Regarding the bold - doesn't any team run into this to some degree when facing a good QB? I think that's the sort of thing that is basically insurmountable unless you have an equivalent QB to do the same to their defense. Running the ball just isn't able to dynamically exploit defenses and mismatches like passing can and I don't think that will ever change unless the rules of football change dramatically. Passing is inherently more efficient than running the ball. Even if we put the Jets aside - what % of teams that won the Super Bowl over the last 20 years would be most known for their passing games and what % of them would be most known for their defenses and/or running games? The numbers are legitimately ~75% in favor of the teams known for being good at passing. The formula is clear, we just spent the last two decades aspiring to an archaic model because we're the Jets.
The Patriots were in the top half of the league in rushing attempts in every Super Bowl winning season. Their rush defense was top 10 every time but one when it was 12. 2001: 8 in attempts. 2003: 12 in attempts. 2004: 5 in attempts. *2007: 9 in attempts in a perfect regular season that did not win the SB. 2014: 13 in attempts. 2016: 3 in attempts. 2018: 3 in attempts. I understand your perception because it is a common one however it is an incorrect perception. BTW, the Patriots winning teams frequently were not in the top half of the NFL in pass defense.
you also have a greater chance of turnover. risk/reward scenario. Jets have been lucky so far-only one pick. Allan
it ebbs and flows but defense and running game has more lasting power. I disagree strongly on your point that passing is more efficient btw. 4 yards per play with no negative plays is a lot more efficient
One of the problems with relying on a strong running game for offense, is that it is time consuming. That can be of great benefit if you're up a few scores going into the 4th quarter, but what if you're down a few scores? In order to come from behind late in a game, you have to throw. We have seen this so many times with Jets teams of the past with their emphasis on the run and defense. They would enter the 4th quarter down by a few points and have to rely on a passing game that just wasn't that good. The result would inevitably be a loss, even if it was a close game. Back in the days of Bronco Nagurski and Red Grange, running the ball is what you did. However, over the years, football has evolved to a passing game. There would have been no way the Jets could have come back from that Browns deficit if they didn't throw the ball.
https://brownswire.usatoday.com/2022/02/09/date-defense-doesnt-win-championships-anymore/ I was very curious after reading through this thread and decided to do a little digging and found this article from last February. Definitely worth a read but I'll post some quotes below. It's a relatively small sample-size (only goes back to 2010) but they make a good point in the article about how much the game has evolved over this period of time and made the game much more offensive-friendly with the new rules. "Due to the continual tweaking of the rules that almost always favor the offense, often under the guise of safety, it may no longer be true that “defense wins championships.” A look at Super Bowl participants since 2011 shows very clearly that almost always only great offenses make the big game:" "The tweet provides the context, 19 of the 22 teams were top ten in offense. Only 10 of the 22 teams were top ten in defense. In fact, four of those teams were not even in the top 20 in defense." "Ben Baldwin took the data a step further by focusing just on the passing game. Only two teams made the Super Bowl without a top 10 passing attack:" "Similar to the first chart, 11 teams made the Super Bowl despite not having a top 10 passing defense. Based on the last 11 Super Bowls, offense wins conference championships and, more specifically, passing offense wins conference championships and gets teams to the Super Bowl." EDIT: After looking at the Ben Baldwin (aka Computer Cowboy) Tweet from the article, he posted one about rushing offense and defense as well, I will post this below.
The Patriots had a lot of rushing attempts because they were often playing with the lead and Belichick is an expert at milking the clock. Their rush defense was also helped massively by that same fact - teams don't run a lot when they're playing from behind all the time. I think we're mixing up cause and effect here. The Patriots didn't have a great offense because they ran more often, they ran more often because they had a great offense. Also, being in the top half of the league doesn't say much, just that they rushed slightly more than average. This is where the Patriots' passing offense ranked during their last few Super Bowl-winning seasons: 9th 1st 2nd 2nd Passing offense is the single most important thing to be good at in football.
The increase in chunk plays and general efficiency on a per-down basis FAR outweigh the slightly higher turnover risk. Also, a long pass that's intercepted is essentially a punt. What does lasting power mean? You can disagree on passing being more efficient point but you'd be wrong. This is an established truth in football analytics. Do you think it's a coincidence that the top teams in the league are consistently the best passing teams? Did they all just get lucky having massive success focusing on something that is inherently inferior to running the ball?
I am not taking sides but let's also keep in mind that a lot of "passing" plays are really run plays.
Lasting power, staying power, running the football works in all weather, in all stadiums and over the course of years No, its not a coincidence that "top teams in the league are consistently the best passing teams" at all. Its more like "duh" if you dont make mistakes in the passing game you tend to be pretty good.
Brad cited rushing attempts, which honestly is a very weird thing to look at instead of say, rushing yards per game or rushing yards per attempt, and makes me think he's cherry picking stats to support an argument that isn't logically there. Second of all - rushing attempts are absolutely impacted by how often your team is playing with a large lead. In the case of the Patriots, that was very often because they consistently had a top 10, if not top 5, passing attack.
How many games does a given team play in weather significantly detrimental to passing? Maybe a few per year? That's inconsequential.
True but if they had a defense that didn't give up 30 points a game they wouldn't have had that deficit to overcome
A few per year that just so happen to occur more frequently in the months where the single elimination playoff tournament is held. It's pretty consequential
I think those charts I posted above do a good job of illustrating that passing efficiency is more important to success in the modern game than rushing efficiency. Pretty hard to argue with the numbers. Only 2 Super Bowl contestants since 2010 were under 10th in the league Pass Offense EPA their respective year. Whereas 12 Super Bowl contestants were under 10th in Rushing Offense EPA.
What % of playoff teams in a given year play outside in areas where the weather is likely to be detrimental to passing during the playoffs? I don't know the answer but I doubt it's most of them or even a substantial percentage. You're talking about contingencies wrapped up in other contingencies here. A game, in the playoffs, played outside, that has weather severe enough to negatively impact passing. These instances are very uncommon in the grand scheme of things, and you're far less likely to even make the playoffs in the first place if you don't have an elite passing game. I don't know how you can look at this: and still try to convince yourself that a running game+run defense is the best thing for a team to strive for. The evidence indicates your stance is the polar opposite of reality. The proof is in the pudding.
Well no shit it would be nice to have an elite passing offense. I'm not saying I don't want that haha. But you can dream in one hand and shit in the other and see what gets there the quickest. It is better and more obtainable to build a defense and running game
