(01-05-2020, 07:10 PM)jagibelieve Wrote:

(01-04-2020, 08:13 AM)SeldomRite Wrote: It's not terrible, he's just clearly not a statistician able to explain what he's talking about. If you want to get an idea of his consistency you can do things like removing outlier runs and calculating a few things. Ideally you'd want your running back to be consistent in getting good yardage on each run, something like 4, 5, 4, 5, 3, 5, 6 for a 4.5 yard average. Not something like 12, -3, 1, 6, 15, -4 for 4.5 average. The first one helps you get to field goal range, the second one gets you a couple of punts.

The below article touches on the unimportance of a strong running game in the modern NFL, and essentially what a stupid draft selection Fournette was.
https://thepowerrank.com/2014/01/10/whic...-playoffs/

The top 4 running teams from this season made the playoffs.

The top 4 passing teams did not.

The myth that having a strong running game is not important in the "modern NFL" is just not true.

First of all, good job letting a one year sample overrule that articles 10 years of data. Logic 101 right there.

Second, I have a feeling you're looking at largely useless overall team stats, and not efficiency stats. Because if you were you would see that the top 4 passing teams (and 8 of the top 10) by passing DVOA did make the playoffs. And the second and third by rushing DVOA did not make it, and only 5 of the top 10 overall.

Third, that article clearly showed that good running teams can win games, sometimes. It looks like if you're among the best rushing teams in the league you have about a 50/50 chance of being a winning team.

---