redman said:
I would define that purely as touches (and scores) inside the five, and touches and scores inside the ten. Do both, because it helps differentiate guys who are multiple threats (receivers as well as runners) from the Leroy Hoards of the world. The 20 yard line is too far out to be of any great value in this analysis, at least as far as RB's go; it's more useful as to TE's and WR's.
Well RBs that are also receiving threats (westy, LT, jordan) have the added dimension of being able to take it in from the 20 on a pass play. showing only from the 5 and 10 would show better stats for pure runners, whereas showing from the 20 and in evens out the playing field for rbs with the added dimension of being able to catch it and take it in for the score. there are different ways to be a "redzone threat" and showing from the 20 and in doesn't favor either one, whereas showing from the 5 or 10 and in would IMO.
You may be right on that. I think the goal of my analysis would be to try to separate guys who are essentially not in the game from the 10 or 5 yard line in (e.g. Warrick Dunn, Tiki Barber), from guys who are purely goalline runners (e.g. Jacobs, Duckett), from guys who have a role in the offense in the entire red zone (LT, Portis, etc.). A simple "red zone" analysis doesn't allow you to do that very well.
