Bills run first pass later wont work

[juice]

If the Bills are looking to begin winning games in the League and make the playoffs why are we trying to rewrite history? If this offense is looking to be successful why try and win with a phillosophy that contradicts league trends.

League rules are geared towards offenses puting up big passing stats. A 300 yd passer is a winner in 80% of games played while rushing for 100 yds does not guarantee a winning game plan.

Henry Avg. about 75 yds/gm this season, had he ran for 100+ yds I dont think this team would have made the playoffs. In games when he went over the century mark this team was still at best .500.

Had this offense been able to rush for the 80 yds/gm and through ball control type gameplanning and passed for 230-250yds/gm it would give the offense balance. More along the lines of NE style of play.

A run on first down style of play then run or play-action on second will make this years offense less predictable while allowing us to play ball control.

The run first type game reminds me of what Carolina tried to do in the first half of the SB. Once the run game folded the pass game couldn't produce the firepwr. in the second half.

Miami has attempted to be this type club for the last few years with being shut out of the playoffs resulting. A midrange passing game has been the downfall of some otherwise pretty good teams in Miami. Williams has put up superior numbers to Henry's with 100/gm, but without the ability to air the ball out they have missed the post season.

[juice]

NCSU over #13WFU

[helmetguy]

Be careful when you use statistics to make an arguement. It may be true that a 300 yard passer won 80% of the time, but recognize, too, that not one single team averaged 300 ypg this past season. Inday had a league best of 268.1 ypg. New England was 8th, with 228.2. That is to say that there is no real cause/effect relationship with that statistic.

Teams that are the most successful are those who can run the ball effectively AS WELL AS pass it. I would be most interested in seeing the rushing statistics for that percentage of wins. It might also be helpful to know how many first downs were gained rushing and receiving, as well as touchdowns scored for each.

In the case of the Bills, there was an over-reliance on the theory that the short/intermediate passing attack would open up everything else. As we saw, that wasn't the result. Looking elsewhere, a guy like Marino passed for over 60,000 yards in his career, but made it to one Super Bowl. The point is, balance is the only key to success, but only a key. There are no gurantees.

[juice]

Bledsoe wont ave 250/gm but that 230 range would be a sufficient with a consistent run game.

300 yds was just a guesstamation of winning % of high end passing offenses and winning in a passing offense as opposed to running.

[STAMPY]

running controls clock and wears down defense... a big plus... pass only leads to many turnovers and 4 n outs... u need balance

[Dozerdog]

statistically, I bveleive half if not more than half of QBs that hit 300 for a game are on the losing end.

If you run the ball and can play decent defense- you can win


It's an oldest paradigm in the NFL.

[juice]

Originally posted by BuffaloBillsSTAMPEDE
running controls clock and wears down defense... a big plus... pass only leads to many turnovers and 4 n outs... u need balance

Too much running can lead to Miami type of a gameplan. You have to be able to pass in this League.

[juice]

Originally posted by Dozerdog
statistically, I bveleive half itf not more than half of QBs that hit 300 for a game are on the losing end.

If you run the ball and can play decent defense- you can win


It's an oldest paradigm in the NFL.

50%? That stat seems low. That might show the need for balance if its accurate.

[Dozerdog]

Originally posted by juice


League rules are geared towards offenses puting up big passing stats. A 300 yd passer is a winner in 80% of games played while rushing for 100 yds does not guarantee a winning game plan.

.

Juice- I would really like to know where you get your info from.


100 yard rushers

300 yard passers

2003 results


Take a long hard look. 300 yard passers- In 17 weeks, 300 yard passers won 26 games, lost 28 games-

And if you look closer- most of the 300 yard passers for the win won very close games- while most of the 300 yard passers that lost were victims of having their teams blown out by double digit margins.


Now I only counted half of the season for 100 yard rushers- but the evidence was overwhelming. Through the first 8 weeks, Teams with 100 yard rushers won 40 games while losing 14- and about 1/3rd of those losses were to teams that also had a 100 yard rusher.


Your stats (and conclusions) are completely wrong- or just made up.

[Ingtar33]

yes...

Its the age old truth of football.

Run and Stop the Run, do it well and you'll win a hell of a lot more than you lose.

[caveboy]

"What team in history ran and won?"

Ravens, on their way to their first SB.

Giants over the Bills, SB XXV.


Who's saying run only, either. I have no problem with running to set up the pass. We tried it fpr three years of the so-called passing attack pass setting up the run. It didn't work. Now it's time for something different.

In the past, you could say that when Thurman went for over 100 yards rushing, we won. Remember how prolific Kelly and his WRs were. With DB, not this year. Henry rushing for +100 but us still losing this year is not because the league trend has changed. It's because our passing game choked. Unless on its own your running game puts up 250-300 yards a game and three TDs, you need help from the QB.

[juice]

Originally posted by Dozerdog
Juice- I would really like to know where you get your info from.


100 yard rushers

300 yard passers

2003 results


Take a long hard look. 300 yard passers- In 17 weeks, 300 yard passers won 26 games, lost 28 games-

And if you look closer- most of the 300 yard passers for the win won very close games- while most of the 300 yard passers that lost were victims of having their teams blown out by double digit margins.


Now I only counted half of the season for 100 yard rushers- but the evidence was overwhelming. Through the first 8 weeks, Teams with 100 yard rushers won 40 games while losing 14- and about 1/3rd of those losses were to teams that also had a 100 yard rusher.


Your stats (and conclusions) are completely wrong- or just made up.

Both Super Bowl QB's had 300 yds passing, which shows some success rate with an offense that can throw down field. Carolina was in the game even though their running game was a non-factor. I guess a passing attack down field comes in handy.

Originally posted by caveboy
"What team in history ran and won?"

Ravens, on their way to their first SB.

Giants over the Bills, SB XXV.


Who's saying run only, either. I have no problem with running to set up the pass. We tried it fpr three years of the so-called passing attack pass setting up the run. It didn't work. Now it's time for something different.

In the past, you could say that when Thurman went for over 100 yards rushing, we won. Remember how prolific Kelly and his WRs were. With DB, not this year. Henry rushing for +100 but us still losing this year is not because the league trend has changed. It's because our passing game choked. Unless on its own your running game puts up 250-300 yards a game and three TDs, you need help from the QB.

Both teams, Giants and Ravens had pro bowl caliber QB's, not just a running game.

In the 2002 season when the offense could pass in the 1st half of the season we put up all time record #'s, when the run game became the primary source of production the team lost more games than it won, that was with Henry gaining 1400 yds. How much more of a run game will it take to be a run, run and win team. Maybe Henry and Willis will gain 1000 yds each. I dought it. ACC NCSU OVER 13WFU

[juice]

Originally posted by Dozerdog


Juice- I would really like to know where you get your info from.


100 yard rushers

300 yard passers

2003 results


Take a long hard look. 300 yard passers- In 17 weeks, 300 yard passers won 26 games, lost 28 games-

And if you look closer- most of the 300 yard passers for the win won very close games- while most of the 300 yard passers that lost were victims of having their teams blown out by double digit margins.


Now I only counted half of the season for 100 yard rushers- but the evidence was overwhelming. Through the first 8 weeks, Teams with 100 yard rushers won 40 games while losing 14- and about 1/3rd of those losses were to teams that also had a 100 yard rusher.


Your stats (and conclusions) are completely wrong- or just made up.

Dog- Your stats while interesting prove to be irrelivant when it comes to this years SB. Both teams showed the ability to pass for 300 and it was the lack of any type run game that proved to be the difference.

[don137]

Juice, some of your posts in this thread make no sense what so ever.
Your points are made with inaccurate guesstimations, inaccurate facts and a theory based on one games results in which both teams passed over 300 yards and the teams that ran the ball better won the game.
First of all the Ravens did not have a QB that was pro-bowl caliber when they won the super bowl. They ran the ball and stopped the run.
Dozers stats are on the mark when you look at running the ball over a 100 yds and a teams winning percentage which is year over year always higher than than the winning percentage of 300 yard passers.
Since you brought up Carolina and there ineffectiveness running the ball in the Super Bowl I will throw some stats at you. Carolina was 6-2 (8-2 if you include games where Foster and Davis split the running duties and ran for over 160 yards combined but under 100 yards each) in the regular season and playoffs where they ran the ball over 100 yards but only 1-2 when they passed over 300 yards...
I think if anything that was proved in the super bowl it proved that it is great to have running first mentaility but have a QB that is good enough to bail them out when the running game falters. Miami has no QB that is why they never go anywhere when there RB is ineffective.

[hurls]

^^^excellent post