Re-thinking offensive success

[Jclayton92]

https://www.pff.com/news/nfl-explosive-plays-and-re-thinking-offensive-success

Amazing read if you are into analytics and a real thought provoking read as we see how Daboll has built this offense.

Every position now has a piece capable of an explosive play whether its Nabers, Wan Dale, Slayton, Waller, and Singletary.

Singletary finished 13th in explosives last season despite less opportunities.

We have been horrible at EPA, Explosives, and Big time throws.

In Buffalo Daboll had Allen reaching tops in Explosives, BTTR, and EPA. You add that context to the team we've built, and you can tell he's laying a foundation.

[Philosophers]

https://www.pff.com/news/nfl-explosive-plays-and-re-thinking-offensive-success

Amazing read if you are into analytics and a real thought provoking read as we see how Daboll has built this offense.

Every position now has a piece capable of an explosive play whether its Nabers, Wan Dale, Slayton, Waller, and Singletary.

Singletary finished 13th in explosives last season despite less opportunities.

We have been horrible at EPA, Explosives, and Big time throws.

In Buffalo Daboll had Allen reaching tops in Explosives, BTTR, and EPA. You add that context to the team we've built, and you can tell he's laying a foundation.

Jess - for a team to be aggressive offensively it takes a coach to trust the offense, a QB with a big play mindset but also trust in the defense to stop the other team if a big play misses causing a punt.

Do we have all that?

[Bob In PA]

J: Theoretically, the pieces are all in place at this time (as you pointed out).

The problem is that precious few of those pieces have enjoyed notable (or any) success in the NFL. The best we can hope for, IMO, is a team that takes the league by surprise, backs into the playoffs, then falls apart when the chips are down.

Next year might be a different story, depending on how much (and how long) this year's success (if any) can be sustained, but IMO we could be seeing the beginning stage of something better than half-decent. As usual injuries (or lack thereof) are bound to play a huge role in the outcome.

Bob

[Jclayton92]

Jess - for a team to be aggressive offensively it takes a coach to trust the offense, a QB with a big play mindset but also trust in the defense to stop the other team if a big play misses causing a punt.

Do we have all that?

I think Daboll will trust the offense he runs as it has worked multiple other places. I think the defense will be the definition of bend don't break. Hopefully Jones, with less mobility focuses dowmfield more often.

[Ed Vette]

Not to be negative, but I am taking a wait-and-see approach.

[Philosophers]

Not to be negative, but I am taking a wait-and-see approach.

Hardly negative

[T200]

Jess - for a team to be aggressive offensively it takes a coach to trust the offense, a QB with a big play mindset but also trust in the defense to stop the other team if a big play misses causing a punt.

Do we have all that?

In Buffalo Daboll had Allen reaching tops in Explosives, BTTR, and EPA. You add that context to the team we've built, and you can tell he's laying a foundation.

It's a work in progress. On paper, I like how it's shaping up.

As Ed said, let's wait and see how it translates on game day.

[MightyGiants]

I found the article quite interesting.   Perhaps the point that stood out the most is how important receivers are in terms of generating explosive plays.  This is a major reason for optimism, assuming that Nabers is as advertised. 

One flaw in this study, at least in my opinion, is that the goal isn't to score as many points as possible.  The goal is to score more points than your opponent.   So, I think they should have addressed time of possession, which is a major factor in a team's defensive success.

Another interesting point is how down this study was on rushing in general.  That would be reason enough to move on from Barkley as "feeding him the ball" is detrimental to the offense or, as the study says- "So, in addition to their lower success rate, this drive success framework suggests that run plays are inferior to passing plays because they basically cede the chance for an explosive play. Running plays are the epitome of leaning into the less optimal "march down the field" drive strategy, as they only attempt to gain a few yards at a time. "


One overarching thought about this is that many defensive coaches already knew this as most of the bend but don't break defenses count on teams not being able to string long many play drives together.