Passing League my eye!! Think again.

[BringBackFergy]

193, 220, 86, 213, 217, 257, 180, 192, 235, 232, 229, 123, 37, 198....

 

These are some of the passing totals this past Sunday for winning and losing teams, All Pro QB’s, Dome teams, All Pro WR’s, $84 million dollar QB’s. 

 

Seems like we are on the right track in Buffalo. Solid QB play, pound the rock, with a great defense. 

Forgot a few: 136 and 20 ,  156 and 128

[dorquemada]

It does seem like we're in a different mood than a month or so ago when Mahomes was throwing for 5000 yards a game and winning every week.  Watching Brady miss on his last few throws yesterday was a reminder that D is more important later in the year than earlier.  Also, did anyone notice Brady fell on the 2nd to last play, trying to avoid getting hit?

[zow2]

The narrative that the NFL is drastically changing was such a knee jerk reaction from the National media after that Rams/Chiefs game.  Run and stop the run is still very much the recipe.  Baltimore has dumped their proven pocket passer for a running QB that throws for 165 yds per game.   Minnesota fired their OC because they didn't run the ball enough.  So yesterday they rush 40 times for 220+ and win big.  

Bottom line, there just aren't enough supremely talented QB's to do the stuff like Mahomes or Brees can do.   Injuries take a toll.  Look who Jacksonville and Washington rolled out yesterday/

[MDH]

Finding a single week that proves a point and saying “see!” doesn’t really prove the point. 

 

Obviously D is important, but this is an offensive league and the best teams in it have potent offenses that can run and pass well.

[BringBackFergy]

1 minute ago, MDH said:

Finding a single week that proves a point and saying “see!” doesn’t really prove the point. 

 

Obviously D is important, but this is an offensive league and the best teams in it have potent offenses that can run and pass well.

So I see you are changing the narrative from “it’s a passing league” to “it’s an offensive league”. Nice try. 

[T master]

Don't care what the "Experts say" if your going to win a championship you still need a really good running game & a really good defense !

 

Look at the last 2 winners of the super bowl what did they have in common ? One being Lagarrette Blount & the other being a really good D !! 

 

Not to mention a decent QB !

[dorquemada]

2 minutes ago, BringBackFergy said:

So I see you are changing the narrative from “it’s a passing league” to “it’s an offensive league”. Nice try. 

 

The difference between now perhaps and times past is the use of the pass to open up the run versus the run to open up the pass.  I actually liked how Ford ran yesterday, i hope he sticks around and gets developed.  Does anyone know if he can catch out of the backfield?

[All_Pro_Bills]

18 minutes ago, dorquemada said:

It does seem like we're in a different mood than a month or so ago when Mahomes was throwing for 5000 yards a game and winning every week.  Watching Brady miss on his last few throws yesterday was a reminder that D is more important later in the year than earlier.  Also, did anyone notice Brady fell on the 2nd to last play, trying to avoid getting hit?

I did notice that too.  Plays like that along with his age and taking into account his accomplishments to date leads me to believe this is going to be his last season.  

[MDH]

16 minutes ago, BringBackFergy said:

So I see you are changing the narrative from “it’s a passing league” to “it’s an offensive league”. Nice try. 

 

Teams that “pound the rock” and don’t, at the very least, have a balanced attack have little chance of success.

 

You can have a good passing attack, you can have a balanced attack but a team has to have a dominant D to have a weak passing attack and have any chance at winning the title.

[RalphWilson'sNewWar]

So...are we all extremely confidently putting our money down on the Bears vs. Ravens Super Bowl?

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

Just now, RalphWilson'sNewWar said:

So...are we all extremely confidently putting our money down on the Bears vs. Ravens Super Bowl?

 

More than a Chiefs/Rams super bowl.

 

Consider this...the Rams lost last night to the Eagles, who are a MASH unit. What's going to happen when they face the Saints IN THE DOME?

 

Toast.

 

[dorquemada]

1 minute ago, RalphWilson'sNewWar said:

So...are we all extremely confidently putting our money down on the Bears vs. Ravens Super Bowl?

 

No, but would you bet $5000 on Rams vs Chiefs? 

 

edit; beaten like a red headed step child

Edited December 17, 2018 by dorquemada

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

Just now, dorquemada said:

 

No, but would you bet $5000 on Rams vs Chiefs? 

 

Rams softer than baby poop on a hot day.

 

[prissythecat]

Its about having a complete team.    A one-sided team eventually gets exposed in a long season.  Who are the complete teams though right now?  Saints?   

[dubs]

It’s all about balance and game planning on both sides of the ball.

 

 

[Chuck Wagon]

27 minutes ago, T master said:

Don't care what the "Experts say" if your going to win a championship you still need a really good running game & a really good defense !

 

Look at the last 2 winners of the super bowl what did they have in common ? One being Lagarrette Blount & the other being a really good D !! 

 

Not to mention a decent QB !

 

 

Yes,  not having Blount gain 3 yards a rush is killing both the Pats and Eagles seasons.

[dorquemada]

1 minute ago, prissythecat said:

Its about having a complete team.    A one-sided team eventually gets exposed in a long season.  Who are the complete teams though right now?  Saints?   

 

My dark horse candidate is Houston.  They might not have the balance but they have star players in important positions, guys who can turn a game around on their own.

[Mickey]

54 minutes ago, BringBackFergy said:

193, 220, 86, 213, 217, 257, 180, 192, 235, 232, 229, 123, 37, 198....

 

These are some of the passing totals this past Sunday for winning and losing teams, All Pro QB’s, Dome teams, All Pro WR’s, $84 million dollar QB’s. 

 

Seems like we are on the right track in Buffalo. Solid QB play, pound the rock, with a great defense. 

Forgot a few: 136 and 20 ,  156 and 128

 

Let me introduce you to a little something called "sample size" and it's companion, "sampling error".

 

A sample size is a part of the population chosen for a survey or experiment. For example, you might take a survey of dog owner’s brand preferences. You won’t want to survey all the millions of dog owners in the country (either because it’s too expensive or time consuming), so you take a sample size. That may be several thousand owners. The sample size is a representation of all dog owner’s brand preferences. If you choose your sample wisely, it will be a good representation.

 

When you only survey a small sample of the population, [such as a single weekend of passing stats] uncertainty creeps in to your statistics. If you can only survey a certain percentage of the true population, you can never be 100% sure that your statistics are a complete and accurate representation of the population. This uncertainty is called sampling error and is usually measured by a confidence interval. For example, you might state that your results are at a 90% confidence level. That means if you were to repeat your survey over and over, 90% of the time your would get the same results.

 

https://www.statisticshowto.datasciencecentral.com/probability-and-statistics/find-sample-size/

Edited December 17, 2018 by Mickey

[mannc]

26 minutes ago, T master said:

Don't care what the "Experts say" if your going to win a championship you still need a really good running game & a really good defense !

 

Look at the last 2 winners of the super bowl what did they have in common ? One being Lagarrette Blount & the other being a really good D !! 

 

Not to mention a decent QB !

You mean LaGarrett Blount, former UDFA, now on his sixth or seventh NFL team?  

[vorpma]

46 minutes ago, MDH said:

Finding a single week that proves a point and saying “see!” doesn’t really prove the point. 

 

Obviously D is important, but this is an offensive league and the best teams in it have potent offenses that can run and pass well.

Wow, thanks for the enlightening post! You need to score points to win, who would have thought!

[WhyteDwarf]

This thread makes no sense, it's a passing league, everyone knows that.  Right?

[Matt_In_NH]

All aspects are important.  QB was and still is #1 no matter what happened this weekend.

[apuszczalowski]

35 minutes ago, MDH said:

Finding a single week that proves a point and saying “see!” doesn’t really prove the point. 

 

Obviously D is important, but this is an offensive league and the best teams in it have potent offenses that can run and pass well.

Exactly, you could go back to another week this season and point out it's a running league, or another to find it's a defensive league, or another to find it's a Special Teams League. Looking at the results this week, there were a bunch of upsets or surprise results that dont necessarily say anything about the league definitively except that 'theres a reason they play the games every week'

 

A nobody QB in San Fran beat a Seattle team fighting for a playoff spot. Nick Foles took down the Rams, Josh Johnson and the beat up Redskins beat a very good Jaguars defence. Patriots lose 2 in a row. Jets came close to beating a playoff Texans team. Vikings may have ran the ball more because they took an early 21-7 lead against Miami. The Cowboys were shutout against the Colts, the Titans shut out a Giants team that was a favorite and on a roll.

[JerseyBills]

36 minutes ago, prissythecat said:

Its about having a complete team.    A one-sided team eventually gets exposed in a long season.  Who are the complete teams though right now?  Saints?   

Chargers are the most complete to me, if Gordon is healthy for the playoffs. They have elite RB, QB, WR and solid OL. Elite pass rush and secondary. 

[BillsVet]

1 hour ago, MDH said:

Finding a single week that proves a point and saying “see!” doesn’t really prove the point. 

 

Obviously D is important, but this is an offensive league and the best teams in it have potent offenses that can run and pass well.

 

When the regular season is over, the teams reaching the playoffs will have good or better passing games.  Right now, we know that in the AFC, that means KC, SD, HOU, PIT, NE, and perhaps IND.  Over in the NFC, it's LAR, NO, MIN, and CHI.  The exception is SEA and DAL, although the latter started improving when they acquired a WR.  That's as many as 10 out of the 12 teams with excellent passing games. 

 

Passing has not been supplanted with running the ball and strong defense.  And barring some rules changes, it's going to remain that way.  One or two weeks' worth of games isn't going to change it, but people have a tendency to analyze things at the surface. 

[RalphWilson'sNewWar]

45 minutes ago, Joe in Winslow said:

 

More than a Chiefs/Rams super bowl.

 

Consider this...the Rams lost last night to the Eagles, who are a MASH unit. What's going to happen when they face the Saints IN THE DOME?

 

Toast.

 

I would def pick the Saints myself.  Brees and that offense in the DOME are just on another level when it’s rolling.

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

Just now, RalphWilson'sNewWar said:

I would def pick the Saints myself.  Brees and that offense in the DOME are just on another level when it’s rolling.

 

Honestly, if the Saints have home field, they may as well not even undertake the NFC playoffs.

 

 

[blacklabel]

The league is all about trends and ebbs and flows. Ten years ago the Wildcat was the major trend every team tried to adopt after Miami slapped New England with it. Eventually defenses caught up and the Wildcat went away. Six years ago it was all about athletic QB's and designed QB runs, (Colin Kaepernick shredding Green Bay for 181 yards on the ground in the 2012 playoffs). Defenses adjusted and  now you don't see it as often as you used to. Nowadays offenses are taking elements of the college spread game and mixing it with pro offenses in order to bring their young QBs up to speed a little faster. This caused a huge upward swing in offensive production and scoring but as the season went on, defenses caught up, as they do every year. RPOs are still trending but teams have also found ways to stop those.

 

There are only so many plays you can run. The chess match stuff between coaches comes down to formations and situational football. Being aware of what your opponent is doing when you give them a certain look so you can hopefully circle back to that same look later in the game and make them expect the same type of play from earlier only to spin around and execute something totally different. Take McKenzie and the jet sweep motion Daboll often puts him in. Against the Jags they showed that motion four or five times to get the Jags thinking that he was in motion just so Allen could see whether or not the defense was in man or zone. Then, they get inside the red zone and run that motion again except this time it's a quick handoff to him and he walks into the end zone. Worked again a couple weeks later against the Jets.

 

No matter how many rules the league creates to favor the offense, defenses will always catch up. And then offenses will adjust and come out with a different attack and that'll work for a bit but then defenses catch on and stop it. Back and forth it goes as it has for decades. 

 

Lot of low scores yesterday as well... 14-13, 17-16, 16-13, 23-0, 24-17, 20-12, 17-0, 17-10, etc. 

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

1 minute ago, blacklabel said:

The league is all about trends and ebbs and flows. Ten years ago the Wildcat was the major trend every team tried to adopt after Miami slapped New England with it. Eventually defenses caught up and the Wildcat went away. Six years ago it was all about athletic QB's and designed QB runs, (Colin Kaepernick shredding Green Bay for 181 yards on the ground in the 2012 playoffs). Defenses adjusted and  now you don't see it as often as you used to. Nowadays offenses are taking elements of the college spread game and mixing it with pro offenses in order to bring their young QBs up to speed a little faster. This caused a huge upward swing in offensive production and scoring but as the season went on, defenses caught up, as they do every year. RPOs are still trending but teams have also found ways to stop those.

 

There are only so many plays you can run. The chess match stuff between coaches comes down to formations and situational football. Being aware of what your opponent is doing when you give them a certain look so you can hopefully circle back to that same look later in the game and make them expect the same type of play from earlier only to spin around and execute something totally different. Take McKenzie and the jet sweep motion Daboll often puts him in. Against the Jags they showed that motion four or five times to get the Jags thinking that he was in motion just so Allen could see whether or not the defense was in man or zone. Then, they get inside the red zone and run that motion again except this time it's a quick handoff to him and he walks into the end zone. Worked again a couple weeks later against the Jets.

 

No matter how many rules the league creates to favor the offense, defenses will always catch up. And then offenses will adjust and come out with a different attack and that'll work for a bit but then defenses catch on and stop it. Back and forth it goes as it has for decades. 

 

Lot of low scores yesterday as well... 14-13, 17-16, 16-13, 23-0, 24-17, 20-12, 17-0, 17-10, etc. 

 

Listen to this man. He is wise.

 

 

[vorpma]

21 minutes ago, apuszczalowski said:

Exactly, you could go back to another week this season and point out it's a running league, or another to find it's a defensive league, or another to find it's a Special Teams League. Looking at the results this week, there were a bunch of upsets or surprise results that dont necessarily say anything about the league definitively except that 'theres a reason they play the games every week'

 

A nobody QB in San Fran beat a Seattle team fighting for a playoff spot. Nick Foles took down the Rams, Josh Johnson and the beat up Redskins beat a very good Jaguars defence. Patriots lose 2 in a row. Jets came close to beating a playoff Texans team. Vikings may have ran the ball more because they took an early 21-7 lead against Miami. The Cowboys were shutout against the Colts, the Titans shut out a Giants team that was a favorite and on a roll.

How about its a "WINNING" league, the winning teams do what it takes to win with emotional attachments to running or passing! Why no one on TBD is employed in any capacity bu the NFL!

[vorpma]

27 minutes ago, blacklabel said:

The league is all about trends and ebbs and flows. Ten years ago the Wildcat was the major trend every team tried to adopt after Miami slapped New England with it. Eventually defenses caught up and the Wildcat went away. Six years ago it was all about athletic QB's and designed QB runs, (Colin Kaepernick shredding Green Bay for 181 yards on the ground in the 2012 playoffs). Defenses adjusted and  now you don't see it as often as you used to. Nowadays offenses are taking elements of the college spread game and mixing it with pro offenses in order to bring their young QBs up to speed a little faster. This caused a huge upward swing in offensive production and scoring but as the season went on, defenses caught up, as they do every year. RPOs are still trending but teams have also found ways to stop those.

 

There are only so many plays you can run. The chess match stuff between coaches comes down to formations and situational football. Being aware of what your opponent is doing when you give them a certain look so you can hopefully circle back to that same look later in the game and make them expect the same type of play from earlier only to spin around and execute something totally different. Take McKenzie and the jet sweep motion Daboll often puts him in. Against the Jags they showed that motion four or five times to get the Jags thinking that he was in motion just so Allen could see whether or not the defense was in man or zone. Then, they get inside the red zone and run that motion again except this time it's a quick handoff to him and he walks into the end zone. Worked again a couple weeks later against the Jets.

 

No matter how many rules the league creates to favor the offense, defenses will always catch up. And then offenses will adjust and come out with a different attack and that'll work for a bit but then defenses catch on and stop it. Back and forth it goes as it has for decades. 

 

Lot of low scores yesterday as well... 14-13, 17-16, 16-13, 23-0, 24-17, 20-12, 17-0, 17-10, etc. 

Yes! It's a "winning;" win or go home - why no emotional attachments to specific offense or defense!

[row_33]

1 hour ago, MDH said:

Finding a single week that proves a point and saying “see!” doesn’t really prove the point. 

 

Obviously D is important, but this is an offensive league and the best teams in it have potent offenses that can run and pass well.

 

beyond obvious...

 

it takes a very stubborn blind dissonance to pretend this isn't a passing league

 

i hope OP insisting this silly argument cannot vote or drive or raise children

 

[iinii]

1 hour ago, prissythecat said:

Its about having a complete team.    A one-sided team eventually gets exposed in a long season.  Who are the complete teams though right now?  Saints?   

Don’t forget Anthony Lynn’s Chargers 

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

1 minute ago, iinii said:

Don’t forget Anthony Lynn’s Chargers 

 

You know what?

 

I'm making that my call for the Super Bowl. Chargers/Saints.

 

Heck with the buttery-soft rams and chiefs.

 

[HomeskillitMoorman]

I love posts like this that don't actually have any real long-term vision.

 

Dominant defenses are not sustainable for long-term success. If you actually really look at this league, the teams that are perennial contenders are the teams with franchise QB's and competent offenses. It's awesome to have a great defense, but no team in the league is able to keep one for an extended period of time. The Bears D I'm sure will stay at least good for a while, but watch, their window for being at this level is going to be pretty small as they start to lose guys. 

 

I don't think anyone's ever been against having a good D or run game...but the priority and rightfully so was about getting that franchise QB. It's so much easier to get everything else to fall into place once you have that. 

[vorpma]

24 minutes ago, HomeskillitMoorman said:

I love posts like this that don't actually have any real long-term vision.

 

Dominant defenses are not sustainable for long-term success. If you actually really look at this league, the teams that are perennial contenders are the teams with franchise QB's and competent offenses. It's awesome to have a great defense, but no team in the league is able to keep one for an extended period of time. The Bears D I'm sure will stay at least good for a while, but watch, their window for being at this level is going to be pretty small as they start to lose guys. 

 

I don't think anyone's ever been against having a good D or run game...but the priority and rightfully so was about getting that franchise QB. It's so much easier to get everything else to fall into place once you have that. 

Tampa Bay won a Super Bowl with Trent Dilfer; Jim McMahon did not light up the sky, and Bob Griese had Czonka and the no name defense; there are no absolutes in the NFL but winning!! There are no emotional attachments by NFL head coaches to offense or defense - running or passing; the only attachment is the score board and won loss column; we are an excitement driven society with a millennial fan base that demands arena football!

[apuszczalowski]

1 hour ago, vorpma said:

How about its a "WINNING" league, the winning teams do what it takes to win with emotional attachments to running or passing! Why no one on TBD is employed in any capacity bu the NFL!

But what did those teams do to become winning teams? What do they all have in common?

 

The teams that continue to stay on top do so because they can adapt to the changes or become trend setters. 

[HomeskillitMoorman]

11 minutes ago, vorpma said:

Tampa Bay won a Super Bowl with Trent Dilfer; Jim McMahon did not light up the sky, and Bob Griese had Czonka and the no name defense; there are no absolutes in the NFL but winning!! There are no emotional attachments by NFL head coaches to offense or defense - running or passing; the only attachment is the score board and won loss column; we are an excitement driven society with a millennial fan base that demands arena football!

 

How long did Tampa stay a SB contender after they won? What sunk them? There's also plenty of elite defenses that never win it. 

 

I want a team that's going to be a perennial contender, and you have the best odds of doing that if you have a franchise QB. This has been proven for as long as football has been around. I don't really even know what the argument is anymore because that is the direction we went in, but I guess I'm glad we have the people in place that we do that had proper value placed on a franchise QB instead of people that aren't able to comprehend that. 

[BuffaLoko]

3 hours ago, Chuck Wagon said:

 

 

Yes,  not having Blount gain 3 yards a rush is killing both the Pats and Eagles seasons.

I think he meant...during their respective SB games, specifically...

[Malazan]

You win in the trenches.