Finding ways to lose

[Lanky Livingston]

sorry Lanky...you are the one who has an irrational attachment to his own sense of self righteousness. I have complemented the defense's performance/improvement overall this season. I also noted at the beginning of this thread that the offense played worse. I have argued all along that this was a bad game from all angles and that the defense had its issues. you prefer to advance all these play pretend extenuating excuses as though they are received and immutable football truths. if it salves your precious ego...have at it! a defense on top of its game can do better than allowing 197 yards rushing no matter what the offense does. it's that simple.

you look silly pushing all these excuses. All that's missing from your plate of rationalizations is that Haslett didn't sleep in a Holiday Inn Sat night!

pick up your toys. go back to the sandbox for a day. and return to discuss how we will stop Newton's passing game. at this point...that's more interesting.

Oh boy, here we go again talking about ego and self-righteousness, when it has nothing to do with anything. Please keep that nonsense out of football discussions - it has no place, especially on this side of the forum.

Its funny, because I'm pretty sure we mostly agree if you could stop for a minute, read my posts, and realize that for a second. If you want to point the finger at me and talk about ego, turn it on yourself also - you're the one who refuses to recognize the 500-pound gorilla in the room: Grossman's 4 INTs. Its logic at its most simple: when the opposing team has the ball for 17 minutes longer, they will put up more yards. The opposing team has the ball for 17 minutes longer when the offense gives the ball to them 4 times.

Its ironic, seeing as how you're possibly the biggest Grossman basher in the history of Grossman bashers - I'd think you'd be all over him for this.

 

[Neophyte]

Gents, a passionate discussion of football is great but let's check personal stuff at the door.

 

[Rymanofthenorth]

I think Al is just frustrated at the inconsistency of arguments lol, I am not saying the D is not better, but just as credit should go where due, so should blame.

 

[Rymanofthenorth]

Lol, according to your definitions the only coordinator worth anything in the league is yourself.



Uhhh, so you are contradicting yourself. When playing from behind, you throw the ball. Scoring quickly gives you more time (as Neo said).

wow you are the king of taking things out of context, you asked about the panthers, who have a really good young qb, and no running game atm, we have no good qb and only a decent running game, football isnt played in a void Lanky.

yes obviously scoring quickly gives you more time, thanks tips, what happens when you cant score?

 

[Rymanofthenorth]

Actaually playing from behind inflates passing numbers its why you can see a team lose 40 -14 and the losing qb has 300 some yards because the defense plays soft. Maybe in Canada that is the way its played larger field and such?

Maybe I should qualify my statement, playing from close behind SHOULD inflate rushing numbers as a good offence will march on a prevent defence if the game is close and clock isnt the sole concern (ie the game is within reach) it will inflate passing numbers when the game is not close and the team needs to hold clock and score multiple times, the problem you often see with those inflated passing yards is more picks.

 

[Lanky Livingston]

Ryman, no offense, but you can qualify any statement to the point that it is true. Generally speaking, playing from behind will inflate a team's passing numbers, and NOT their running numbers. Teams tend to abandon the run when playing from behind, and it becomes gradually more and more pronounced the deeper in the hole they get. That's a simple football fact, man. If you are referring to only the specific case in which a team has a good running game and is only down by 3 or less points, then you might be correct. But, I would argue that teams with a 3-7 point lead don't generally go into a prevent style defense until late in the 4th quarter, when teams are no longer running.

 

[servumtuum]

hmmm...I seem to recall others at one time or another complaining that "coulda, woulda, shoulda" opens the door for any sort of imaginary football outcomes.

197 yards rushing. I R R E F U T A B L E. you like to play the stats game. rationalize that one.

you're missing the point....several points. if we're going to play this game:

- the margin was wider than it appears. we scored a lone touchdown late in the game. the Skins were never in the game and never had a chance to win. it takes a chemically induced state of delusion to believe that the game was close because the final score was a difference of a touchdown. it wasn't.

- so...did the Iggles get more conservative in the second half? your analysis is one dimensional.

- again...the Iggles ran all over the Skins. 197 big ones.

good enough to win? THEY LOST. IT'S A MEANINGLESS STATEMENT.

Fansince there's a problem with that 197 yard rushing stat-it has no context, but I'll fix that. Actually there is a second problem since the box scores all show it as 192 yards but that's mostly inconsequential

The question is this, how much is attributable to our run D having a breakdown and how much of that is due to the Eagles having the #1 ranked rushing game in the league? Our run D did suffer a breakdown but not all of that yardage was due to that.

I check the numbers on all the other teams that have played the Eagles to see if the Eagles had rushed for more yards than the other teams had been allowing other opponents to rush for.

Here are the teams the Eagles have played followed by how many rushing yards they gave up on average to other opponents-followed by the number of yards the Eagles rushed against them.

St. Louis Rams-other team average 144.5 Eagles yardage 236

Atlanta Falcons-other team average 91 Eagles yardage 133

New York Giants-other team average 117.8 Eagles yardage 177

San Fransisco 49ers-other team average 68 Eagles yardage 108

Buffalo Bills-other team average 128 Eagles yardage 174

Washington Redskins-other team average 84.5 Eagles yardage 192

Percentage of yardage increase.

Rams-63%

Falcons-46%

Giants-50.25%

49ers-59%

Bills-36%

Redskins-127%

The average increase in rushing yardage against non-Redskins Eagles opponents is 50.85% for the Eagles. Since it would be pretty much irrational to conclude that all five of the other teams suffered run D collapses I think it's safe to say that the Redskins could have expected a 50.85% increase in how much rushing yardage the Eagles would gain on them over their average at the time of 84.5. This comes to 127.5 yards with the remaining 64.5 yards due to failure of run D.

 

[Bulldog]

The only statistic that really matters is the 4 interceptions.

Look at the percentages for a team that throws picks. How many win those games?

Joe Gibbs in the early 1980's coming from the Air Coryell offense learned here in Washington that if you limit mistakes instead of taking a lot of risks you win more football games.

And as you improve the level of your talent and commit fewer turnovers than the opposition then you become a dominant team.

This team doesn't have the depth of talent AND it turns the ball over.

Not a winning formula.

 

[Goaldeje]

Serv, as always excellent statistical analysis, thank you for your efforts.

My only counter argument at all to your post would be that I seem to remember the Eagles playing from behind quite often in their other games, which might skew their stats some in favor of the run. They got up early on the Rams, but struggled with the Falcons and Bills in particular, which manly have forced the to pass more and run less.

If I have time tomorrow, I may look to see if I can find some stats to back those thoughts up myself.

 

[servumtuum]

G., I found the info you're looking for, I think, on ESPN,s NFL stat page. They break down each team's stats into splits. This season this is how the Eagles rushing attempts look in comparison to pass attempts in various situations.

When winning-88 rush attempts-92 pass attempts

When trailing-66 rush attempts-90 pass attempts

When tied-26 rush attempts-35 pass attempts

Further breakdown by point differential:

When winning by 15-21 -23 rush attempts -25 pass attempts

When winning by 1-7 -51 rush attempts -61 pass attempts

When losing by 1-7 -41 rush attempts -55 pass attempts

When losing by 15-21 -22 rush attempts -29 pass attempts

An interesting one

When in the 4th quarter with a +/- 7 point margin either way-20 rush attempts -34 pass attempts

Link: http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/splits/_/name/phi/philadelphia-eagles

 

[redskins26]

The eagles have led everygame but 1 at the end of 3 quarters

 

[fansince62]

Fansince there's a problem with that 197 yard rushing stat-it has no context, but I'll fix that. Actually there is a second problem since the box scores all show it as 192 yards but that's mostly inconsequential

The question is this, how much is attributable to our run D having a breakdown and how much of that is due to the Eagles having the #1 ranked rushing game in the league? Our run D did suffer a breakdown but not all of that yardage was due to that.

I check the numbers on all the other teams that have played the Eagles to see if the Eagles had rushed for more yards than the other teams had been allowing other opponents to rush for.

Here are the teams the Eagles have played followed by how many rushing yards they gave up on average to other opponents-followed by the number of yards the Eagles rushed against them.

St. Louis Rams-other team average 144.5 Eagles yardage 236

Atlanta Falcons-other team average 91 Eagles yardage 133

New York Giants-other team average 117.8 Eagles yardage 177

San Fransisco 49ers-other team average 68 Eagles yardage 108

Buffalo Bills-other team average 128 Eagles yardage 174

Washington Redskins-other team average 84.5 Eagles yardage 192

Percentage of yardage increase.

Rams-63%

Falcons-46%

Giants-50.25%

49ers-59%

Bills-36%

Redskins-127%

The average increase in rushing yardage against non-Redskins Eagles opponents is 50.85% for the Eagles. Since it would be pretty much irrational to conclude that all five of the other teams suffered run D collapses I think it's safe to say that the Redskins could have expected a 50.85% increase in how much rushing yardage the Eagles would gain on them over their average at the time of 84.5. This comes to 127.5 yards with the remaining 64.5 yards due to failure of run D.

interesting..thoughtful analysis Serv. of course, the flip side of looking at it would be the percentage under rushing average the Redskins held their opponents to and applying that factor to the Iggles average per game. but your point is well taken: the Iggles are a strong running team and the Skins rush defense was bested by more than the stats would predict.

 

[Rymanofthenorth]

Take Vicks rushing out of the equation, then look at rushing yards, atlanta was never an amazingly dominant rushing team but when you add Vicks yards to a solid rushing game it skews things. Mccoy is very good, but they shouldnt have been able to rack up 197 yards on us when we were trying to come back. its because we played far too conservatively in the second half.

 

[Rymanofthenorth]

btw Lanky, the teams that abandon the run early on all have the same thing in common, THEY LOSE. Garrett lost the cowpies a game against us last year and against the lions this year, we tend to abandon the run after we get stuffed 2-3 times lol.

 

[servumtuum]

Take Vicks rushing out of the equation, then look at rushing yards, atlanta was never an amazingly dominant rushing team but when you add Vicks yards to a solid rushing game it skews things. Mccoy is very good, but they shouldnt have been able to rack up 197 yards on us when we were trying to come back. its because we played far too conservatively in the second half.

Ryman, removing Vick's rushing yardage makes no sense. Once the QB takes off with ball he in essence becomes another RB-there is no difference between yardage gained by him or any RB. But just for informational purposes

Vick had 7 carries for 54 yards-7.7 yards/carry. McCoy had 28 carries for 126 yards-4.5 yards/carry-1 TD.

Removing Vick's 54 yards leaves 138 rushing yards gained by other Eagles ball carriers.

interesting..thoughtful analysis Serv. of course, the flip side of looking at it would be the percentage under rushing average the Redskins held their opponents to and applying that factor to the Iggles average per game. but your point is well taken: the Iggles are a strong running team and the Skins rush defense was bested by more than the stats would predict.

O.K., fansince I checked this out also and came up with some interesting results as you might imagine.

How our opponents have fared in the run game on average so far this season as opposed to how they fared against us-basically how much did our run D inhibit or not inhibit their ability to run the football expressed as the percentage above or below their average against teams other than the Redskins.

Giants-75 yards- average against other opponents-93.2 19.5% lower

Cardinals-93 yards-aerage against other teams 105.5-11.8% lower

Cowboys-125 yards-average against other teams 74.75-67% higher-see note on Felix Jones below

Rams-45 yards-average against other teams-112.5 60% lower

Eagles-192 yards-average against other teams 165.6-16% higher

In the Dallas game, Felix Jones was a "loose cannon" he gained 115 yards against the Redskins which is 45% of his rushing total through 6 games. Against their other opponents he was much "quieter."

Feix Jones rush stats by team this season so far.

New York Jets-17 carries for 44 yards-2.6 yds/carry-1 TD

San Fransisco 49ers-9 carries for 25 yards-2.8 yds/carry

Washington Redskins-14 carries for 115 yards-8.2 yds/carry-one 40 yard run helped skew this stat

Detroit Lions-15 carries for 57 yards-3.6 yds/carry

New England Patriots-8 arries for 14 yards-1.8 yds/carry

As youcan see one "big" game, especially with big-gain runs in the mix skews the stats noticeably.


The Redskins shut down of the Rams running game is intriguing.

Here's how they have fared on the ground this season for a comparison-the rushing total against the Ravens is surprising.

Eagles-154 yards

Giants-59 yards

Ravens-112 yards

Redskins-45 yards

Packers-125 yards

 

[Goaldeje]

Serv, as always excellent statistical analysis, thank you for your efforts.

My only counter argument at all to your post would be that I seem to remember the Eagles playing from behind quite often in their other games, which might skew their stats some in favor of the run. They got up early on the Rams, but struggled with the Falcons and Bills in particular, which manly have forced the to pass more and run less.

If I have time tomorrow, I may look to see if I can find some stats to back those thoughts up myself.

Looks like I have been wrong in this thread some, my apologies to FS and Ryman. First off, the Eagles ran the ball more in the first half than they did the second (19-15, by my count on the game log). Ryman, your assertion that good teams throw when expected to run seems to on the money here, as the Eagles threw more than they ran in the second half (12 passes, 11 runs, if you eliminate the kneels downs and the last drive in the 4th at the end of the game).

Perhaps the distinction needs to be made that our run defense left something to be desired, while our pass defense performed quite well, particularly in the second half, where we got the two INTs. I maintain in the first half that the defense was not helped by Kyle's playcalling, but can see why Al and Ryman would be frustrated over the run D. I can also see why Lanky would argue that giving up only 20 points when your offense gift wraps 4 INTs is nothing to sneeze at.

 

[fansince62]

we tend to abandon the run after we get stuffed 2-3 times lol.

I don't have the stats...but that does seem to be a pattern.

 

[fansince62]

Looks like I have been wrong in this thread some, my apologies to FS and Ryman. First off, the Eagles ran the ball more in the first half than they did the second (19-15, by my count on the game log). Ryman, your assertion that good teams throw when expected to run seems to on the money here, as the Eagles threw more than they ran in the second half (12 passes, 11 runs, if you eliminate the kneels downs and the last drive in the 4th at the end of the game).

Perhaps the distinction needs to be made that our run defense left something to be desired, while our pass defense performed quite well, particularly in the second half, where we got the two INTs. I maintain in the first half that the defense was not helped by Kyle's playcalling, but can see why Al and Ryman would be frustrated over the run D. I can also see why Lanky would argue that giving up only 20 points when your offense gift wraps 4 INTs is nothing to sneeze at.

Goal...I like where the defense is headed....i just thought in this game the incessant and unstopped cut backs communicated no adjustment...no answer. the running TD for 6 or whatever many yards it was...the back was basically never touched! never should have happened.

anywho....I'll be honest and confess I don't know what's going on with the offense. We know QB is part of the problem. We know the O-line has gotten maybe a second better at pass protection.....a bit better a stretch plays....but still too much pressure.....still too many run stuffs. the wideouts are not getting a lot of separation in my opinion....playcalling...welll you and others have assessed that one pretty well. to be frank...it's a disappointing mess - AND THE SHANAHANS ARE DIRECTLY ACCOUNTABLE. this is their area of expertise. oh well....as others have noted....work in progress.

pls, pls, pls......Mr ALlen...find us a young, hidden gem QB....who has arm strength, smarts and leadership skills. is that too much for long-suffering Skins fans to ask for?

 

[Lanky Livingston]

btw Lanky, the teams that abandon the run early on all have the same thing in common, THEY LOSE.

You'll get no argument from me on this...its one of the mysteries of the NFL, like punting from inside the 40-yard line. I just don't get it.

 

[Rymanofthenorth]

Looks like I have been wrong in this thread some, my apologies to FS and Ryman. First off, the Eagles ran the ball more in the first half than they did the second (19-15, by my count on the game log). Ryman, your assertion that good teams throw when expected to run seems to on the money here, as the Eagles threw more than they ran in the second half (12 passes, 11 runs, if you eliminate the kneels downs and the last drive in the 4th at the end of the game).

Perhaps the distinction needs to be made that our run defense left something to be desired, while our pass defense performed quite well, particularly in the second half, where we got the two INTs. I maintain in the first half that the defense was not helped by Kyle's playcalling, but can see why Al and Ryman would be frustrated over the run D. I can also see why Lanky would argue that giving up only 20 points when your offense gift wraps 4 INTs is nothing to sneeze at.

I can remember sitting in one of my early coaching clinics and thinking the exact same way, its counterintuitive but the guy conducting the seminar on offensive football actually pointed to a redskins team as the hallmark for not abandoning the run when behind, he also showed that statistically the mismatch is far more important than the playcall. the redskins actually had a personelle package under petitbone called the "victory" package, they subbed in coleman at LB but didnt run a true nickel because Petitbone believed in pressure defence and solid coverages. The Cowpies in the nineties used to continue to pound the ball when down in the second half, and it worked, because teams usually will stack against the run when the other team is grinding up first downs.

The biggest thing is coverages, in todays NFL some coords play a guessing game, they send out a pile of Dbs, use a lot of coverages that are complex, I think some teams have learned now that running the ball against little people is a better way to attack. Today more than ever, its a chess match, the days of "what we do works" are over, nowadays you had better watch film and break tendencies or you will get screwed.

I think our pass defence is far better this season than last, but I think our Run defence suffers because we play too much zone and we seem to fall into that bend but dont break philosophy too much.