Are You Ready for Some Football - Week 14

[Imran Siddiqui]

ou have to be able to run to keep the defense honest, but you don't have to be great at it. And you don't have to stop the run. Teams that are good at rushing don't score many points. You just have to score more.

Only one team that won the Super Bowl in the last 4 was great at the run and they had a great defense too.

Name a Superbowl winner who was bad at the run AND against the run?

Last year Tampa wasn't that great, true (27th), but were great against it (5th). Oakland likewise (18th in rushing but 3rd against the run). That was the exception!

New England in 2001 was 13th in the run (and St. Louis was 5th in the run and 3rd in run defense). In 2000, Baltimore was 5th in rushing and 1st against the run, and the Giants were 11th in rushing and 2nd against the run. In 1999, St. Louis was 5th in rushing [are you telling me that 1999 St. Louis didn't score many points?] and 1st against the run, while Tennessee was 13th in rushing and 10th against the run.

Your premise seems to be wrong. Last year was the exception when the SuperBowl teams were not good at running (but both were great at stopping the run).

All stats from:

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/

[Dis]

you don't have to be good against the run

I suppose that is true if you face a passing team. But even they may figure out that running will win the game.

Football games are won by good running. Therefore being able to stop the run gives a team a chance to prevent from being beaten.

Unless you are one of those guys like Spurrier who think you can pass 60 or 70 times a game and win.

There's a reason why the Rams lost the superbowl a couple of years ago. Look at their play selection for a hint.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Football games are won by good running. Therefore being able to stop the run gives a team a chance to prevent from being beaten.

Right on, Diss . Give me a great offensive line and a great running back and I'll give you a nice offense .

[Berzerker]

Hey Diss, what happened that "iffy" Miami offense?

Damn, Holcomb cost me (and Cleveland) the game tonite. St L gets 2 TD's before the half because of him.

[Frozzy]

Bears Coaching Staff Pay Attention!!!

[Dis]

Originally posted by Berzerker
Hey Diss, what happened that "iffy" Miami offense?

Damn, Holcomb cost me (and Cleveland) the game tonite. St L gets 2 TD's before the half because of him.

what do ya expect- it was a blizzard against one of the best defenses in the league.

You know just as well as I Miami ALWAYS folds in December.

My point was up until last week- they were a pretty good team with Jay Fiedlar at QB. All bets are off in December, as the past 4 years- possibly even longer than that.

[Berzerker]

what do ya expect- it was a blizzard against one of the best defenses in the league.

I expected more than a minus 7 points

[Imran Siddiqui]

Well if it wasn't for Tampa, the Dolphins would have the worst record of any team in weather below 40 degrees.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Dissident
There's a reason why the Rams lost the superbowl a couple of years ago. Look at their play selection for a hint.

That's correct, but you didn't read the part where I said that teams need to be able to run the ball enough to keep the defense honest.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Football games are won by good running. Therefore being able to stop the run gives a team a chance to prevent from being beaten.

Right on, Diss . Give me a great offensive line and a great running back and I'll give you a nice offense .

What is the best offensive line - running back combination that you can think of. For me it's the Rams with Eric Dickerson. We went to one championship game and got are ass kicked.

[Imran Siddiqui]

What is the best offensive line - running back combination that you can think of.

Jim Brown with the 1960-65 Cleveland Browns (1950s if you are counting the old AAFC). And they won their share of championships .

If we are talking modern times (), then Emmitt Smith behind that '90s Cowboys O-Line.

That's correct, but you didn't read the part where I said that teams need to be able to run the ball enough to keep the defense honest.

I've shown facts that a VAST majority of Superbowl participants in the last 4 years run much more than simply to keep defenses honest. If you are above 16th in rushing offense (upper half of the league), then you are running to get yards, not to keep teams honest. And besides, the Rams, when they went to the Superbowl in the last decade were in the Top 5 in rushing. That's not to keep teams 'honest'.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

What is the best offensive line - running back combination that you can think of.

Jim Brown with the 1960-65 Cleveland Browns (1950s if you are counting the old AAFC). And they won their share of championships .

If we are talking modern times (), then Emmitt Smith behind that '90s Cowboys O-Line.

That's correct, but you didn't read the part where I said that teams need to be able to run the ball enough to keep the defense honest.

I've shown facts that a VAST majority of Superbowl participants in the last 4 years run much more than simply to keep defenses honest. If you are above 16th in rushing offense (upper half of the league), then you are running to get yards, not to keep teams honest. And besides, the Rams, when they went to the Superbowl in the last decade were in the Top 5 in rushing. That's not to keep teams 'honest'.

I think you are confusing teams who build there offense for the run and teams that build their offense for the pass, but run the ball. The Rams pass the ball far more than they run, even though they are OK at running the ball. Their offensive line is primarily pass blockers, with the exception of Kyle Turly (aquired only this year). The 90s Cowboys were also a very good passing team.

When teams build their team to run at the expense of the pass they don't do as well.

[rah]

There is also one other thing. Successful teams that are dominant because of their passing usually have run up large leads by the middle of the third quarter and end up running the ball for the last quarter and a half to eat up the clock. Running against lines that already know they've lost. This can easily pad the rushing stats making the team appear to be a successful running team in comparison.

[-Jrabbit]

Originally posted by Kidicious
What is the best offensive line - running back combination that you can think of. For me it's the Rams with Eric Dickerson. We went to one championship game and got are ass kicked.

OJ and the Buffalo o-line would get my vote.

Emmitt/Dallas a close 2nd.

[Japher]

I don't think you need to have a great running game, you just need an effective one; in that, they are enough of a threat to pull defenders off the receivers.

I think for the most part you don't need one thing to be "great" more so than for everything to be effective enough. Though, as we have seen, it doesn't hurt to have a great defense. Yet even that is not always the case; i.e. the Niners this year, and The Charges through most of the 90s.