Jump to content

  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

David Newton: When Cam Newton takes fewer sacks, Carolina wins

beastson

By beastson,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

beastson Newbie

beastson

Posted
Posted
Quote

There's a direct correlation between Newton's effectiveness as a runner and the number of sacks he takes. The past three games are a microcosm of that. Newton has rushed 25 times for 225 yards and a touchdown in those games. In the first three games he rushed 13 times for 46 yards as he rehabbed his surgically repaired shoulder. He was sacked 10 times, including six times in one game during that opening stretch.

Running well does not always equal success. Newton was sacked five times in a loss to Chicago in which he rushed for 50 yards. But he was playing catchup after the Bears turned a fumble and interception into touchdowns.

In general, when Newton runs well he takes fewer sacks, and that turns into wins.

The Panthers are 25-6-1 since 2011 in games when Newton takes one or fewer sacks -- including a game last season when the 2015 NFL MVP was benched for one play at Seattle -- according to ESPN Stats & Information research.

They are 26-23 when Newton takes two to three sacks and 7-14 when he takes four or more sacks.

Source

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SixMileDrive Newbie

SixMileDrive

Posted
Posted
19 minutes ago, Ornias said:

and water is wet. 

It's this type of insight of insight that really makes this forum great...

Title aside, as a math/stats professional, this article is pretty interesting. It delves into the numbers and the reasons why Cam's running impacts his sacks and how it changes the teams winning percentage.

The longer I live in life, the more I realize that the people (like the poster above) who try to claim everything is so obvious "yeah, duh...." just don't have the ability to think past 2+2.

Sorry that the article was above your head, man. Maybe try reading these types of things a couple more times before posting next time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
KillerKat Grand Master

KillerKat

Posted
Posted
42 minutes ago, SixMileDrive said:

It's this type of insight of insight that really makes this forum great...

Title aside, as a math/stats professional, this article is pretty interesting. It delves into the numbers and the reasons why Cam's running impacts his sacks and how it changes the teams winning percentage.

The longer I live in life, the more I realize that the people (like the poster above) who try to claim everything is so obvious "yeah, duh...." just don't have the ability to think past 2+2.

Sorry that the article was above your head, man. Maybe try reading these types of things a couple more times before posting next time.

Speaking of heads, maybe instead of trying to make someone else look like an ass, perhaps you should get your head out of your own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
L-TownCat Grand Master

L-TownCat

Posted
Posted

He’s John Madden with words.

Sacks are bad.  You don’t want sacks.  If your QB is getting sacked he’s not getting yards.  It gets the offense off schedule and usually impacts scoring.

None of this is revolutionary, new, or even informative.

Its lazy and uninspired.  Did anyone learn something they didn’t already know?

If you like numbers great, but tell me how KBs absence seemingly unlocked the door?  How has the Oline magically turned into a solid unit?  Why are we suddenly at the line with 15 or more seconds on the playclock?

Tons of angles for a story this week and this putz goes with- “When Cam isn’t sacked, he plays good”

Wut. tha. fug. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • UnluckyforSome
      TNF: Rams/Seahawks

      By UnluckyforSome · Posted

      I think the book has been fairly written on Darnold, and by and large stays true. He can be rattled by pressure, and will lose his composure. If a team can get to him and have something go wrong in the plan, the mistakes and errors will pile up. Rams have a better offense, Seahawks sport a better defense. Should be a good 1.
    • Mr. Scot
      Why does Bryce get the blame?

      By Mr. Scot · Posted

      Not a defense of him...an understanding of the problem. (something you seem to be lacking right now) 🙄 Bryce in a Canales offense is not an example of a stylistic mismatch, but I can give you one if that helps. When he was playing for the Panthers, Cam Newton sat under OC's running Coryell type offenses. Newton had a big arm and was a strong runner. He fit into that sort of attack very well. Then he goes to New England, where at the time they were running an Earhardt-Perkins system (similar to WCO In a lot of what they do but very different terminology). The Patriot offenses back then were heavily based on timing and rhythm style passing, not something that Newton was especially well suited for. So he washed out at New England, not because he had poor ability (his abilities had been on display here on a regular basis) but because he didn't fit what they wanted to do with their offense. I always go back to Jeff Garcia as one of the prime examples of this issue. Garcia in a WCO looked like a world beater. Put him in any other scheme though...yikes!  So again, Young's issues here have nothing to do with any failure to mesh with Canales. Hell, is say Canales has actually done pretty well at adapting his system to who he has rather than trying to jam square pegs into round holes. Again, it doesn't take an elite level of football knowledge to get this. It's pretty basic. But if you're not even capable of understanding what the real problem is, how are you going to know you to find the right solution? 🤔
    • frankw
      TNF: Rams/Seahawks

      By frankw · Posted

×
×
  • Create New...