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!

     

3Rd Greatest Rushing Attack In Nfl History?


CRA

Recommended Posts

I think Cam can be one of the greatest of all time and win multiple rings. I just don't think building a super backfield is the means to aid him. The greatest attacks in league history haven't gotten anyone a ring.... have barely aided a QB in just winning playoff games.

You really are out in left field here. Building a great backfield in and of itself has nothing to do with a Superbowl win. Winning a superbowl has to do with scoring lots of points and keeping the opponent from scoring lots of points. You also have to separate getting into the playoffs versus winning a Superbowl. Since we are building an option based spread attack, then a running game is critical to our success. We were 5th in offensive scoring. Problem was we gave up more than we scored. Why not look at teams with the largest differential between points scored and points surrendered and see how many of them got in the playoffs and won a Superbowl. Doesn't really matter how they got their points.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Cam can be one of the greatest of all time and win multiple rings. I just don't think building a super backfield is the means to aid him. The greatest attacks in league history haven't gotten anyone a ring.... have barely aided a QB in just winning playoff games.

It's a cherry picked stat that suits your POV. I looked at the list of teams that averaged over 5 ypc and there were 31 teams listed. This list spans the entire history of professional football (1934 Bears are in there). This is such an elite list over such a broad span of time you couldn't possibly draw any conclusion about how our proficiency relates to winning the Superbowl. A couple of recent examples of why being on this list in ypc average didn't translate to winning the SB:

That 1997 Lions team? Without Barry Sanders that is a 0-16 team...I would wager heavily on this considering hindsight.

That 2006 Falcons team? Without Vick they were complete garbage.

I wonder what would be found if you analyzed the top 5 teams in avg. ypc from each year in the Superbowl era...certainly that would be a better measuring stick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can make stats support almost any statement.

A good run game can only help your chances of winning. A good passing game will only do the same. How much is another question. I don't think you can honestly say having a good run game is going to hurt your chances unless it is financially tying up the rest of your team which is potentially our problem. But how to gauge "too much" becomes the next question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The cool thing is that no one has really seen a team like us... honestly. A unique specimen in Newton who knows when to run and when to throw...and is only getting better, plus a dynamic RB tandem with a hybrid FB/RB/ST guy in Tolbert. A receiving TE in Olsen and then Smitty and co. with Gettis, LaFell...and more to come IMO.

Given that we aren't a duo anymore shows that very different offenses can adjust the safe yards thus cushioning one type of offense in a sense. For example, Sean Payton knows how to do this in e passing game. Chud seems to spread it out but in a semi-new NFL way. I'm stonnnnned as a mother fvcker

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder what would be found if you analyzed the top 5 teams in avg. ypc from each year in the Superbowl era...certainly that would be a better measuring stick.

Look at the last 5 years using your criteria. 2007-2011.

Running teams- ypc

25 teams - 9 had winning records

0 Superbowl wins

vs.

Passing teams-ypa

25 teams - 21 had winning records

3 Superbowl wins

Efficient passing teams seem to trump efficient running teams. Not arguing running is not important....but building an elite passing attack has paid off for teams. Wouldnt investing into being an elite and strong passing attack seem like the most reasonable thing to do to?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look at the last 5 years using your criteria. 2007-2011.

Running teams- ypc

25 teams - 9 had winning records

0 Superbowl wins

vs.

Passing teams-ypa

25 teams - 21 had winning records

3 Superbowl wins

Efficient passing teams seem to trump efficient running teams. Not arguing running is not important....but building an elite passing attack has paid off for teams. Wouldnt investing into being an elite and strong passing attack seem like the most reasonable thing to do to?

A long way to essentially you need to pass the ball well. I think the arguments with your logic were more that you seem to be implying that you don't need to build a good running team and in fact building a running game is counter productive to being successful.

What if you have both? A good passing attack and a good running attack?? What if your running backs account for a good portion of your passing attack?? Last year Stewart had the second most catches on the team. So we went out and got a fullback who caught 50 passes last year as well.

I don't agree that we are spending too many resources on the running game that should be spent on the passing game. I think that having a good running game makes the passing game more effective as it keeps the safeties biting on play action and staying in the box which makes it hard to double cover deep downfield. Which is why our passing attack was fifth in YPA and we had so many long pass plays. At this point Smith makes more in salary than Williams and Stewart together. And spare me the what if we pay Stewart arguments for after we do, We are as likely to trade him as we are keep him and who knows what happens in the coming months.

We have what many call a new style of offense that essentially breaks the traditional mold, so to judge us by those standards seems rather unproductive. Lets see what happens when we have the offseason to install our offense and see what Chud comes up with. Then we will be in a better place to make judgements. I suspect what we saw last year is only a harbinger of things to come.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look at the last 5 years using your criteria. 2007-2011.

Running teams- ypc

25 teams - 9 had winning records

0 Superbowl wins

vs.

Passing teams-ypa

25 teams - 21 had winning records

3 Superbowl wins

Efficient passing teams seem to trump efficient running teams. Not arguing running is not important....but building an elite passing attack has paid off for teams. Wouldnt investing into being an elite and strong passing attack seem like the most reasonable thing to do to?

Correct, so lets trade a 2nd, 7th and Wharton, Davis and Stu for Brees, Brady or Rodgers. This works on Madden every time!

Why didn't we do this years ago! Why did Hurney did not understand that all it take is to " investing into being an elite and strong passing attack", fire him!!

A strong passing attack is almost always built through a QB obtained by luck with a draft pick (or luck with a one coming of injury like Brees), it is not a strategy you can just decide to follow and have it done successfully in a couple of years.

That being said, Cam is very promising to be one if he keeps improving!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Correct, so lets trade a 2nd, 7th and Wharton, Davis and Stu for Brees, Brady or Rodgers. This works on Madden every time!

Why didn't we do this years ago! Why did Hurney did not understand that all it take is to " investing into being an elite and strong passing attack", fire him!!

A strong passing attack is almost always built through a QB obtained by luck with a draft pick (or luck with a one coming of injury like Brees), it is not a strategy you can just decide to follow and have it done successfully in a couple of years.

That being said, Cam is very promising to be one if he keeps improving!

Starts with a QB...which we now have.

Then comes the OL and recieving threats. We need to be worried about Cam's recieving threats going forward....not his backfield.

Steve Smith is aging....and we are a Steve Smith injury away from Cam having little. When Gregg Jennings goes down....Aaron Rodgers still has one hell of a cast.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Point is simple. It is more important to strive to be a great passing team than a great running team.

All this talk and obsession over Fox's RBs silly. We need to move forward and find Cam his Steve Smith and focus there. We need Chuds ideal TE. RBs are a dime a dozen....can pick up a Mike Tolbert for peanuts who is effective. Doesn't work that way at other spots.

Fanbase still has a lot Foxball embedded in there heads IMO. We have a QB now....changes what positions around him matter most.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Starts with a QB...which we now have.

Then comes the OL and recieving threats. We need to be worried about Cam's recieving threats going forward....not his backfield.

Steve Smith is aging....and we are a Steve Smith injury away from Cam having little. When Gregg Jennings goes down....Aaron Rodgers still has one hell of a cast.

Lets not compare ourselves to a WCO team like Green Bay who stockpiles receivers. We are a vertical passing attack with a spread option attack. Different system with different needs.

Most teams who lose their number 1 receving option usually have a significant drop off. Why are we writing Smith off at this point? He just came off his second best receiving year in his career yet everyone has him over the hill. He is 32 years old not 42 years old. He has several years left.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Point is simple. It is more important to strive to be a great passing team than a great running team.

All this talk and obsession over Fox's RBs silly. We need to move forward and find Cam his Steve Smith and focus there. We need Chuds ideal TE. RBs are a dime a dozen....can pick up a Mike Tolbert for peanuts who is effective. Doesn't work that way at other spots.

Fanbase still has a lot Foxball embedded in there heads IMO. We have a QB now....changes what positions around him matter most.

Point is very simple. You have to score more points than your opponent and you win no matter how you score. We were the fifth higest scoring offense last year even though we were not great in the redzone and settled too often for field goals. The problem was not the running attack or the passing attack. The problem was the defense. if we focus on that side of the ball and leave the offense essentially alone we will be fine. Focusing on improving an offense that was top 5 in points scored versus focusing on a defense that was bottom six in points allowed is foolhardy in my opinion. All of this pass versus run debate deflects from the real issue which is the defense is the problem that needs fixing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Point is very simple. You have to score more points than your opponent and you win no matter how you score. We were the fifth higest scoring offense last year even though we were not great in the redzone and settled too often for field goals. The problem was not the running attack or the passing attack. The problem was the defense. if we focus on that side of the ball and leave the offense essentially alone we will be fine. Focusing on improving an offense that was top 5 in points scored versus focusing on a defense that was bottom six in points allowed is foolhardy in my opinion. All of this pass versus run debate reflects from the real issue which is the defense is the problem that needs fixing.

Amen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


×
×
  • Create New...