Ping: Multiplayer champions

Kodos · 10-18-2005, 01:49 PM

Have there been any champions that featured run-first teams? Just curious, and too lazy to do the research myself.

Cuckoo · 10-18-2005, 02:00 PM

Cleveland won the NAFL's first Championship with pretty much a run-first offense. They ranked 7th in the league in rushing yardage during the regular season and 26th in passing yards.

QuikSand · 10-18-2005, 02:03 PM

7th in rushing yards, for a championship team, might not really be all that slanted an offense. Win a lot of games, get ahead, start running more -- it could largely be a function of the team's success as much as a deliberate attempt to "run first." I don't claim any particular knowledge of the league or the team - I just think the bar is set pretty high with the stat splits to show a real run preference.

The ideal case I think Kodos is looking for is a team where the run is the clear centerpiece of the offense -- where you'd see the team in the top 2 or 3 in the league in rushing, and probably the bottom handful in passing. (Presumably with all run-stacked OL, and economies at WR/QB to afford more quality elsewhere)

Cuckoo · 10-18-2005, 02:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by QuikSand

7th in rushing yards, for a championship team, might not really be all that slanted an offense. Win a lot of games, get ahead, start running more -- it could largely be a function of the team's success as much as a deliberate attempt to "run first." I don't claim any particular knowledge of the league or the team - I just think the bar is set pretty high with the stat splits to show a real run preference.

The ideal case I think Kodos is looking for is a team where the run is the clear centerpiece of the offense -- where you'd see the team in the top 2 or 3 in the league in rushing, and probably the bottom handful in passing. (Presumably with all run-stacked OL, and economies at WR/QB to afford more quality elsewhere)

Yes, and the GM would have to comment himself on his gameplanning as I have very little knowledge of that. I do know that he won his division rather handily that year so your supposition is indeed possible. I recall him expressing his desire to be a running/good defense kind of team, but I don't know all the details of his plans.

QuikSand · 10-18-2005, 02:09 PM

Sounds like a good example - but maybe not as lopsided as Kodos is looking for. We have definitely seen "pass-first" teams reach great heights - but this would be an interesting find.

Buzzbee · 10-18-2005, 02:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kodos

Have there been any champions that featured run-first teams? Just curious, and too lazy to do the research myself.

I'll let you know in a month or so.

Kodos · 10-18-2005, 02:10 PM

Yep. In IHOF, it has been nothing but Pass First champions. The running teams haven't even had a whiff of the championship.

Cuckoo · 10-18-2005, 02:10 PM

Although I still can't really define whether it's the chicken or the egg, I looked again at the numbers, and he was 3rd in rushing attempts and 27th in passing attempts that year.

Kodos · 10-18-2005, 02:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buzzbee

I'll let you know in a month or so.

I can tell you right now. Nope.

cthomer5000 · 10-18-2005, 02:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kodos

Yep. In IHOF, it has been nothing but Pass First champions. The running teams haven't even had a whiff of the championship.

bzzzzzt, wrong answer!

2008 Fairbanks Northstars
#3 in Rushing Attempts (573 - 62 behind Vicksburg)
#2 in rushing yards (2,447 - 174 behind Vicksburg)
#24 in passing attempts
#7 in passing yards

It's an interesting exercise in perception vs. reality.

WrongWay · 10-18-2005, 02:39 PM

The FastFL 2009 Colts made it all the way to the Bowl, but lost with their #1 rushing offense.

Kodos · 10-18-2005, 02:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cthomer5000

bzzzzzt, wrong answer!

2008 Fairbanks Northstars
#3 in Rushing Attempts (573 - 62 behind Vicksburg)
#2 in rushing yards (2,447 - 174 behind Vicksburg)
#24 in passing attempts
#7 in passing yards

It's an interesting exercise in perception vs. reality.

#7 in passing yards suggests a lot of running with the lead.

cthomer5000 · 10-18-2005, 03:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kodos

#7 in passing yards suggests a lot of running with the lead.

#24 in passing attempts, #3 in rushing attempts. You can't seriously tell me you think that's entirely a product of being in the lead often... It's a huge disparity.

Buzzbee · 10-18-2005, 03:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cthomer5000

bzzzzzt, wrong answer!

2008 Fairbanks Northstars
#3 in Rushing Attempts (573 - 62 behind Vicksburg)
#2 in rushing yards (2,447 - 174 behind Vicksburg)
#24 in passing attempts
#7 in passing yards

It's an interesting exercise in perception vs. reality.

It says to me their offense is:

Run.

Run.

Throw deep.

Run.

Run.

Throw deep.

Kodos · 10-18-2005, 03:06 PM

Fairbanks 2008.

4040 passing yards
2447 rushing yards

I'd say that's a passing team.

cthomer5000 · 10-18-2005, 03:10 PM

I agree. The playcalling numbers suggest that they were a run-first, or at the very least, a balanced attack. I know Buzzbee is one of the few to notice that their RB (Mark Halley) is one of the league's all-time leading rushers, and the all-time leader in rushing touchdowns. Fairbanks was pass-crazy in 2004, but they have evolved quite a bit.

cthomer5000 · 10-18-2005, 03:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kodos

Fairbanks 2008.

4040 passing yards
2447 rushing yards

I'd say that's a passing team.

Then it's a loaded question. By your definition of what would constitute a running team, that teams' offense will be so one-dimensional that they wont possibly succeed.

Samdari · 10-18-2005, 03:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cthomer5000

Then it's a loaded question. By your definition of what would constitute a running team, that teams' offense will be so one-dimensional that they wont possibly succeed.

That's I think the problem Corey. It is very possible to succeed with a offense that is one dimensional, as long as it is passing.

Buzzbee · 10-18-2005, 03:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cthomer5000

Then it's a loaded question. By your definition of what would constitute a running team, that teams' offense will be so one-dimensional that they wont possibly succeed.

Damn.

Kodos · 10-18-2005, 03:18 PM

I bet there isn't a team with even a 50/50 running/passing yardage that has won a championship.

cthomer5000 · 10-18-2005, 03:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Samdari

That's I think the problem Corey. It is very possible to succeed with a offense that is one dimensional, as long as it is passing.

I'm not sure this is very different from real life. I'd be stunned if any Super Bowl champ outside of Baltimore had an obscenely one-dimensional offense.

cthomer5000 · 10-18-2005, 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kodos

Fairbanks 2008.

4040 passing yards
2447 rushing yards

I'd say that's a passing team.

2004 Regular Season NFL

Denver Pass 3999
Denver Rush 2333

Atlanta Rush 2672
Atlanta Pass 2412

Pittsburgh Rush 2464
Pittsburgh Pass 2720

So are we faulting Fairbanks for simply being more successful when they attempt a pass?

Kodos · 10-18-2005, 03:20 PM

What were the stats for the 2 Broncos champs in the late 90s?

cthomer5000 · 10-18-2005, 03:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kodos

I bet there isn't a team with even a 50/50 running/passing yardage that has won a championship.

In FOF, just like real life, it's much harder to run the ball successfully. I would argue that any team going for an exact 50/50 total is sacrificing overall yardage in favor of their ratio.

Kodos · 10-18-2005, 03:21 PM

Which is fine if you're winning games.

Buzzbee · 10-18-2005, 03:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cthomer5000

In FOF, just like real life, it's much harder to run the ball successfully. I would argue that any team going for an exact 50/50 total is sacrificing overall yardage in favor of their ratio.

Damn.

Buzzbee · 10-18-2005, 03:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kodos

Which is fine if you're winning games.

Damn.

cthomer5000 · 10-18-2005, 03:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kodos

What were the stats for the 2 Broncos champs in the late 90s?

1997 Denver
Pass 3704
Rush 2378

1998 Denver
Pass 3808
Rush 2468

cthomer5000 · 10-18-2005, 03:24 PM

ok, this is the final straw for me. The most stone-age football team i've ever seen, the Super Bowl Champion Baltimore Ravens:

Pass 3102
Rush 2199

Buzzbee · 10-18-2005, 03:28 PM

2007 Viper season record = 11-5

Passing Yards = 2097
Rushing Yards = 3342

Buzzbee · 10-18-2005, 03:29 PM

Damn.

QuikSand · 10-18-2005, 03:29 PM

What on earth makes you think that a 50/50 split of rushing yardage and passing yardage is the standard for a "balanced' offense?

I think the question is flawed here.

cthomer5000 · 10-18-2005, 03:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buzzbee

2007 Viper season record = 11-5

Rushing Yards = 3342
Passing Yards = 2097

You guys were pass-crazy by Kodos definitions.

Buzzbee · 10-18-2005, 03:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cthomer5000

You guys were pass-crazy by Kodos definitions.

Look at that again. Rushing yards were on top. I edited my original post to match your passing yards on top for more dramatic effect.

We were as effective running the ball as most teams were passing. Unfortunately we were less effective passing the ball than most teams were running. Damn.

cthomer5000 · 10-18-2005, 03:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buzzbee

Look at that again. Rushing yards were on top. I edited my original post to match your passing yards on top for more dramatic effect.

We were as effective running the ball as most teams were passing. Unfortunately we were less effective passing the ball than most teams were running. Damn.

Is see now... you tricked me!

Your numbers are incredibly far from the NFL stats for a "running team." To the point that your game plan might have been more unrealistic than any of the pass-crazy ones we've seen. No one ever seems to complain about that stuff though.

Pyser · 10-18-2005, 03:36 PM

i had my main running percentages set at 55% the year i won in the enfl...

its nearly impossible for the numbers to come out 50-50 though. a succesful running game in the nfl would be around 1600-2000 yards a season. passing numbers are almost always above 3000 yards though, i think.

so if a team won the championship and ran for 1800 yards, id think they had success running the ball.

Kodos · 10-18-2005, 03:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by QuikSand

What on earth makes you think that a 50/50 split of rushing yardage and passing yardage is the standard for a "balanced' offense?

I think the question is flawed here.

I'm not even going for balanced. Just for a team that clearly is run-1st with merely an adequate (16th or so in terms of yardage) pass offense. One where the run is clearly the bread and butter of the offense and the pass merely supplements.

QuikSand · 10-18-2005, 03:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kodos

I'm not even going for balanced. Just for a team that clearly is run-1st with merely an adequate (16th or so in terms of yardage) pass offense. One where the run is clearly the bread and butter of the offense and the pass merely supplements.

I understand what you're going for in term of run-first.

But comparing total passing yards and total rushing yards... why would anyone expect these two gross figures to be equal for a balanced team? I think it's quite obvious that a team with a truly balanced offense will have far more passing yards than rushing yards. If your total yards are split roughly evenly, you are a heavily run-intensive offense -- like Pittsburgh and Atlanta were last year in the NFL.

Kodos · 10-18-2005, 04:06 PM

That's true.

10-18-2005, 02:10 PM	#8
Cuckoo College Starter Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Edmond, OK	Although I still can't really define whether it's the chicken or the egg, I looked again at the numbers, and he was 3rd in rushing attempts and 27th in passing attempts that year. __________________ Commissioner - North American Football League Dallas Cowboys GM

10-18-2005, 02:39 PM	#11
WrongWay Banned Join Date: Jan 2005	The FastFL 2009 Colts made it all the way to the Bowl, but lost with their #1 rushing offense. Last edited by WrongWay : 10-18-2005 at 02:39 PM.

10-18-2005, 03:28 PM	#30
Buzzbee College Starter Join Date: Jun 2002	2007 Viper season record = 11-5 Passing Yards = 2097 Rushing Yards = 3342 __________________ Ability is what you're capable of doing. Motivation determines what you do. Attitude determines how well you do it. - Lou Holtz Last edited by Buzzbee : 10-18-2005 at 03:30 PM.

10-18-2005, 03:29 PM	#31
Buzzbee College Starter Join Date: Jun 2002	Damn. __________________ Ability is what you're capable of doing. Motivation determines what you do. Attitude determines how well you do it. - Lou Holtz

10-18-2005, 04:06 PM	#39
Kodos Resident Alien Join Date: Jun 2001	That's true. __________________ Indiana Hoosiers Football - 2025-26 National Champs The FOFC Ladder History thread

10-18-2005, 02:00 PM	#2
Cuckoo College Starter Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Edmond, OK	Cleveland won the NAFL's first Championship with pretty much a run-first offense. They ranked 7th in the league in rushing yardage during the regular season and 26th in passing yards. __________________ Commissioner - North American Football League Dallas Cowboys GM Last edited by Cuckoo : 10-18-2005 at 02:00 PM.

10-18-2005, 02:03 PM	#3
QuikSand lolzcat Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Annapolis, Md	7th in rushing yards, for a championship team, might not really be all that slanted an offense. Win a lot of games, get ahead, start running more -- it could largely be a function of the team's success as much as a deliberate attempt to "run first." I don't claim any particular knowledge of the league or the team - I just think the bar is set pretty high with the stat splits to show a real run preference. The ideal case I think Kodos is looking for is a team where the run is the clear centerpiece of the offense -- where you'd see the team in the top 2 or 3 in the league in rushing, and probably the bottom handful in passing. (Presumably with all run-stacked OL, and economies at WR/QB to afford more quality elsewhere)

10-18-2005, 02:09 PM	#5
QuikSand lolzcat Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Annapolis, Md	Sounds like a good example - but maybe not as lopsided as Kodos is looking for. We have definitely seen "pass-first" teams reach great heights - but this would be an interesting find.

10-18-2005, 03:06 PM	#15
Kodos Resident Alien Join Date: Jun 2001	Fairbanks 2008. 4040 passing yards 2447 rushing yards I'd say that's a passing team.

10-18-2005, 03:18 PM	#20
Kodos Resident Alien Join Date: Jun 2001	I bet there isn't a team with even a 50/50 running/passing yardage that has won a championship.

10-18-2005, 03:20 PM	#23
Kodos Resident Alien Join Date: Jun 2001	What were the stats for the 2 Broncos champs in the late 90s?

10-18-2005, 03:21 PM	#25
Kodos Resident Alien Join Date: Jun 2001	Which is fine if you're winning games.

10-18-2005, 03:36 PM	#36
Pyser Pro Rookie Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Los Angeles	i had my main running percentages set at 55% the year i won in the enfl... its nearly impossible for the numbers to come out 50-50 though. a succesful running game in the nfl would be around 1600-2000 yards a season. passing numbers are almost always above 3000 yards though, i think. so if a team won the championship and ran for 1800 yards, id think they had success running the ball.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)