2010 Run/Pass ratio expectations

[ESPY]

I'm trying to base this run/pass ratio on who our OC is & what his track record has been. Obviously we know what he's done here at Nebraska, but I got curious about his best season as OC at Colorado in 2001.

 

Did you know his 2001 squad, which ranked 20th that year with 434 yards/game (& was the 3rd Buffs offense ever to eclipse 2,000 rush yards & 2,000 pass yards in the same season), had a run/pass ratio of 575/311? That's 64.9 % run/35.1% pass.

 

Look at the roster & you'll see we're facing a similar situation as that 2001 Buffs offense. They had 2 outstanding RBs - Chris Brown & Bobby Purify - & each guy was just 50 yards short of 1,000 rush yards. That could definitely happen with Helu & Rex. Watson relied on a near 50/50 split of PT between his top 2 QBs - Bobby Pesavento & Craig Ochs - & both these guys passed for just over 1200 yards each. Neither of these QBs ran for more than 31 yards, so our QBs will definitely have the advantage there since Watson likes to get our QBs running in the open.

 

I think these are very interesting similarities we ought ton consider when predicting ratio & overall output of this year's offense. So, I'm pumped to see if Wats can get results mirroring those of his great success in 2001.

+1 Awesome post

 

I like your point about The 2 CU RBs compared to ours. Personally I predicted a while ago that Helu and Burkhead will combine for 1800. Throw in Tray, I think the 3 of them could combine for 2000. And I would LOVE to see 65% run ratio, that would take pressure off Lee, and open play action. I don't think we're going to be a top 20 offense, but I think like you said, if Wats can emulate this 01 CU model we should at least crack the top 50-60, which with our defense, could make for a hell of a football team.

 

Is it effing football season yet?!

2001 Colorado offense had a 3rd running back - Cortlen Johnson - who eclipsed 500 rushing yards to go along with Brown & Purify's 1900 yards. The similarities just keep coming.

Do you have any info about that 2001 Colorado Oline? I expect ours to be good, but I don't think they're going to be an 08 Oklahoma Oline or anything.

Definitely a big, experienced Oline for the Buffs that year. I couldn't find any record of who their primary starters were, but I remember the line consisting of 2 srs & 3-5 jrs with avg size of 6'5" & 300 lbs among them. No wonder their running game was so successful.

[GMoose]

I'd say that's the directions our line is going-Qvale, Rodriguez, Sterup, Moore, we should have a commanding line soon. As for right now we've got some size up front, but I don't know if we'll be that good yet. Although I still think the 3 R's can go for for 2000+

 

After QB running yardage and backup yards, I think we'll have a top 30 rushing offense.

[sd'sker]

hopefully it will be a 55/55 percentage, that way we will be getting more than we think.

[brophog]

Run/Pass Ratios are the single most overrated statistic in all of football. I can't exaggerate how meaningless that statistic is, nor how imprecise it is in today's college game.

 

We track it only to abide by the rule that each play can only have 1 forward pass. It's usefulness in statistics and tendencies is very, very low.

 

Now, if you want to track how many times Team A threw a flanker screen out of a Trips set on the short side of the field, that's meaningful. The number of times a team was credited with a forward pass is not. It doesn't tell me how to defend that team. Was it a 3 yard RB screen? A 7 step drop? A draw play?

 

I think fans today are so much better educated about the game than they were in the past, but the media and the popular opinion on this stat is such a huge tether holding it back from going further.

 

Especially with that word 'balance'. Blah, such a useless and generic word. It assumes that doing something in equal proportions is somehow a desired result. There is nothing special about having a 50/50 pass run ratio. In fact, from a big play potential, it is often counterproductive........and football is a game where picking up large chunks of offense at one time is a very desirable trait.

 

Every successful offensive scheme is 'balanced'. By 'balanced' I mean the capability to present complementary looks and actions in order to derive specific results from the defense. A triple option offense is balanced via the FB dive or outside release. You're attempting to give one look to a playside DE and enticing different actions. The Zone Read is balanced via the backside DE.

 

We don't keep mainstream stats on how often the FB Dive was ran, but we track how many times the same offense threw a forward pass. The former, which is important, doesn't enter mainstream consciousness despite the fact it is infinitely more important to the success of that offense than the latter.

 

Of all the complementary actions, the pass-run relationship is just one of them and yet because it is an easily accessible statistic it is given an enormous priority. For general purposes, its pretty meaningless to know if your opponent passes the ball 45% or 52% of the time. Now, if we make it situationally specific, it becomes more important. You want to know how often on 3rd and 3 or less the opponent ran an ISO or threw an inside slant on a 3 step drop. That's meaningful data that tells me how to defend that down.

 

That's what I really want to know......how do I defend it. The problem with pass/run ratios is it turns the game into a simple dichotomy: it's either pass or run with a requisite response to defeat it. Early computer games on the sport were this way. It ignores the diversity of this game and attempts to simplify it to an erroneous degree.

[sd'sker]

Run/Pass Ratios are the single most overrated statistic in all of football. I can't exaggerate how meaningless that statistic is, nor how imprecise it is in today's college game.

 

We track it only to abide by the rule that each play can only have 1 forward pass. It's usefulness in statistics and tendencies is very, very low.

 

Now, if you want to track how many times Team A threw a flanker screen out of a Trips set on the short side of the field, that's meaningful. The number of times a team was credited with a forward pass is not. It doesn't tell me how to defend that team. Was it a 3 yard RB screen? A 7 step drop? A draw play?

 

I think fans today are so much better educated about the game than they were in the past, but the media and the popular opinion on this stat is such a huge tether holding it back from going further.

 

Especially with that word 'balance'. Blah, such a useless and generic word. It assumes that doing something in equal proportions is somehow a desired result. There is nothing special about having a 50/50 pass run ratio. In fact, from a big play potential, it is often counterproductive........and football is a game where picking up large chunks of offense at one time is a very desirable trait.

 

Every successful offensive scheme is 'balanced'. By 'balanced' I mean the capability to present complementary looks and actions in order to derive specific results from the defense. A triple option offense is balanced via the FB dive or outside release. You're attempting to give one look to a playside DE and enticing different actions. The Zone Read is balanced via the backside DE.

 

We don't keep mainstream stats on how often the FB Dive was ran, but we track how many times the same offense threw a forward pass. The former, which is important, doesn't enter mainstream consciousness despite the fact it is infinitely more important to the success of that offense than the latter.

 

Of all the complementary actions, the pass-run relationship is just one of them and yet because it is an easily accessible statistic it is given an enormous priority. For general purposes, its pretty meaningless to know if your opponent passes the ball 45% or 52% of the time. Now, if we make it situationally specific, it becomes more important. You want to know how often on 3rd and 3 or less the opponent ran an ISO or threw an inside slant on a 3 step drop. That's meaningful data that tells me how to defend that down.

 

That's what I really want to know......how do I defend it. The problem with pass/run ratios is it turns the game into a simple dichotomy: it's either pass or run with a requisite response to defeat it. Early computer games on the sport were this way. It ignores the diversity of this game and attempts to simplify it to an erroneous degree.

excellent point and so true. especially the part about balance. just because the ratio is 50/50, it would not be balanced if the yards gained were 80% from running and 20% from passing; that would demonstrate a run heavy offense with weak passing capabilities. rushing/passing ratios should be based on yardage if anything, rather than just the act, and i know that would still be too simplistic. a truly balanced offense could not just consider pass vs. rush, but it would have to consider type of pass, type of rush, and the relative success. offenses are about keeping the defense guessing (or, imposing your will on an inferior defense). i guess the only stat i really pay attention to is the score, although individual and team stats are interesting, most ratios would leave much to be desired.

[GMoose]

Run/Pass Ratios are the single most overrated statistic in all of football. I can't exaggerate how meaningless that statistic is, nor how imprecise it is in today's college game.

 

We track it only to abide by the rule that each play can only have 1 forward pass. It's usefulness in statistics and tendencies is very, very low.

 

Now, if you want to track how many times Team A threw a flanker screen out of a Trips set on the short side of the field, that's meaningful. The number of times a team was credited with a forward pass is not. It doesn't tell me how to defend that team. Was it a 3 yard RB screen? A 7 step drop? A draw play?

 

I think fans today are so much better educated about the game than they were in the past, but the media and the popular opinion on this stat is such a huge tether holding it back from going further.

 

Especially with that word 'balance'. Blah, such a useless and generic word. It assumes that doing something in equal proportions is somehow a desired result. There is nothing special about having a 50/50 pass run ratio. In fact, from a big play potential, it is often counterproductive........and football is a game where picking up large chunks of offense at one time is a very desirable trait.

 

Every successful offensive scheme is 'balanced'. By 'balanced' I mean the capability to present complementary looks and actions in order to derive specific results from the defense. A triple option offense is balanced via the FB dive or outside release. You're attempting to give one look to a playside DE and enticing different actions. The Zone Read is balanced via the backside DE.

 

We don't keep mainstream stats on how often the FB Dive was ran, but we track how many times the same offense threw a forward pass. The former, which is important, doesn't enter mainstream consciousness despite the fact it is infinitely more important to the success of that offense than the latter.

 

Of all the complementary actions, the pass-run relationship is just one of them and yet because it is an easily accessible statistic it is given an enormous priority. For general purposes, its pretty meaningless to know if your opponent passes the ball 45% or 52% of the time. Now, if we make it situationally specific, it becomes more important. You want to know how often on 3rd and 3 or less the opponent ran an ISO or threw an inside slant on a 3 step drop. That's meaningful data that tells me how to defend that down.

 

That's what I really want to know......how do I defend it. The problem with pass/run ratios is it turns the game into a simple dichotomy: it's either pass or run with a requisite response to defeat it. Early computer games on the sport were this way. It ignores the diversity of this game and attempts to simplify it to an erroneous degree.

That's great that you can throw around terms and stats like that, but the purpose of this thread is to predict what the offense will look like, not estimate how many yards per play on zone reads or screens.

 

I think when people throw their $.02 in on this thread they're predicting how many times we'll run the ball and throw the ball. The yardage that comes from said plays, like you said, can be extremely misleading.

[brophog]

 

That's great that you can throw around terms and stats like that, but the purpose of this thread is to predict what the offense will look like, not estimate how many yards per play on zone reads or screens.

 

I think when people throw their $.02 in on this thread they're predicting how many times we'll run the ball and throw the ball. The yardage that comes from said plays, like you said, can be extremely misleading.

 

The title of this thread is 2010 pass/run ratio expectations. It is a good idea in such a thread to know how important that ratio is and how relevant it happens to be in the grand scheme.

 

Please read again what I wrote. I did not simply write that the yardage from said plays can be misleading, but that the entire premise of tracking and applying value to such a ratio is misleading.