b/c they are jumping out to early leads, forcing the NFL to respect the pass, while creating turnovers due to opponents trying to play mistake free catch up. Has their run game helped? Yes, and much in part to Jahri Evans and Carl Nicks in the middle. It also helps to have an explosive back like Bush who can break off a long run at any time. The whole "there's only so many times you can contain him theory". They are not running a ground controlled offense and much of their rushing yards are coming in big chunks thanks greatly to Brees and the passing attack setting the run up.

In 08 they were not jumping out to early 1st half leads, which kept opponents in the game, allowing costly turnovers, and lost many games b/c of it. In the 5 games that the Saints trailed by 10 points or more within 5 minutes into the 2nd Half, they were 0-5 last year. In those games, Brees averaged 48/ 357 YPG/ 10 TDs/ 8 Ints (7 of which came when trailing). NO trailed early in these games so they were forced out of their conventional offense and into having Brees tying to win it for them, hence Brees throwing for 48 attempts & 357 YPG while only being able to rush the ball only 21 times/game for 82 yards/ 3.9 YPC average.

In the 5 games that Saints were up 10 or more points within 5 minutes of 2nd Half, they were 5-0. In those, Brees averaged 34 passes/339 yards/15 TDs/3 Ints (only 1 coming when trailing). They took an early lead which allowed them to eat the clock on the gound more: 29 times/game for 119 yards/4.1 YPC. In this early lead, they weren't forced into making turnovers.... and their TPC wasn't much different than when they were 0-5. The difference between the 2 is a net 20 point scoring differential. In these games, NO was ahead early so Brees was able to throw less passes for more efficiency and production.... similar to what the Saints are doing this year while getting random big plays from their ground game.

In Saints 6 games in which the score was +/- 7 points within 5 minutes of 2nd Half, they split it down the middle at 3-3. In these, NO did not jump out to an early lead therefore didn't take their opponents out of their game plan. This kept the pressure on both teams to play mistake free football, hence leading to lower yardage outputs and splitting the victories. In these, Saints passed 37 times for 263 YPG/ 9 TDs/ 8 Ints (5 of those coming while trailing). The ground game rushed 27 times for 98 yards/ 3.6 YPC. Last year, the Saints trailed or had minimal leads going into the 3rd qtr and it led to a lot of costly turnovers and mistakes. This year, they are taking comfortable leads early in the game and as such they are now the ones creating the turnovers. There is no reason for Brees to play catch up, so they can run more efficiently and more often.... and the more runs they have, the more chances their backs have of breaking one off.

In the 7 games in which NO has built an early lead this year they are 7-0 with 0 Ints <when not trailing>. This has allowed them to create a TON of big plays on defense b/c other teams are forced out of rythm. In the 2 games in which Saints were losing headed into the 2nd half (Miami/Corolina), Brees had 4 ints when trailing. The ground game was also ineffective early b/c they were taken out of their game plan. In the end, 2 of the best rushing teams in the NFL didn't have enough firepower to put the Saints away and traded off field goals and punts for TDs. NO's passing attack allowed them back into the game, and once they gained the lead, they began milking the clock with the ground game.

If anyone watched their impressive dismantling of the Giants, they would have seen that it was the passing attack that exploded the game open early, leaving NY no opportunity to catch up. Ground game means nothing if you're playing catch up. Ask Brandon Jacobs and Ahmad Bradshaw who were limited to only 17 carries for 82 yards. Most people would think that they are a pretty formidable 1-2 punch, but you can't be effective if they don't get a chance to carry the ball when your teams trailing early.

The Saints were able to ram it down our throats b/c we had to respect the pass that was starting to tear us up. You wanna stop the passing attack, then you're gonna give up yards on the ground. Try to stop the run..... and their passing game will beat you even worse. Has our very strong rushing attack allowed us to beat anyone this year? Not really. Weaker teams- a little, but this year has shown us that firepower and offensive weapons are the big kahunas. Just my opinion of course.

 

Sure...

How about your same Pittsburgh Steelers?
2008 Pittsburgh Steeler Super Bowl Champs had the 23 ranked rushing offense.

506 Passing attempts/ 3301 yards/ 7.1 ave/ 19TDs
460 Rushing attempts/ 1690 yards/ 3.7 ave/ 16 TDs

That's a pretty controlled experiment if you ask me.
Same team, SB champs, 3 years later...... hmmmm. LOL.
Looks like the SB champs changed it up to win it again. Less rush attempts, twice as many passing yards to rushing, twice the average per play, and more TDs.

Go a step farther..... you have last year's SB champs who are trying to become even more explosive by adding Mike Wallace to the mix and now ranking 8th in the NFL in passing up from 17th from 08 with a rushing attack ranked 17th.

09 Steelers current SB champs:
303 passes/ 2280 yards/ 8.2 ave/ 15 TDs/ 8 ints
232 rushes/ 1002 yards/ 4.3 ave/ 6 TDs/ 6 fumbles

I'd say it's pretty conclusive what's going on here. The Steelers are getting much more production and scoring per play without sacrificing many turnovers to do so. There is no doubt that they are trying to become a more explosive offense that can put teams away early so that they can bleed the clock with Mendenhall, while allowing their beastly pass rushers to take over on defense after forcing an offense into more predictable passing downs. Easy peasy. LOL.

 

If anyone want to break down the record and point averages of the top 10 passing teams in the NFL..... be my guest. LOL. We could also do the top 15 passing teams in the NFL and what their record is.

 

Out of the Top 2009 19 Passing teams, only 2 of those have losing records (Bears and Seahawks).

The top 12 passing teams have a combined record of 71-33. Of these, there are only 4 top 10 scoring defenses.
The top 19 passing teams have a combined record of 107-60.

In this top 12 passing, it breaks down to (with defensive scoring ranking beside it) :
1. Indy 9-0 (1)
2. Pats 6-3 (3)
3. Texans 5-4 (15)
4. Saints 9-0 (17)
5. Zona 6-3 (12)
6. Dallas 6-3 (8)
7. SD 6-3 (20)
8. Pitt 6-3 (6)
9. Philly 5-4 (12)
10. Bears 4-5 (19)
11. GB 5-4 (10)
12. Minne 8-1 (12)

The next 7 teams have only 1 losing record among them.
13. Seattle 3-6 (18)
14. Giants 5-4 (21) (have offensive weapons)
15. Ravens 5-4 (5)
16. Jags 5-4 (26)
17. Falcons 5-4 (16)(have offensive weapons)
18. Broncos 6-3 (4)(have offensive weapons)
19. Bengals 7-2 (2) (have offensive weapons)

With the exception of Seattle, all 19 of these teams have a legitimate shot at the playoffs.

Top 14 run offenses:
1. Jets 4-5
2. Titans 3-6
3. Panthers 4-5
4. Dolphins 4-5
5. Saints 9-0
6. Jags 5-4
7. Giants 5-4
8. Cowboys 6-3
9. Falcons 5-4
10. Vikings 8-1
11. Bengals 7-2
12. Packers 5-4
13. Rams 1-8
14. Ravens 5-4
The rushing offenses in this group with any chance at the playoffs are the ones who have passing attacks that have to be respected (with the exception of the Jags).

 

There has been a draft and FA moves since then, but I like how the 10th ranked passing Miami Phins were 11-5 and now the 4th ranked rushing Phins are 4-5. just sayin. LOL. I know there's more to it, but the shoe fit so I felt like throwing that out there.

 

compared to the top 14 passing offenses that's stretching it a bit. LOL.

 

When you have teams like Pitt getting playmakers like Wallace, Philly getting Maclin, Minne getting Favre & Harvin, Indy reloading with Collie and Brown, Giants nabbing Nicks etc, it can quickly change things IMO. Backs have also been de-emphasized in the draft IIRC.

This year TE's are becoming more of a threat than we've ever seen before IMO also. So, yes, I feel 1 year has changed things. Actually the change had already started prior to this year, only we're now starting to see it in full tilt. IMO again.

 

True.... good point.

The trend still seems to be that, when looking at the offenses in the NFL, most of the teams are gearing up to become as explosive as possible while stressing less importance on a ball controlled ground game (or not at least until the 2nd half).

I'm only stating what I've seen so far. Not saying that the running game isn't important at all, but it has seemed to have taken a back seat.... with the teams possessing firepower AND a decent running game/Oline seem to be in charge. However the run first teams with what would appear to be quality Olines/RBs seem to not be fairing as well.

 

I listed Brown b/c of his capability/threat catching the ball out of the backfield.

Those teams have been nabbing playmakers for the past few years, and they're still doing it b/c they know it works. Indy has been doing it for a LONG time, ignoring defense at times in the process, and they and NE (another explosive offense) are the top 2 teams of the past 10 years or so IIRC..... and the most consistent, despite having years where their defense was ranked poorly while barely having a rushing attack. NE has done everything they can to get Brady weapons, and they have gone through RBs like a woman does shoes. LOL.

 

For our sake, I hope so.

 

What was your point about prolific offenses scoring since the beginning of time stuff? That wasn't ground breaking news, which is why I said what I did. Prolific 30 years ago is not synonymous with prolific today. What allowed success 20 years ago doesn't necessarily dictate success today. That's my point. You made a vague generalization like it's the end all argument..... and you gave absolutely nothing of merit to back up anything you said with up to date 09 data.

You actually think I have my nose up Gruden's butt like this is some epiphony to me?..... We (including myself) have been discussing this very topic in the Club level since the Falcon's loss, so it's nothing new to me. I'm only bringing it up in the mains b/c it was nice to hear Gruden validate the very same thing that we've been talking about for weeks.

Say what you want about Gruden, but he's probably the most astute person in football who IS actually giving us their honest and forthright opinion.... so what he says bears more weight than most. 32 coaches smarter than Gruden?? How many of those have winning percentages equal to 100-81 in the NFL..... with a Super Bowl ring? Riddle me that please.... not to mention being the youngest coach at the time to win a SB. I told you what John said if you cared to read the post. He said basically everything that I stated in my opening thread.

Actually.... that's exactly what Gruden said Mr. Omniscient. If you DVR'd the game, you can go back and see for yourself. He said that the NFL is now about putting up points quick and "milking the clock in the 2nd half". Notice the quotation marks. So I think that was exactly what he said, and not what he was meaning to say based on your concept of what the NFL is all about now. LOL.

"Have to do with top 4 rushing teams?" They lack consistent explosiveness besides the RB position..... and it shows that top rushing teams do not necessarily qualify for a winning team anymore, where as the explosive top passing teams do. Now if you can have an explosive passing game while still being able to run, then you're deadly.

There are also 32 teams that would say that they are good enough to stop you from scoring 4 TDs on long, ball controlled drives..... however these same teams will have a tougher time stopping scores from explosive offenses just by nature. Again, if you have guys who are capable of turning a 5 yard high percentage pass into a 75 yard TD, it increases your probability of scoring over a team that has to rely on long, consistent, 80 yard drive. It's a mathemetical fact. NE scored more points and racked up more yards in considerably less plays than us in our recent loss to them. That's an example.

No... For 9 weeks, I watched 7 screens that had every game transpiring. What I noticed <before ever hearing Gruden> is exactly what I've posted. Teams that have convincing wins come out scoring fast, which forces opposing offenses into more obvious play calling while trying to play catch up..... it forces them out of their normal game plan and into a more 1 dimensional style. When the team with the big lead knows the pass is coming, they can focus on blitzing and bringing the heat. I've seen this happen week in and week out, and I've also noticed these trailing teams being forced into committing turnovers b/c they are no longer able to play "their style of football" and are no longer able to consistently run high percentage plays. I've watched the more explosive offenses quickly capitalize on these errors, maintaining momentum and keeping their foot on their opponents throats. They put teams away. Their explosiveness allows them to either high-percentage run or pass in the 2nd half b/c they have the players who can still turn short yardage plays into long gains. B/c of this, opposing defenses still have to respect an explosive offense.

Like Gruden said, once these teams build up a quick lead, they milk the clock in the 2nd half while still scoring here or there on big plays. It's a very simple philosophy to understand. Is defense still important? Of course. but once you make it to the Super Bowl, teams with explosive offenses can nullify any top defense as Zona showed last year. Couple this with the fact that rules have changed, and it makes it even harder for defenses to dominate the league. The history of the SB has averaged nearly 46 points per game.... not exactly seeming to be a battle of top defenses.

You can be in love with our running game while at the same time be disappointed in our overall offenses effectiveness. I'm not criticizing our running game. I firmly believe that we would have a run-at-will ground game through 4 qtrs if we had playmaking WRs/TEs to accompany it, allowing us to be more explosive in the process. I'm criticizing the approach that a run first offense can win games consistently in this day and age.

I'm critical of the fact that the successful teams in the league, unlike us currently, have caught onto the fact that explosive teams win games, allowing their defense to play better when offenses are placed into more predictable situation.

I'm critical of the fact that while these top teams are adding players who can make them more explosive, we're adding players like Patrick Turner and Brian Hartline while passing on TOO MANY explosive WRs from a hugely playmaking WR class. We dropped the ball on that IMO. I like Hart, but we have a virtual clone in Cammy. However we passed on Mike Thomas who would've been the perfect upgrade to Bess in the slot. A guy that's Bess's size with speed, elusiveness, and reliable hands who can actually return punts as well????

I'm critical in the fact that we pass on many playmaking TE's who could replace DMart's production only to take a small school (non explosive) guy who is now bye bye.... and now we have very little production from the TE and are excited as heck to finally have a last minute signed TE with 33 receiving yards & 1 TD. I'm critical in the fact that we didn't address CB in FA with the likes of Bodden/McFadden so that we could've had an extra early draft pick to use on one of the numerous offensive playmakers. I follow the draft closely so these aren't hindsight thoughts for me in case you're thinking it. I'm critical in the fact that we have gone the conservative route while others went the explosive one. The explosive one is prevailing.

I'm critical in the fact that we have a stud QB in Henne who we've not prioritized giving playmaking weapons to, which is a quick way to destroy a young QB and put him in the looney bin.

Speak for yourself. There were people who actually understood my post, however the they were from the club level. just sayin.

 

We have enough non-skill players for now.... what we don't have is playmakers. It doesn't matter to me what our November or December is like if we still can't make the playoffs. LOL.

So skill players mean that they are less durable? How about the possession guys who take a beating b/c of the nature of their play style?

A 53 man roster is a 53 man roster. Being more explosive doesn't necessarily mean you're more of a liability than someone who isnt. Plenty among plenty of SB winners have had playmaking skill players to show that explosive players do indeed impact from November on.