| TEAM | Adj. Line Yards |
RB Yards |
Power Success |
Power Rank |
10+ Yards |
10+ Rank |
Stuffed | Stuffed Rank |
| 4 | NYG | 4.62 | 5.28 | 62% | 23 | 25% | 2 | 17% | 10 |
| 3 | NYG | 4.48 | 4.79 | 70% | 7 | 20% | 8 | 17% | 9 |
| 5 | WAS | 4.41 | 4.13 | 69% | 14 | 13% | 29 | 14% | 2 |
| 17 | WAS | 4.09 | 3.73 | 60% | 22 | 10% | 28 | 18% | 16 |
| 14 | DAL | 4.10 | 4.48 | 68% | 15 | 22% | 8 | 18% | 17 |
| 14 | DAL | 4.16 | 4.31 | 68% | 12 | 20% | 11 | 18% | 14 |
| 20 | PHI | 4.06 | 4.05 | 55% | 31 | 17% | 19 | 19% | 22 |
| 5 | PHI | 4.46 | 4.73 | 74% | 4 | 19% | 12 | 19% | 19 |
I have pasted the 2008 & 2007 Run Blocking statistics from Football Outsiders (FO):
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ol2007. Toggle back and forth to 2008 and other FO calculations.
It is notable that the rank of the Redskins in this scheme of things improved from 2007 to 2008. Where as the Eagles suffered a significant reversal. The change in the Giants and Cowboys rankings were not as significant. It remains to be seen whether the changes in the offensive lines for the Eagles and Skins will improve their run blocking performance in 2009. The third table is of interest since it shows the five directions that teams tended to run their plays. The Redskins tended to avoid the MID/GUARD (see tables) plays in both years compared to most other NFL. teams. Was this a matter of choice or of real options? The latter would support the notion that the Skins were weak at guard and center positions.
There are 2 Comments. Load Now.
Shortcuts to mastering the comment thread. Use wisely.
C - Next Comment
X - Mark as Read
R - Reply
Z - Mark Read & Next
Shift + C - Previous
Shift + A - Mark All Read
Comment Settings
Live comment alert: Hide it!
Comments for this post are closed.