I've been wondering what to expect this year in terms of how often we'll run/pass. So, I looked up some stats for Carolina during Henning's tenure, and compared it to the last few years of Dolphins' playcallers. Here's what I found: Carolina 2006 16.9 pts/g 423 rushes 7 TDs 539 passes 19 TDs ---------------------------------- 962 Plays 44% Runs 56% Passes 26 Off TDs 27% Rushing TDs 73% Passing TDs 2005 24.4 pts/g 487 rushes 17 TDs 449 passes 16 TDs ------------------------------- 936 Plays 52% Runs 48% Passes 33 Off TDs 51% Rushing TDs 49% Passing TDs 2004 22.2 pts/g 422 rushes 10 TDs 536 passes 29 TDs ------------------------------- 958 Plays 44% Runs 56% Passes 39 Off TDs 27% Rushing TDs 73% Passing TDs So far, it's hard to see a pattern. In 2006, the offense struggled, and they were throwing all the time. They were 8th in the league in defensive points allowed, so I don't think they were throwing all the time just to catch up. In 2004 Henning's Panthers were also throwing a lot, but having great success doing so. So what dictated Henning's playcalling those years, and the difference in results? You've got me, because in 2005 he called more running plays than passing plays and the Panthers scored 24.4 points per game (the highest of 2004, 2005 and 2006's totals). So why did Henning run so much and so effectively in 2005? Maybe the answer is in the 2003 stats. Let's look: Carolina 2003 20.3 pts/g 522 rushes 9 TDs 460 passes 19 TDs ------------------------------- 982 Plays 53% Runs 47% Passes 28 Off TDs 32% Rushing TDs 73% Passing TDs In this case, despite the playcalling favoring runs, the scoring heavily favors the pass. This is what I expect of the Dolphins offense if it functions properly. You move the ball and establish a power running game, but that leaves the defense extremely susceptible to the big passing play. I expect us to move the chains on runs, but get a lot of our scores on deep balls, whether on play action, because the safeties start cheating up, or because the defensive personnel is more run-oriented (8 in the box, fewer nickel.dime looks, subbing in stout run defenders on the line instead of good pass rushers). Overall, though, there is no pattern to whether Henning prefers calling more runs or passes. My guess is that injuries and talent availability (Delhomme, Smith, Foster, etc.) determined a lot of what was possible on offense. Foster and Davis (the starting RBs) were both on IR in 2004, for instance. In 2006, they lost Travelle Wharton, their starting left tackle, for the season in the very first game. I doubt that helped their offensive line protection of Jake very much. The result: a low-scoring year. Still, I like knowing our Offensive Coordinator can and will effectively adjust his gameplan most of the time. I do believe he is very dependent on the power running game working in order to set up a successful passing attack. I can;t see henning running an effective pass-first offense if it turns out our O-line sucks, or Ronnie and Riky both become unavailable. If we lose our power running game, we have the wrong OC to dig us out of it, I think. Now, how does this comapre to Miami's playcalling over the last few years? Let's look: Miami 2007 16.7 pts/g 389 rushes 14 TDs 558 passes 12 TDs --------------------------------- 947 Plays 41% Runs 59% Passes 26 Off TDs 54% Rushing TDs 46% Passing TDs No secret here. We were constantly playing from behind and had to throw to try to catch up. Our offense had no established QB, no established RB after Ronnie went down, and the defense was non-existent, letting opponent's grab early leads then build on them. 2006 16.2 pts/g 402 Rushes 7 TDs 591 Passes 16 TDs --------------------------------- 993 Plays 40% Runs 60% Passes 23 Off TDs 30% Rushing TDs 70% Passing TDs This year confounds me. I mean, it's Mike Mularkey playcalling, so I can't analyse it with normal logic. He loved to pass, and since we were so predictable all the time (except in the redzone, where we would only run esoteric inventions of Mularkey's gadget-diseased psyche) we never seemed to hang up points on anyone. This meant we were behind a lot and, much to Mike's delight, necessitated plenty more passing. But only once everyone knew it was coming. Mike could go on to a great career as an asset allocation specialist at a giant pension fund. 2005 19.9 pts/g 444 rushes 11 TDs 556 passes 22TDs --------------------------------- 1000 Plays 44% Runs 56% Passes 33 Off TDs 33% Rushing TDs 67% Passing TDs Linehan also loved to be very aggressive, but because he had a servicable QB in Gus Frerotte, he managed to be moderately effective. note, even here, our PPG was below most of Henning's teams' scoring average. It seems to me that Henning should be a definite improvement over Mularkey and certainly call a game tailored to the power running game. That said, he is NOT shy at all about using that successful running game to set up big scores from the passing attack. If his heavy running game is on, he'll screw you with the aerial assault too. That means our priorities this year are: 1) good run-blocking O-line 2) strong RB 3) Strong-armed QB to make defenses pay if they play the run 4) A deep burner (Ginn) to get behind those run-defenses. I expect that if our running game is working we'll see close to a 50/50 play calling and average around 22 points per game (with our current talent level). If our ground game falters I expect to see a 70% pass to 30% run ratio with around 16 points per game. Now I'd like to hear *your* predictions/expectations.
Great write up & analysis BPK, thanks for the effort. What I take away is the same thing you did, he will use the power running game to set up an attacking passing game. My only worry is how well he can disguise it. Or how well we can just pound the ball and dare defenses to stop us, then pass deep when they're struggling to stop the power running game.
great writeup.... obviously a lot of work & research went into that. i think in addition to his past strategies and trends, you must weigh his tools at his disposal. given our relatively poorer crop of WR talent, i'd expect a lot more running & dump-offs in the play-calling.
Don't forget, that was Henning ... in Carolina. Here you'll have Henning ... under Sparano. Sparano was a playcaller just two years ago, under Bill Parcells. Plus, and you did touch on this, it all depends on how successful the offense is, run or pass. The more successful each pass is, the less passes they'll make in the end.
Hopefully we'll run the ball alot and actually run it in the redzone, and not use trick plays to score.
That's a great point. When I have a sec, I need to look at the numbers for Sparano under Parcells in Dallas. I mean, in general, we'll do whatever is working, obviously. It is also obvious that the entire offense depends on establishing that power running game first. If that breaks down, we aren't a high octane passing attack team. And, by the way, it's a bit of a "Which came first, the chicken or the egg?" question when we talk about the personnel on the team dictating our offensive approach. I feel that our offensive co-ordinators style dictated who we got as personnel. We loaded up on the O-line and took extra running backs precisely because the power running game takes heavy priority over our aerial attack in establishing this offense. If we had Mike Martz as a co-ordinator, we would have been drafting and signing different players and most likely acquired more talented wide receivers instead of some of the above. Bpk
