What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Goal Line Rushing...what on Earth happened? (1 Viewer)

Jason Wood

Zoo York
So I'm doing a bit of research for our projections and for a magazine article about a particular RB; that prompted me to look at some goal-line statistics. Basically I was trying to determine whether said RB was as bad at the goal-line as his numbers indicate, or if we should completely discount them b/c of the small sample size.

That led me to look at LEAGUE WIDE goal-line stats, to get a sense of what the baseline conversion rate was. Intuitively we all know that last year was a pretty substandard year for RBs; but I was stunned when I took at look at the league conversion rate relative to recent years.



DATA DOMINATOR: NFL League Rushing Stats (Opp 5 Yard - Goal Line), Sorted by Year [2002-2007]

2002 -- 258 TDs in 625 attempts -- 41.3%
2003 -- 233 TDs in 604 attempts -- 38.6%
2004 -- 251 TDs in 631 attempts -- 39.8%
2005 -- 224 TDs in 593 attempts -- 37.8%
2006 -- 239 TDs in 628 attempts -- 38.1%
2007 -- 188 TDs in 686 attempts -- 27.4%What on EARTH happened last season? League-wide stats don't skew that far in a season; at least rarely. It almost makes me wonder if the 2007 stats are somehow in error. If they are valid, can anyone attempt to explain such a massive drop-off in league-wide goal-line productivity?

 
wonderring why the yardage is so much higher than the other years too. My guess would be more runs at the 5 yardline skewing the #s, try it from the 4

YR RSH RSHYD YD/RSH FD RSHTD FANT PT

1 2003 2918 9809 3.36 1688 288 6419.05

2 2006 2810 9266 3.30 1652 274 6665.20

3 2002 2931 10371 3.54 1731 316 7376.40

4 2004 2851 9856 3.46 1671 284 7223.15

5 2005 2823 9508 3.37 1667 279 6545.00

6 2007 2770 9706 3.50 1641 229 7160.05

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I would also throw in the fact that TEs in general had a great years in 2007 (tend to take away Red Zone oppys) plus the movement towards RBBC (maybe RBs are freshers and getting in from beyond 5 yards more often?).

 
I would also throw in the fact that TEs in general had a great years in 2007 (tend to take away Red Zone oppys) plus the movement towards RBBC (maybe RBs are freshers and getting in from beyond 5 yards more often?).
Hey Sweet Love...but we're just talking about running attempts at the goal line right now. And if the DD numbers are accurate, teams actually attempted MORE rushing attempts at the goal line in 2007 than at other times; yet converted a much lower percentage.As I said, the more I look at this data the more I think something is screwy.
 
Fixed now.

2007 numbers slightly down, but not a major anomaly:

Code:
+------+-----+------+------+| year | att | td   | pct  |+------+-----+------+------+| 2002 | 625 |  258 | 0.41 || 2003 | 603 |  232 | 0.38 || 2004 | 631 |  251 | 0.40 || 2005 | 593 |  224 | 0.38 || 2006 | 628 |  239 | 0.38 || 2007 | 549 |  186 | 0.34 |+------+-----+------+------+
I'm very sorry for the error.
 
:kicksrock:

That makes a LOT more sense. Still shows what we intuitively knew, that 2007 was a pretty bad year for rushing productivity. A 4% delta from the mean league-wide is still significant enough to ask the question, what happened last year?

 
:ptts:

That makes a LOT more sense. Still shows what we intuitively knew, that 2007 was a pretty bad year for rushing productivity. A 4% delta from the mean league-wide is still significant enough to ask the question, what happened last year?
Check out the increase in receiving TD's from the same yardage (assuming the data is corrected).
Code:
YR TARG REC RECYD YD/REC FD RECTD FANT PT 1 2006 372 187 504 2.70 167 165 3711.10 2 2007 459 241 649 2.69 205 204 3912.55 3 2005 356 175 460 2.63 155 153 3524.40 4 2004 397 214 557 2.60 183 183 3987.70 5 2003 379 177 541 3.06 161 160 3684.80 6 2002 400 192 500 2.60 176 176 4012.35
 
basic deviation from the norm

check WRs in 1995 vs. 1994, or perhaps QBs in 2004 vs. 2005

Strangeness happens periodically.

I think some of this can be attributed to the league-wide "laxness" in holding on pass plays as well as the higher restrictiveness that seems to have been enforced against DBs, and you have teams throwing the ball more when they're close to the goal line.

although the retirement of the Bus didn't contribute entirely, take a look at PGH alone. FWP had 13 TDs rushing himself in 2006, and in 2007, the Steelers posted a grand total of 9 rushing TDs to go with Ben's 32 passing TDs. Perhaps the Steelers' rushing game has a pretty big gravitational pull? :shrug:

 
Jason Wood said:
So I'm doing a bit of research for our projections and for a magazine article about a particular RB; that prompted me to look at some goal-line statistics. Basically I was trying to determine whether said RB was as bad at the goal-line as his numbers indicate, or if we should completely discount them b/c of the small sample size.

That led me to look at LEAGUE WIDE goal-line stats, to get a sense of what the baseline conversion rate was. Intuitively we all know that last year was a pretty substandard year for RBs; but I was stunned when I took at look at the league conversion rate relative to recent years.



DATA DOMINATOR: NFL League Rushing Stats (Opp 5 Yard - Goal Line), Sorted by Year [2002-2007]

2002 -- 258 TDs in 625 attempts -- 41.3%
2003 -- 233 TDs in 604 attempts -- 38.6%
2004 -- 251 TDs in 631 attempts -- 39.8%
2005 -- 224 TDs in 593 attempts -- 37.8%
2006 -- 239 TDs in 628 attempts -- 38.1%
2007 -- 188 TDs in 686 attempts -- 27.4%What on EARTH happened last season? League-wide stats don't skew that far in a season; at least rarely. It almost makes me wonder if the 2007 stats are somehow in error. If they are valid, can anyone attempt to explain such a massive drop-off in league-wide goal-line productivity?
Brady with 50 TDs? Moss with 23? That wouldn't account for decline in %s, unless you reason that Brady's TDs were the result of trying once inside the 5 and then passing for it. Better D-lines? You got me.
 
:yes:

That makes a LOT more sense. Still shows what we intuitively knew, that 2007 was a pretty bad year for rushing productivity. A 4% delta from the mean league-wide is still significant enough to ask the question, what happened last year?
I think injuries to some of the top backs certainly contributed to it. LJ, SJax, and Rudi all were much worse due to injuries. The teams just didn't have adequate goal-line replacements.
 
I would also throw in the fact that TEs in general had a great years in 2007 (tend to take away Red Zone oppys) plus the movement towards RBBC (maybe RBs are freshers and getting in from beyond 5 yards more often?).
Hey Sweet Love...but we're just talking about running attempts at the goal line right now. And if the DD numbers are accurate, teams actually attempted MORE rushing attempts at the goal line in 2007 than at other times; yet converted a much lower percentage.As I said, the more I look at this data the more I think something is screwy.
how many of those attempts came from Dallas, GB, NE, SD, Indy down the stretch of the season when they had significant leads in games and were just winding down the clock while not necessarily trying to run up the score?!
 
It's all the Brady to Moss 1 yarders to break records. If other teams want to stop them...YWIA.
You laugh, but I'll bet that that had a measurable effect on this data due to both the uniformity of their implementation of that scoring approach as well as the sheer volume. 4% of 686 is just over 27 attempts. Don't you think that NE alone could have counted for 27 more attempts with all of those trips into the red zone?
 
What's the problem with the RBs you ask?? You can really start with offensive lines around the league. And you could break down each individual line, and each individual player, but that could take a while. So, maybe just few examples.

Start with one of the best lines over the past many years, KC. Theyve had 2 HOFers retire in the past couple of years: Willie Roaf and Wil Shields. No coincidence, their line now stinks, Larry Johnson spent his first significant time on the shelf, had a miserable season, disappointed countless fantasy owners, and Kansas City, one of the historically dominant running clubs, is now among the league's worst. That's just one team, but one known for producing huge volumes of rushing TDs. Just one team, but its a bit of a synopsis.

Now, look at some of the anchors at left tackle around the league, and where they are in their careers. Jon Ogden, if not basically retired though officially undecided at this point, is pretty much done. He's in his 13th year. Walter Jones, a MAN amongst other huge men, is 34 and in his 12th year. He's seen better, brilliant days. Orlando Pace is really falling apart lately and he's now in his 11th year, with probably not very much mileage left on that tread. Denver's Matt Lepsis, long one of the better Olinemen in the league, anchoring the Broncos left side, is done. Tough shoes to fill. Indy's Tarik Glenn just retired last season. Absolutely an anchor if there ever was one. Flozell Adams, Dallas' anchor at LT is in his 11th season and no spring chicken. How long will he continue to play at a high level? The great Larry Allen, though I dont believe officially retired at this point, but after 14 seasons, he' s pretty much done. He's an absolutely lock HOFer and among the most dominant run blockers of any time. San Fran's gonna have fun filling his shoes. Alan Faneca has been a dominant All Pro player at guard for years for Pittsburgh, but he's also in his 11th year and deemed expendable but a team that lives and dies with the run. And there are just countless stud linemen like Jeff Saturday, Olin Kreutz, Reuben Brown, Kevin Mawae and Matt Birk and the list goes on. These are all Pro Bowl regulars and tremdous run blocking linemen getting up their in years who's games just arent quite what they used to be. I could go on, but all things are cyclical, and offensive lines around the league are getting old, and taking the hit.

Which brings us to the draft. The 2008 NFL draft to be specific. When was the last time EIGHT O linemen were taken in the 1st round of a draft? And very possibly 8 left tackles if not this year, very much in the near future. Teams were looking for Oline anchors in this draft. Which tells us the teams are also very aware of their own most signficant problems. We all know teams draft for best available player. Yeah, sure they do. They also take linemen when they need them (or in other words when the rushing TD totals around the league are significantly down and everyone knows it because many of their lines stink and are aging, wink wink). But of course, no one drafts for need. We know better.

So, weve pretty much established that RBs are dependent on their Olines for success, and when those great linemen retire or regress, bad things can happen. But what about the backs themselves? Guys like Curtis Martin? Marshall Faulk? Jerome Bettis, Priest Holmes and Tiki Barber, Corey Dillon, and finally, of course, the GREAT Mike Alstott? These men are HOF-caliber (not all certain locks, but caliber) and record breaking stars none of which are easily replaced, and theyve all retired within the last 2 years. Is that NOT incredible?? That weve lost all of these studs in the last 2 years?? What a collectively enormous loss. And we really wonder why the NFL rushing TD totals are down? :rolleyes: Sometimes, it seems just that simple. But we all know it never really is.

Youve got to also consider the massive dropoff we saw from players like Shaun Alexander over the past 2 years after his Oline was re-worked. And Larry Johnson's waste of a season due to injury and poor line play. Rudi Johnson's basic disappearing act in '07. Thomas Jones was a virtual non-factor with his new team, after some tremendous Bears' success. Ricky Williams of course is an anomaly that's wasted what was at once a brilliant fantasy career for many of us, for the love of nature's finest. The once great Ahman Green and his machine-like TD production? The classic "shell" of one's former-self case. Deuce McCallister was a Mc no-show, Warrick Dunn was more or less done, Kevin Jones lived up to his fully earned reputation as a hot potato (at least in my view), and the once promising Lamont Jordan was anything but Jordan-esque.

Those last several names werent probably worth the enumerating. After all, there are a significant # of RBs every year that disappoint for one reason or another. But it further accentuates the point. The #s are severely down. And Im guessing, that trend may continue. And when you take time to consider how frequent teams utilize the dreaded RBBC system, where specialists are brought in for often obvious situations, and it adds to the complexity. The days of back versatility has severely diminished. That Tomlinson type player who could carry the ball on 1st and 2nd downs, catch the ball on 3rd to move the chains, and still line up on the goalline?? What ever happened to that guy? They are fewer and further in between at this stage. And when you dont have that guy on the goalline, the guy that kill you in more ways than one, and you replace him with a big "goalline" back, it seems youre pretty much daring the opposing defense to line up in a goalline package of their own, and stop what youre obviously about to attempt. Of course, its not always that fundamental or cut and dry, and Im painting a rather extreme picture in some cases, but these dreaded committees have made our jobs in the fantasy world just that much more complex. And you know what? I kind of like it.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
What's the problem with the RBs you ask?? You can really start with offensive lines around the league. And you could break down each individual line, and each individual player, but that could take a while. So, maybe just few examples.

Start with one of the best lines over the past many years, KC. Theyve had 2 HOFers retire in the past couple of years: Willie Roaf and Wil Shields. No coincidence, their line now stinks, Larry Johnson spent his first significant time on the shelf, had a miserable season, disappointed countless fantasy owners, and Kansas City, one of the historically dominant running clubs, is now among the league's worst. That's just one team, but one known for producing huge volumes of rushing TDs. Just one team, but its a bit of a synopsis.

Now, look at some of the anchors at left tackle around the league, and where they are in their careers. Jon Ogden, if not basically retired though officially undecided at this point, is pretty much done. He's in his 13th year. Walter Jones, a MAN amongst other huge men, is 34 and in his 12th year. He's seen better, brilliant days. Orlando Pace is really falling apart lately and he's now in his 11th year, with probably not very much mileage left on that tread. Denver's Matt Lepsis, long one of the better Olinemen in the league, anchoring the Broncos left side, is done. Tough shoes to fill. Indy's Tarik Glenn just retired last season. Absolutely an anchor if there ever was one. Flozell Adams, Dallas' anchor at LT is in his 11th season and no spring chicken. How long will he continue to play at a high level? The great Larry Allen, though I dont believe officially retired at this point, but after 14 seasons, he' s pretty much done. He's an absolutely lock HOFer and among the most dominant run blockers of any time. San Fran's gonna have fun filling his shoes. Alan Faneca has been a dominant All Pro player at guard for years for Pittsburgh, but he's also in his 11th year and deemed expendable but a team that lives and dies with the run. And there are just countless stud linemen like Jeff Saturday, Olin Kreutz, Reuben Brown, Kevin Mawae and Matt Birk and the list goes on. These are all Pro Bowl regulars and tremdous run blocking linemen getting up their in years who's games just arent quite what they used to be. I could go on, but all things are cyclical, and offensive lines around the league are getting old, and taking the hit.

Which brings us to the draft. The 2008 NFL draft to be specific. When was the last time EIGHT O linemen were taken in the 1st round of a draft? And very possibly 8 left tackles if not this year, very much in the near future. Teams were looking for Oline anchors in this draft. Which tells us the teams are also very aware of their own most signficant problems. We all know teams draft for best available player. Yeah, sure they do. They also take linemen when they need them (or in other words when the rushing TD totals around the league are significantly down and everyone knows it because many of their lines stink and are aging, wink wink). But of course, no one drafts for need. We know better.

So, weve pretty much established that RBs are dependent on their Olines for success, and when those great linemen retire or regress, bad things can happen. But what about the backs themselves? Guys like Curtis Martin? Marshall Faulk? Jerome Bettis, Priest Holmes and Tiki Barber, Corey Dillon, and finally, of course, the GREAT Mike Alstott? These men are HOF-caliber (not all certain locks, but caliber) and record breaking stars none of which are easily replaced, and theyve all retired within the last 2 years. Is that NOT incredible?? That weve lost all of these studs in the last 2 years?? What a collectively enormous loss. And we really wonder why the NFL rushing TD totals are down? :lmao: Sometimes, it seems just that simple. But we all know it never really is.

Youve got to also consider the massive dropoff we saw from players like Shaun Alexander over the past 2 years after his Oline was re-worked. And Larry Johnson's waste of a season due to injury and poor line play. Rudi Johnson's basic disappearing act in '07. Thomas Jones was a virtual non-factor with his new team, after some tremendous Bears' success. Ricky Williams of course is an anomaly that's wasted what was at once a brilliant fantasy career for many of us, for the love of nature's finest. The once great Ahman Green and his machine-like TD production? The classic "shell" of one's former-self case. Deuce McCallister was a Mc no-show, Warrick Dunn was more or less done, Kevin Jones lived up to his fully earned reputation as a hot potato (at least in my view), and the once promising Lamont Jordan was anything but Jordan-esque.

Those last several names werent probably worth the enumerating. After all, there are a significant # of RBs every year that disappoint for one reason or another. But it further accentuates the point. The #s are severely down. And Im guessing, that trend may continue. And when you take time to consider how frequent teams utilize the dreaded RBBC system, where specialists are brought in for often obvious situations, and it adds to the complexity. The days of back versatility has severely diminished. That Tomlinson type player who could carry the ball on 1st and 2nd downs, catch the ball on 3rd to move the chains, and still line up on the goalline?? What ever happened to that guy? They are fewer and further in between at this stage. And when you dont have that guy on the goalline, the guy that kill you in more ways than one, and you replace him with a big "goalline" back, it seems youre pretty much daring the opposing defense to line up in a goalline package of their own, and stop what youre obviously about to attempt. Of course, its not always that fundamental or cut and dry, and Im painting a rather extreme picture in some cases, but these dreaded committees have made our jobs in the fantasy world just that much more complex. And you know what? I kind of like it.
:unsure: Excellant thoughts here.
 
Do RBBC offenses tend to use one back sets at the goal line? Good FB's like Lorenzo Neal seemed help the ball carrier find a hole inside the 5.

 
Do RBBC offenses tend to use one back sets at the goal line? Good FB's like Lorenzo Neal seemed help the ball carrier find a hole inside the 5.
I'm not sure it has anything to do with RBBC, but the spread offenses seem to opt in favor of an additional WR in lieu of a FB.
 
Do RBBC offenses tend to use one back sets at the goal line? Good FB's like Lorenzo Neal seemed help the ball carrier find a hole inside the 5.
There are fewer and fewer Pro Bowl caliber FBs being utilized in the NFL. Not that the players themselves are extinct. But NE has used packages with LBs in their formations like Junior Seau, Richard Seymour and Mike Vrabel. All three defensive players used in goalline packages. The importance of the actual FB seems to have waned. Theyre being replaced in formations by often a slot receiver, an H-back or a 2nd TE. FBs like Lorenzo Neal, you know, players who's names you actually KNOW, are highly uncommon. I consider myself relatively familiar with many players on most teams around the league. And when filling about my 2 dozen Pro Bowl ballots last year, struggled deciding who to give the nod to at FB. Its because so few are significant, potentially every down players anymore. And the less these FBs are actually out there working on their craft, which is bulldozing into some LB or safety, the less GOOD theyre going to be at it. That's just the way it works. You do something often, youre likely to get good at it. You do it once in a while, youre gonna be so so by comparison.
 
Do RBBC offenses tend to use one back sets at the goal line? Good FB's like Lorenzo Neal seemed help the ball carrier find a hole inside the 5.
There are fewer and fewer Pro Bowl caliber FBs being utilized in the NFL. Not that the players themselves are extinct. But NE has used packages with LBs in their formations like Junior Seau, Richard Seymour and Mike Vrabel. All three defensive players used in goalline packages. The importance of the actual FB seems to have waned. Theyre being replaced in formations by often a slot receiver, an H-back or a 2nd TE. FBs like Lorenzo Neal, you know, players who's names you actually KNOW, are highly uncommon. I consider myself relatively familiar with many players on most teams around the league. And when filling about my 2 dozen Pro Bowl ballots last year, struggled deciding who to give the nod to at FB. Its because so few are significant, potentially every down players anymore. And the less these FBs are actually out there working on their craft, which is bulldozing into some LB or safety, the less GOOD theyre going to be at it. That's just the way it works. You do something often, youre likely to get good at it. You do it once in a while, youre gonna be so so by comparison.
Very true. And you forgot to mention Dan Klecko; who the Eagles explicitly signed this offseason to play fullback after seeing him used that way in NE.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top