Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Lessons To Learn From 2012 Playoffs And What It Means For DC
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Dallas Cowboys
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Texas_OutLaw7


Most Valuable Poster (6th Ballot)

FF Fanatic

Joined: 27 Mar 2005
Posts: 23989
Location: Cowboys Forum ROH Class of '12
PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2013 2:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The_Slamman wrote:
Lets have a little fun with this one... The that wins the rushing battle either wins 82% of the time or loses 82% of the time. Which one?


I am going to go with loses - gut feeling.
_________________


In Redball I Trust!
The price of progress is trusting the process.
Heart. Leadership. Passion. Will.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
WizardHawk


Joined: 31 Jan 2009
Posts: 9716
Location: Hawkeye State
PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2013 2:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Texas_OutLaw7 wrote:
The_Slamman wrote:
Lets have a little fun with this one... The that wins the rushing battle either wins 82% of the time or loses 82% of the time. Which one?


I am going to go with loses - gut feeling.


Same here. Passing league.
_________________

Kiltman on avy n' sig
George Selvie Fan Club
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
The_Slamman


Joined: 07 Feb 2005
Posts: 13324
Location: Las Vegas, NV
PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2013 3:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I really like this one... lots of different ideas. The results may surprise some. I'll be honest, it did surprise me...

Question #4

what % of teams that won the battle of the rushing game ultimately won the game???

Closest Answer

This comes from my buddy Hawksrealm...

Hawksrealm wrote:
Teams that rush for over a Hundred + Yrds win 82% of the time

Winner Winner Chicken Dinner


Answer to #4

Here are the rushing results...

seattle 224, wash 104
Minn 167, GB 76
Indy 152, Baltimore 172
Cincy 80, Houston 158
Baltimore 155, Denver 125
GB 104, SF 323
Seattle 123, Atl 167
houton 91, NE 122
SF 149, Atl 81
Balt 121, NE 108
Balt 93, SF 182

The team that won the rushing battle finished 9-2 in the playoffs (82%). The 2 oddball games were interesting. One involved Minn who was playing with their 2nd string QB. The other was SF in the SB. I think all of us wonder if the SB would have been different if SF rushed the ball 4 straight times when they were first and goal at the end of the game.

I admit I was surprised by the result. Thoughts on this? Anomaly? Or, is winning the rushing battle a good indication of who will win the game?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
The_Slamman


Joined: 07 Feb 2005
Posts: 13324
Location: Las Vegas, NV
PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2013 3:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Question 5

Without looking it up, do you think sacks make a significant difference between winning and losing? What % of teams that won the sack battle ultimately won the game?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Texas_OutLaw7


Most Valuable Poster (6th Ballot)

FF Fanatic

Joined: 27 Mar 2005
Posts: 23989
Location: Cowboys Forum ROH Class of '12
PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2013 4:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Slam, back to question 4, how many of those yards came from the primary RB, and how many came from other sources?
_________________


In Redball I Trust!
The price of progress is trusting the process.
Heart. Leadership. Passion. Will.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
The_Slamman


Joined: 07 Feb 2005
Posts: 13324
Location: Las Vegas, NV
PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2013 4:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Texas_OutLaw7 wrote:
Slam, back to question 4, how many of those yards came from the primary RB, and how many came from other sources?


Obviously, with SF and Sea... lots of yards came from the QB. What Kaep did to the Packers is probably illegal in most countries. Both Kaep and Wilson finished in the top 10 in rushing in the playoffs. Those are the only 2 QBs who jump off the page. Luck and Rodgers both ran a little bit. RGIII only ran for 20 yards but was on a bum knee. Truthfully, I don't know how many of the rushing yards were accounted for on WR reverses.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Texas_OutLaw7


Most Valuable Poster (6th Ballot)

FF Fanatic

Joined: 27 Mar 2005
Posts: 23989
Location: Cowboys Forum ROH Class of '12
PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2013 4:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The_Slamman wrote:
Texas_OutLaw7 wrote:
Slam, back to question 4, how many of those yards came from the primary RB, and how many came from other sources?


Obviously, with SF and Sea... lots of yards came from the QB. What Kaep did to the Packers is probably illegal in most countries. Both Kaep and Wilson finished in the top 10 in rushing in the playoffs. Those are the only 2 QBs who jump off the page. Luck and Rodgers both ran a little bit. RGIII only ran for 20 yards but was on a bum knee. Truthfully, I don't know how many of the rushing yards were accounted for on WR reverses.


I ask because I was curious about the intent. Was it a passing play that broke down which led to an excellent run by the QB. That's not indicative of plays called, but of football IQ.
_________________


In Redball I Trust!
The price of progress is trusting the process.
Heart. Leadership. Passion. Will.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
The_Slamman


Joined: 07 Feb 2005
Posts: 13324
Location: Las Vegas, NV
PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2013 4:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Texas_OutLaw7 wrote:
The_Slamman wrote:
Texas_OutLaw7 wrote:
Slam, back to question 4, how many of those yards came from the primary RB, and how many came from other sources?


Obviously, with SF and Sea... lots of yards came from the QB. What Kaep did to the Packers is probably illegal in most countries. Both Kaep and Wilson finished in the top 10 in rushing in the playoffs. Those are the only 2 QBs who jump off the page. Luck and Rodgers both ran a little bit. RGIII only ran for 20 yards but was on a bum knee. Truthfully, I don't know how many of the rushing yards were accounted for on WR reverses.


I ask because I was curious about the intent. Was it a passing play that broke down which led to an excellent run by the QB. That's not indicative of plays called, but of football IQ.


I see what you are saying. I didn't analyze each run to see if it was originally a run call. Frankly, it would be hard to do with Sea and SF because they run those reads that give the QB options to run.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Hawksrealm


Joined: 03 Nov 2009
Posts: 260
PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2013 5:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The_Slamman wrote:
Question 5

Without looking it up, do you think sacks make a significant difference between winning and losing? What % of teams that won the sack battle ultimately won the game?


This has so many varibles its difficult for me to come up with a number. Most of your sacks are actually coverage sacks, which means your DBs are doing a good job.

But on the other hand, sacking a guy and breaking his ribs is a good indication you might just win. A QB running for his life is likely to make a number of mistakes. So Ints probably plays a bigger role as a game changer.

Then again if one team likes to run and the other team likes to pass, Sacks might not play a big role at all.

I'll be surprized at the real number, because I don't have a clue....I'll say 50% of the time.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Desperado Dan


Joined: 28 Jan 2006
Posts: 279
Location: Pontiac, MI
PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2013 9:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The_Slamman wrote:
Question 5

Without looking it up, do you think sacks make a significant difference between winning and losing? What % of teams that won the sack battle ultimately won the game?


I'm going to guess 33%. I think that turnovers are more important than sacks.
_________________

The eyes of Texas are upon you...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Texas_OutLaw7


Most Valuable Poster (6th Ballot)

FF Fanatic

Joined: 27 Mar 2005
Posts: 23989
Location: Cowboys Forum ROH Class of '12
PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2013 9:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Desperado Dan wrote:
The_Slamman wrote:
Question 5

Without looking it up, do you think sacks make a significant difference between winning and losing? What % of teams that won the sack battle ultimately won the game?


I'm going to guess 33%. I think that turnovers are more important than sacks.


Similar thought, 28%
_________________


In Redball I Trust!
The price of progress is trusting the process.
Heart. Leadership. Passion. Will.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
WizardHawk


Joined: 31 Jan 2009
Posts: 9716
Location: Hawkeye State
PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2013 9:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The_Slamman wrote:
Question 5

Without looking it up, do you think sacks make a significant difference between winning and losing? What % of teams that won the sack battle ultimately won the game?


Low. 10% or less.
_________________

Kiltman on avy n' sig
George Selvie Fan Club
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
The_Slamman


Joined: 07 Feb 2005
Posts: 13324
Location: Las Vegas, NV
PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2013 9:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Guys, just keep in mind that if sacks were statistically insignificant... it could still be 50% chance of winning. Many of you are predicting that if a team gets more sacks, they are more likely to lose the game.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
textaz03


Moderator
Joined: 09 Nov 2004
Posts: 11198
Location: Land of the Jersey Devil!
PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2013 11:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Texas_OutLaw7 wrote:
Desperado Dan wrote:
The_Slamman wrote:
Question 5

Without looking it up, do you think sacks make a significant difference between winning and losing? What % of teams that won the sack battle ultimately won the game?


I'm going to guess 33%. I think that turnovers are more important than sacks.


Similar thought, 28%
going to have to agree with both of you, but not quite as much. I think it's more along the 40% range. With the pass happy league that we are in now, QB's can over come those loss of yards a little easier than yester-years offense's.

I will agree that turnovers have a bigger advantage on winning.
_________________




"Courage is being scared to death, but saddling up anyways" - John Wayne
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
Ace5


Joined: 22 Jan 2007
Posts: 6091
Location: CT
PostPosted: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The_Slamman wrote:
Question 5

Without looking it up, do you think sacks make a significant difference between winning and losing? What % of teams that won the sack battle ultimately won the game?


Third down sacks make a huge difference. Sacks? Not so much. Gimmie an even 50%, just cause a split shows no correlation at all.
_________________
iPwn wrote:
Your sig is wherever your car keys are. Sorry you won't ever see it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Dallas Cowboys All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
Page 4 of 8

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group