The team that has the most rushing yards wins 78% of the time

imgv94 · 10-23-2006, 09:13 PM

Check this stat out..

Teams with the most rushing yards...

SU RECORDS

Week 1: 12-4
Week 2: 13-3
Week 3: 9-5
Week 4: 12-2
Week 5: 10-4
Week 6: 10-3
Week 7: 11-1

Overall 77-22 78%

Interesting Statistic IMO... Run the ball and basically win the game almost 80% of the time...

Jimmy The Greek · 10-24-2006, 01:57 AM

Teams with leads (more so with big leads) tend to run more but still, 78% is pretty surprising. It's also funny because teams like Atlanta & Washington average some of the most ypg (222 & 128yds) while Carolina and Chicago are near the bottom (97 & 98yds per game).

dave11486 · 10-24-2006, 01:59 AM

Ganchrow is that you...

imgv94 · 10-24-2006, 04:21 AM

Is there a way to handicap or determine what teams gets the most rushing yards?

Dark Horse · 10-24-2006, 04:55 AM

Twominutewarning has power rankings based on this, and they throw out the meaningless yards, like when a team runs out the clock at the end of a game. That last thing alone will probably lower the percentage somewhat.

imgv94 · 10-24-2006, 05:06 AM

Instead of trying to find ways to downgrade this trend. How about considering the some other facts guys..

Maybe the team with the more Rushing YDS has a better Offensive line.. Maybe the team is more balanced.. Maybe the team has a killer RB...

Went 12-1 last week no fluke IMO...

Jimmy The Greek · 10-24-2006, 08:51 AM

Not trying to poo-poo the trend - sorry if it came out sounding that way.

Another thing about this year...if you shopped for the lowest totals on every game and always bet over I believe you'd make a profit every week (sometimes a huge profit).

nosuzieno · 10-24-2006, 09:13 AM

Don't remember who first said it but "when you pass, three things can happen, two of them bad." On the converse, logic would dictate that teams with better run defenses would be strong plays, will have to look at that later...

Jimmy The Greek · 10-24-2006, 09:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nosuzieno

Don't remember who first said it but "when you pass, three things can happen, two of them bad." On the converse, logic would dictate that teams with better run defenses would be strong plays, will have to look at that later...

Top 5 rush defenses (ypg)

1 Min
2 Bal
3 Chi
4 Dal
5 SD

Bottom 5

28 NYJ
29 Cle
30 TB
31 Ind
32 Tenn

hmmm....

nosuzieno · 10-24-2006, 10:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by imgv94

Instead of trying to find ways to downgrade this trend. How about considering the some other facts guys..

Maybe the team with the more Rushing YDS has a better Offensive line.. Maybe the team is more balanced.. Maybe the team has a killer RB...

Went 12-1 last week no fluke IMO...

Agreed it is worth a look...More telling would be to compare nfl rushing rank both Off and Def PRIOR to those games and see if anything peeks out. Would suspect a team ranked higher in both would have excellent chance SU but had line compensated for it either directly or indirectly?

Doc JS · 10-24-2006, 10:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nosuzieno

Don't remember who first said it but "when you pass, three things can happen, two of them bad." On the converse, logic would dictate that teams with better run defenses would be strong plays, will have to look at that later...

Paul Bear Bryant

Doc JS

Jimmy The Greek · 10-24-2006, 10:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nosuzieno

Agreed it is worth a look...More telling would be to compare nfl rushing rank both Off and Def PRIOR to those games and see if anything peeks out. Would suspect a team ranked higher in both would have excellent chance SU but had line compensated for it either directly or indirectly?

There is a fundamental problem with using stats this way...we're using averages so we need to decide if a team's A effort will show or B. Even if you figure in off/def, home/away, quality of opponent, etc.

Case in point: I used a formula based on scoring (after all, the teams that score more win 100% of the time). I factored in all of the above but there is always a missing variable. I think maybe a couple games were close but in general I couldn't get an advantage. For instance Cincinnati should have beat Tampa something like 45-0.

Not that others wouldn't be more successful. It's always fun to try.

nosuzieno · 10-24-2006, 11:21 AM

I agree with fundamental error in stats like these because you have to get down to so many levels of variables like common opponents, and some of the other ones like you mentioned.

When I looked at 2005, three of top rushing teams-kc, sd and den-all came from same division.hmm..5 of top 6 did make 2005 playoffs, but gave up on analyzing any further.

.. Indy is now (again) 6-0, 4-2 ats, showing running and/or stopping the run not an exclusive determinative factor in victory.

P.S. Would have settled for Cincy winning 13-7

nosuzieno · 10-24-2006, 11:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doc JS

Paul Bear Bryant

Doc JS

Thanks, would have guessed Lombardi...

imgv94 · 10-24-2006, 07:04 PM

Good input guys nonetheless.. conversation is always good..

Keep it up fellas!!!

nosuzieno · 10-24-2006, 07:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by imgv94

Good input guys nonetheless.. conversation is always good..

Keep it up fellas!!!

I still think it is a stat worth comparing prior to betting and I appreciate you reminding me of it~