Football Freakonomics, the QB driven league, and the Bills

[Hapless Bills Fan]

The Pats have 604 passing plays this year and 409 runs. The Saints have 648 passing plays and 396 running plays. Both pass rates are higher than that of the Bills. This whole debate seems beside the point to me. Run-heavy offenses dom't really work in the NFL any more, and I really wonder whether nostalgia for old-fashioned Lombardi/Halas-era smashmouth football is fueling the sentiments here.

 

Hi Dave,

 

Again, interesting points. I'm not sure they're consistent with the facts? And obviously I disagree that it's besides the point. Hear me out.

 

If you asked 10 random knowledgeable TBD posters who are the three elite QB in the league this year, I bet they would say "Rodgers, Brady, and Brees". And there would be general agreement. These 3 teams are all very successful in the league, and will be in the playoffs. And, as you point out, they all have very similar % passing (58, 58, and 61% respectively) This sort of observation is often used to defend the phrase "it's a QB driven league" and to argue that the Bills need to find an elite QB to find success.

 

There are 12 teams going to the playoffs. It seems worth asking "what exactly do the Bills need to do to become one of those teams, rather than one of the 20 teams sitting at home?" So let's ask, do all of these teams have similar QB-driven, high-pass offense? (That would support your contention that run heavy offenses don't really work any more, correct?)

 

The answer is "No". In fact, two quite successful teams (the 49ers - same win % as NE and NO) have less than 50% pass plays (48% and 46%, respectively). Most of the rest have lower % passes than GB, NE, and NO: 55, 56, and 53% for the Ravens, Steelers and Bengals. The only team with higher % pass than the top 3 is Detroit, with a strong young QB in Stafford and 64% pass plays.

 

The question I think most of us have is "what do our beloved Bills need to change, in order to move from the 20 watching teams to the 12 teams being watched, during the playoffs?

 

There is stuff that is oft suggested here that is really beyond control or that would have heavy overall consequences: for Wilson to pass on, trade all our high picks for 3 years to move up and draft Luck regardless of all our other gaps and needs, fire Chan and bring in a new coach which is highly likely to mean new schemes and new personnel and extended rebuilding.

 

Isn't it worth asking, are there simple things we could do WITH OUR EXISTING PERSONNEL that would make us more effective on offense?

 

I offer this. Last year, the '9ers were 6-10, 38% wins. They passed 55% of the time. This year, they are 80% wins and 48% run. Is that all just 4th quarter padding, or was there a change in philosophy not to put so much of the game on Alex Smith? Last year the Texans were 38% wins, 6-10 and 58% pass. This year they are 67% even with their starter and 2nd string QB going out, and 46% pass plays. Again - is that all just 4th quarter padding, or was there a change in philosophy not to put so much of the game on the QB esp. after the starter and backup were hurt?

 

We have the same % pass (59%) as the three league-leading teams with generally-acknowledged elite QB. Yet even people such as myself who like Fitz and want to see him continue to get a chance, will say that he's an average QB and has clearly been struggling during the last games. Does it really make sense that we have the same %pass as teams with elite QB, when even Fitz's fans and supporters will agree that he's not in the same class as Rodgers, Brady, Brees, and perhaps someday Stafford and Newton? Isn't it reasonable to ask if a change in philosophy could have made us more effective, won us a few more games, and broken this playoff drought? Yes, we need better defense as well, and I think we can all agree even there, a more consistent offense is helpful in that it rests the D and helps them stay fresh.

 

We all know that sometimes games hinge on a few key plays - a key successful 3rd down conversion to keep a drive going, a key play in the red zone that leads to a TD instead of a FG or an INT. So if the play calling is off, even a few percentage points make a difference.

 

BTW, I think there are terms that mean different things that might cause confusion if they're conflated. There is "power running offense" aka "smashmouth football". The Lombardi era stuff. There is "run first offense", meaning the run is used to set up the pass but not necessarily in a "smashmouth" way, finesse could be involved. And there is overall run-pass balance, meaning pass plays are called at key times when a run play might arguably be more appropriate. I personally and I think others in this thread, are looking more at overall run-pass balance, and sometimes at using run plays to set up the pass, which is not the same thing as Lombardi-era smashmouth football.

 

Again, thanks to all for the interesting discussion.

Edited January 1, 2012 by Hopeful

[spartacus]

Hi Dave,

 

Again, interesting points. I'm not sure they're consistent with the facts? And obviously I disagree that it's besides the point. Hear me out.

 

If you asked 10 random knowledgeable TBD posters who are the three elite QB in the league this year, I bet they would say "Rodgers, Brady, and Brees". And there would be general agreement. These 3 teams are all very successful in the league, and will be in the playoffs. And, as you point out, they all have very similar % passing (58, 58, and 61% respectively) This sort of observation is often used to defend the phrase "it's a QB driven league" and to argue that the Bills need to find an elite QB to find success.

 

There are 12 teams going to the playoffs. It seems worth asking "what exactly do the Bills need to do to become one of those teams, rather than one of the 20 teams sitting at home?" So let's ask, do all of these teams have similar QB-driven, high-pass offense? (That would support your contention that run heavy offenses don't really work any more, correct?)

 

The answer is "No". In fact, two quite successful teams (the 49ers - same win % as NE and NO) have less than 50% pass plays (48% and 46%, respectively). Most of the rest have lower % passes than GB, NE, and NO: 55, 56, and 53% for the Ravens, Steelers and Bengals. The only team with higher % pass than the top 3 is Detroit, with a strong young QB in Stafford and 64% pass plays.

 

The question I think most of us have is "what do our beloved Bills need to change, in order to move from the 20 watching teams to the 12 teams being watched, during the playoffs?

 

There is stuff that is oft suggested here that is really beyond control or that would have heavy overall consequences: for Wilson to pass on, trade all our high picks for 3 years to move up and draft Luck regardless of all our other gaps and needs, fire Chan and bring in a new coach which is highly likely to mean new schemes and new personnel and extended rebuilding.

 

Isn't it worth asking, are there simple things we could do WITH OUR EXISTING PERSONNEL that would make us more effective on offense?

 

I offer this. Last year, the '9ers were 6-10, 38% wins. They passed 55% of the time. This year, they are 80% wins and 48% run. Is that all just 4th quarter padding, or was there a change in philosophy not to put so much of the game on Alex Smith? Last year the Texans were 38% wins, 6-10 and 58% pass. This year they are 67% even with their starter and 2nd string QB going out, and 46% pass plays. Again - is that all just 4th quarter padding, or was there a change in philosophy not to put so much of the game on the QB esp. after the starter and backup were hurt?

 

We have the same % pass (59%) as the three league-leading teams with generally-acknowledged elite QB. Yet even people such as myself who like Fitz and want to see him continue to get a chance, will say that he's an average QB and has clearly been struggling during the last games. Does it really make sense that we have the same %pass as teams with elite QB, when even Fitz's fans and supporters will agree that he's not in the same class as Rodgers, Brady, Brees, and perhaps someday Stafford and Newton? Isn't it reasonable to ask if a change in philosophy could have made us more effective, won us a few more games, and broken this playoff drought? Yes, we need better defense as well, and I think we can all agree even there, a more consistent offense is helpful in that it rests the D and helps them stay fresh.

 

We all know that sometimes games hinge on a few key plays - a key successful 3rd down conversion to keep a drive going, a key play in the red zone that leads to a TD instead of a FG or an INT. So if the play calling is off, even a few percentage points make a difference.

 

BTW, I think there are terms that mean different things that might cause confusion if they're conflated. There is "power running offense" aka "smashmouth football". The Lombardi era stuff. There is "run first offense", meaning the run is used to set up the pass but not necessarily in a "smashmouth" way, finesse could be involved. And there is overall run-pass balance, meaning pass plays are called at key times when a run play might arguably be more appropriate. I personally and I think others in this thread, are looking more at overall run-pass balance, and sometimes at using run plays to set up the pass, which is not the same thing as Lombardi-era smashmouth football.

 

Again, thanks to all for the interesting discussion.

 

if you want to pound the ball, you need to do 3 three things:

 

1. get a OC and OL committed to that philosophy

 

2. obtain OL players capable of winning individually at the point of attack

 

3. develop a teamwide attitude of toughness that you will run the ball successful (no excuses) goes back to point #1

 

 

Notice that you do not need top 10 RBs to make this work

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Gray Beard]

There is a big difference between being a lower seed in the playoffs and being a one or two seed in the playoffs. Many of the "Fitz sucks, Gailey sucks, Edwards sucks" people will admit that this team could make it to a wildcard game with better play calling (offense and defense), along with upgraded talent in a few key areas (e.g., pass rushing OLB, deep threat receiver, left tackle).

 

However, if you want to get a first round bye and go deep into the playoffs, then major changes become necessary. I am always surprised that people want to throw everything out and start over because they have a "Superbowl or Bust" mentality. Baby steps. You have to walk before you can run. You have to crawl before you can walk. You have to fall down before you can crawl. The Bills have fallen down, now it is time to start to crawl.