Interesting stat

[Sideline Tweeting 101]

Marvin Lewis is 31-7 when a RB eclipses the 100 yard mark... I was unaware of this stat until reading the article on the front page. That is a phenomenal winning percentage, I think the emphasis this off-season should most definitely be on the running game. This team has proven it can air it out, with an adequate running game there is no reason they could not become perennial contenders. (if this has already been mentioned please merge)

Are there any backs that stand out for you guys? I am not huge on the college game, but do keep up with it some. The kid from Clemson looks like he could be a great back, and some early mocks that I have seen have him going to us in the 3rd. Who stands out to you that you feel could really help this team turn the corner?

[Housh]

Thing is we've been trying to help the running game for years by bringing in lineman very high in the draft. So yes it may be time for a back to get drafted high.

[Mr. Hopeful]

Originally Posted by Sideline Tweeting 101

Marvin Lewis is 31-7 when a RB eclipses the 100 yard mark... I was unaware of this stat until reading the article on the front page. That is a phenomenal winning percentage, I think the emphasis this off-season should most definitely be on the running game. This team has proven it can air it out, with an adequate running game there is no reason they could not become perennial contenders. (if this has already been mentioned please merge)

Are there any backs that stand out for you guys? I am not huge on the college game, but do keep up with it some. The kid from Clemson looks like he could be a great back, and some early mocks that I have seen have him going to us in the 3rd. Who stands out to you that you feel could really help this team turn the corner?

I agree a back is needed. However, I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of teams have above .500 records when their backs go for over 100 yards.

[Sideline Tweeting 101]

Originally Posted by Mr. Hopeful

I agree a back is needed. However, I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of teams have above .500 records when their backs go for over 100 yards.

above .500 would be understandable, but 31-7!!! Thats .815! I may be over zealous but dang! LOL

[D's Nuts and Bolts]

Originally Posted by Sideline Tweeting 101

Marvin Lewis is 31-7 when a RB eclipses the 100 yard mark... I was unaware of this stat until reading the article on the front page. That is a phenomenal winning percentage, I think the emphasis this off-season should most definitely be on the running game. This team has proven it can air it out, with an adequate running game there is no reason they could not become perennial contenders. (if this has already been mentioned please merge)

Are there any backs that stand out for you guys? I am not huge on the college game, but do keep up with it some. The kid from Clemson looks like he could be a great back, and some early mocks that I have seen have him going to us in the 3rd. Who stands out to you that you feel could really help this team turn the corner?

Exactly, one dimensional, stop the run stop this team. Instead of how do we get the run better, how do we adjust during a game and score more points then the other team. However, it is a trend in the NFL but our team is super reliant on the run. Do you invest heavy in the run game and Run D? Do we follow the mold of SF/BAL or NE/GB?

I found these articles about running the ball.
http://www.ihavenet.com/NFL/NFL-Foot...-the-Ball.html
In 2011, NFL teams with a 100-yard rusher in a game posted a 90-38 record for a .703 winning percentage. That rated higher than clubs boasting a 300-yard passer (.545; 66-55) or a 100-yard receiver (.538; 93-80). It marked the fourth time in the past five seasons that NFL clubs with a 100-yard rusher in a game registered a winning percentage above .700, a mark not reached by teams with 100-yard receivers or 300-yard passers.

http://blogs.nfl.com/2011/02/11/supe...eatured-backs/
"Of the last 10 Super Bowl winners, only two (the 2005 Steelers and 2004 Patriots) had backs that rushed for more than 1,200 yards that season. Parker rushed for 1,202 yards in 15 games (80.1 ypg) in 2005. Dillon had a monster season in 2004, rushing for 1,635 yards in 15 games (109.0 ypg). Although, we might have exclude the Packers, who used various backs after the Week 1 injury to Ryan Grant."

2006 was the last time a 1st round RB won the SB

[luckyjackaubrey]

This is the least meaningful stat in the world. You win if you run all over your opponent. But if you're winning for any other reason, then you run to kill the clock. Sometimes you win because run for 100, but more often you run for 100 because you're winning.

If you notice, Corey Dillon (the best back on the list) was about .500 in hundred yard games. That's because the rest of the team was terrible.

[Hammerstripes]

Originally Posted by Housh

Thing is we've been trying to help the running game for years by bringing in lineman very high in the draft. So yes it may be time for a back to get drafted high.

All the while we have been using undrafted free agents for the last couple years at 2 spots on the line.

[mars304]

Those stats are skewed. The reason he has such a high percentage of wins when we have a 100 yard rusher is because when we have a lead we run it more.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

[D's Nuts and Bolts]

Originally Posted by luckyjackaubrey

This is the least meaningful stat in the world. You win if you run all over your opponent. But if you're winning for any other reason, then you run to kill the clock. Sometimes you win because run for 100, but more often you run for 100 because you're winning.

If you notice, Corey Dillon (the best back on the list) was about .500 in hundred yard games. That's because the rest of the team was terrible.

Are you saying the rest of the PATS were terrible when they won the SB or when he was here? The list with him on it was to show that only two of the last 10 SB winners had great running games. Now if this team had Dillion in his prime, wow. I think that if you have a special back, like Dillion, AP, Foster, Faulk, Rice, you feature that back, if you don't focusing on running the ball is tough. Those are once every 3-5 year draft backs.

I do agree that teams run for more yards when they are winning.

[Shake n Blake]

Originally Posted by mars304

Those stats are skewed. The reason he has such a high percentage of wins when we have a 100 yard rusher is because when we have a lead we run it more.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

Exactly. Anyone who doubts this, read this article:

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/info/FO-basics

Very interesting read that dispels a bunch of NFL myths.

[luckyjackaubrey]

Originally Posted by D's Nuts and Bolts

Are you saying the rest of the PATS were terrible when they won the SB or when he was here? The list with him on it was to show that only two of the last 10 SB winners had great running games. Now if this team had Dillion in his prime, wow. I think that if you have a special back, like Dillion, AP, Foster, Faulk, Rice, you feature that back, if you don't focusing on running the ball is tough. Those are once every 3-5 year draft backs.

I do agree that teams run for more yards when they are winning.

None of this makes any sense. He was 15-13 with 100 yard games on the Bengals. No Pats stats are included. I mentioned it to point out that a dominant running game doesn't cause wins, winning causes you to carry the ball more at the end.