http://blogs.sun-sentinel.com/sports_football_dolphins/2012/02/mike-sherman-continuity-in-offense-benefits-quarterbacks.html Sherman is out to prove that a balanced offense is better than a pass heavy offense. Thoughts??
It's fundamental football. Sun Tzu said that all warfare is based on deception. Even in the glory days, when the offense was run-heavy, the team had the option of a toss to Warfield or Twilley or Mandich or the backs. The result was to keep the defense off balance, and we didn't lose many games. Marino did not win any Super Bowls (think Washington and San Francisco) because the opposing defenses were not kept off balance by a credible running game, and ours was. If you are a defense facing a pass heavy offense that is also able to crank off five to seven yard runs on you at will, you have a serious problem of not knowing whether to excrete or go blind.
Anybody else do a double take and thought the title of this thread was "Sherman wants a balanced breakfast"?
Excellent now we can hear people complain about how a 50/50 pass-run ratio is a stone-aged, run-first mentality.
I know the stats say that a team with a great passing attack wins 70% and supposedly show that having a running game does not help. However the problem with relying on stats is they are only good for bunches of games. When you get down to one single game your best chance of winning is to have the ability to run and pass the ball. I think the Ravens/Patriot game is a perfect example of this. The game was won by two main factors, Vince Wilfork went totally crazy and the Patriots were able to run the ball away from Ngota. Wilfork going crazy didn't allow the Ravens to run the ball, which shut down their offense more than if they were able to run the ball. Flacco luckily played well enough to keep them in the game and well enough to win the game. Patriots couldn't get anything going until they started to run draws and delays up the middle. In fact they did this almost every time Ngata was out. This opened up the passes they like to throw and they were able to get long drives. I do agree that it is better to have a passing offense, however to totally abandon the run is a mistake.
The Giants are a good example too. Eli had a great year, but Bradshaw and Jacobs kept defenses honest.
People miss the point on the importance of passing and stopping the pass. It's not about volume. It is about efficiency. The '72 and '73 Dolphins are a great example of a team that was excellent at passing and stopping the pass but were run heavy. In fact, last time I checked, every champion since about 1940 has passed better than their opponents during the regular season or during their playoff run. That is still the case now, it's just that some teams have done it with little or no balance. The one constant is that you have to pass better than your opponent. Philbin recognizes that since he actually mentioned that it's all about passer rating differential in his first press conference. People get confused and think that means "pass a lot" but it doesn't. It just means pass "better". You can get there with a defense that can't be passed on or gets a ton of picks, but only an okay passer. You could get there with a marginal defense and great passer. Or you could get there with a run heavy team that only passes occasionally and plays good defense. A good coach figures out what talents his team has and plays to those. But regardless you have to be able to pass better than your opponents (note that that includes how well you stop the pass). It's not "stone age" to want to pass and stop the pass efficiently. It is "stone age" to think that you can focus on all the other things and not focus on passing and stopping the pass. But the rumors are that Miami's priorities this off-season are QB, pass rusher and S, coupled with Philbin's mention of the importance of passer rating differential, so I think it's clear this regime finally understands that.
That is good Rafael. You made more sense into what I believe Sherman was trying to mention. I wasn't thinking the same as you was but now that you said it like you did, I understand it better. You know, this season can't come early enough for me.
a balanced offense isn't necessarily a 50/50 offense passing & running two things: 1) the treat of potentially running or throwing stalls defenses & improves the chance of the offense succeeding when they can mix it up 2) one will set up the other, forcing the defense to move up into the box or spread out according to the attack 3) the traditional wisdom has been to run the ball to open passing lanes & control the game. how this is achieved starts first with having the right pieces on offense, then game planning accordingly
