Offensive Balance

by JasonB on Jan 3, 2008 8:09 AM EST in Philadelphia Eagles News

Over on ESPN.com, Mike Sando wrote a interesting article about characteristics of a team coorelate to playoff success.

ESPN.com analyzed every team in every season from 2000 to 2007 to see how strengths and weaknesses translated to playoff performance. A goal was to project which teams might enjoy playoff success based upon characteristics evident during the regular season.

To that end, we measured each of the 254 teams during 2000-07 in 36 statistical categories tracked by the league (18 on each side of the ball). Statistical analysis revealed which categories correlated most strongly to regular-season victory totals. We then noted how many playoff games pre-2007 teams won, and which teams won and lost Super Bowls.

Basically they tested all the old football cliches about how to win and found out whether they actually still held true. All of his results were interesting and worth checking out, but one caught my eye. Mostly because it's a hot topic among Eagles fans and it mentioned us...

4. Conventional wisdom: Balanced offenses always have an advantage.
Verdict: FALSE
Truly balanced teams generally aren't very proficient through the air. But even teams with highly productive passing and running games have struggled to win in the playoffs.

The Philadelphia Eagles were the only team this season to average more than 230 yards passing and 120 yards rushing per game. They finished 8-8.

Fifteen other teams have hit those averages since 2000. Eight finished the regular season with double-digit victories, but together these 15 teams won only five playoff games. Of the group, only the 2001 St. Louis Rams reached a Super Bowl, and they lost.

The least balanced offenses haven't fared much better. The current season produced five of the 17 largest pass-rush yardage imbalances since 2000. The 2000 Rams were least balanced, followed by the 2005 Arizona Cardinals, current Patriots and current New Orleans Saints.

The other 12 least-balanced teams went 0-2 in Super Bowls while winning nine playoff games.

This just underscores how amazing it was that the Eagles offense was able to put up this kind of yardage without translating it to points.

Tweet Comment 7 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Walker

Apparently Javon Walker wants out of Denver and given his injury history and salary (he's due a large roster bonus next season), the Broncos may be inclined to let him go.

Anyone intrigued?

For the right price, I would be.

by BFH on Jan 3, 2008 8:25 AM EST reply actions

Link

Here's the article in the Denver Post. It will certainly be interesting how the Broncos handle this.

http://www.denverpost.com/sports/ci_7850208

by BFH on Jan 3, 2008 9:21 AM EST up reply actions

... Walker..

It should be noted that the Broncos just re-signed Brandon Stokley, and Brandon Marshall is an absolute stud. Jay Cutler isn't starving for weapons out there, they don't necessarily "need" Walker.

by BFH on Jan 3, 2008 9:25 AM EST up reply actions

I'm not sure how interested I am...

I still want the top tier guy if he's out there. I guess if those guys aren't there, I wouldn't mind Walker but I wouldn't give up a ton for him.

You could be in the discussion! Sign up for a free account at Bleeding Green Nation

by JasonB on Jan 3, 2008 9:32 AM EST up reply actions

... Walker ..

I concur. It seems obvious, but the first question to answer is "How much does this player improve our team?". Followed by "what are the risks?" and "can we afford to pay?", etc.

In terms of the first question, I think there could be differences of opinion. Walker will turn 30 in 2008. He has had two 1000 yard seasons, one of which was a 90 catch year. He has good speed, reliable hands, and will draw coverage. He is a tremendous injury risk, and still may be reeling from what he experienced in that limo with Darrent Williams.

Whether or not someone like Chad Johnson or Larry Fitzgerald becomes available is still unknown. But it looks pretty likely Walker could be had.

by BFH on Jan 3, 2008 9:59 AM EST up reply actions

The Eagles wanted to sign him before...

they got Stallworth instead, but they had a big long term deal waiting for him. But I think GB, didn't want to see Walker on a NFC team.

I would be suprised if they didn't at least check his price tag. I think that he is a really explosive player. He isn't just fast he is really fast. He did kill us when we almost lost the 4 and 26 game. If you remember he was killing us.

Who else are we going to look at? Stall might be dropped after this year because he hasn't lived up to his contract. I would like to see them both get looked at.

by topcat6 on Jan 3, 2008 2:23 PM EST reply actions

running back?

It seems to me as if the Eagles have enough good wide receivers. From two through five, they're excellent. What they are lacking is a game breaking number one guy. Was Stallworth that guy? Is Walker? Are any game breaking type guys available? I don't know.

What if the game breaking new addition was a first round running back? A productive runner would allow the Eagles to split Westbrook out from time to time, ease the work load of the dynamic but fragile superstar, and provide some insurance in the event of injury.

I know that young running backs have a history of not thriving in the Eagles's system, but other teams seem to have figured out how to make them productive and it seems like the second half of the first round is a real sweet spot for the position - Laurence Maroney, De Angelo Williams, Joseph Addai, Steven Jackson, Willis McGahee, Larry Johnson, Deuce McCallister, Shaun Alexander. The hit rate is phenomenal.

I'm not sold on the idea myself (I'd rather see them go defensive backfield if the right guy's there), but given that I'm not optimistic about getting a number one wide receiver, I thought I'd weigh in with the possibility.

by dave in san mateo on Jan 3, 2008 3:16 PM EST reply actions