[div align=\\\"center\\\"]Who Killed the Ground Game?[/div]
I was born August 2nd, 1999. That year, the Euro was introduced into circulation, Exxon and Mobil merged to form the world’s largest corporation and the average NBA player shot 73-percent from the line. That world bears little similarity to the world of 1954, the year the NBA introduced the shot clock. Far from the apex of continental cooperation it was in ‘99, the Iron Curtain had just begun to descend across Europe. Not only were Exxon and Mobil independent, they went by the names Standard Oil Co. of New Jersey and Standard Oil Co. of New York. But the average NBA player? He still shot a tick above 73% from the line.
While perhaps the most extreme example, as the league’s free throw percentage has hovered right around 75% for over a half-century, statistical consistency in sport is not uncommon. Batting averages and golf scores come to mind as numbers that have remained remarkably static in their sport’s modern eras. Even in the NFL, a league that has undergone tremendous changes, since 2000, the yards-per-carry average has fluctuated between 4.0 and 4.3. As offenses have adapted and players improved, running backs have gotten better by a whopping 6 chain links.
In the NSFL, we’ve seen precious little of that mythical “statistical consistency.” It’s no surprise that QBs have gotten more accurate or receivers more reliable, those improvements are exclusively internal. But there is one change that is both notable and unexpected: the death of the NSFL running back.
Last season’s MVP, Bubba Nuck, led the league in rushing yards (and lapped the rest of the field) while posting a very robust 4.4 yards per carry average. This year his YPC has plummeted to 3.6, a decline that you’d expect as a player crawls to his career twilight, not as he sprints towards his prime. Omar Wright? A drop of more than a full yard, from 4.4. to 3.3. Reg Mackworthy has gone from one of the league’s most efficient backs to one of the league’s least. Moreover, these players aren’t outliers, they represent a concerning trend for GMs and players alike. The average team in Season 1 rushed for an average of 3.85 yards-per-carry. That team in Season 2 would lead the league by a fairly healthy margin as the average has fallen to a mere 3.24. Last season’s least efficient rushing team, the Baltimore Hawks would be in a tie for second place this year. The running game is dead, the true question is what killed it.
According to Ray Stefani, a professor at Cal State, Long Beach, there are four factors that can cause widespread change in sports: physiology, technology, coaching and equipment. From the jump, we can eliminate equipment and technology as possibilities since both are held static year to year in a league like ours. Coaching however, represents a legitimate possibility. Perhaps NSFL defensive coordinators have, across the board, simply figured out how to neutralize rushing attacks. Without access to the gameplans from this season and the last, testing that theory is impossible. However, it does seem unlikely that every team drew up a magic bullet strategy to stop the ground game and that no offense in the league has adjusted at all.
By process of elimination, we are left with physiology as the only factor that could cause such a drastic league-wide decline. The average NSFL running back has changed physically, but those changes logically wouldn’t lead to decline. I’m not an expert, but players collecting getting faster, stronger and more agile tends to create better rushers, not worse. Realistically, at worst, the physical improvements from running backs is offset by improvements at defensive positions, leading to no net change. It is certainly possible that the TPE gains on the less-glamorous side of the ball have been, on a per-player basis, larger than those of running backs. But again, it is incredibly unlikely that the difference is enough to explain such a massive drop in yards per carry. However, there is a potential offset that is far more likely and equally impactful.
Among skill players, there is no position as dependent on others as running back. It doesn’t matter if Jesus is in the backfield, a stacked box and pressure behind the LOS make a fine Black Saturday tombstone. While running backs have likely matched the TPE gains of their defensive counterparts, the same can’t be said for the big nasties up front. Offensive Line is by far the league’s least active position group and is, to the best of my knowledge, the only one where bots receive significant playing time. As offensive lines stagnate and defensive players continue to improve, the league’s collective rushing problem is only going to get worse.
As it stands right now, we’re still a ways away from the rushing midnight hour. With dedication and a proper game plan, a team can conceivably still build around a dominant ground game. But that may not be true forever, especially if this trend continues unabated. Fortunately, there are a couple of solutions to prevent running back from becoming unplayable. Obviously, the league should continue to beat the drumbeat for more active linemen to join and encourage their continued activity. That task is easier said than done, but it is also the only option that has benefits aside from solving the immediate problem. Another option would be tethering the attributes of bot offensive line to the league average defensive linemen. While the bots would of course still be comparatively below average and fielding them would significantly impact a team’s offensive line, if bots are going to remain a part of the league, the gap between their skill level and that of defensive linemen should probably be monitored. While choosing the gap will likely require sim engine testing, the larger point is that it should remain constant to ensure both balanced game-play and realism. Barring rule changes, the offense-defense pendulum doesn’t typically swing too far in either direction in most sports leagues.
The running back is dead. Offensive lines killed him.
Parting Thoughts:
The nature of planning is to solve problems before they occur, it is my hope that this article spurs greater discussion on the decline in running back effectiveness, including more statistics-based research into positional TPE counts and offensive line effectiveness. I will also note that while my conclusion seems plausible, it is not without its flaws. One would expect to see an increase in sacks as a result of comparatively worse offensive line play, however, in both Season 1 and Season 2, the average team allowed 2.7 sacks per game. Additionally, I did not tabulate the TFL data that would have supported, or disproven, my conclusion. I will leave that to someone who isn’t preparing to move back in.
Wordcount: 1128
I was born August 2nd, 1999. That year, the Euro was introduced into circulation, Exxon and Mobil merged to form the world’s largest corporation and the average NBA player shot 73-percent from the line. That world bears little similarity to the world of 1954, the year the NBA introduced the shot clock. Far from the apex of continental cooperation it was in ‘99, the Iron Curtain had just begun to descend across Europe. Not only were Exxon and Mobil independent, they went by the names Standard Oil Co. of New Jersey and Standard Oil Co. of New York. But the average NBA player? He still shot a tick above 73% from the line.
While perhaps the most extreme example, as the league’s free throw percentage has hovered right around 75% for over a half-century, statistical consistency in sport is not uncommon. Batting averages and golf scores come to mind as numbers that have remained remarkably static in their sport’s modern eras. Even in the NFL, a league that has undergone tremendous changes, since 2000, the yards-per-carry average has fluctuated between 4.0 and 4.3. As offenses have adapted and players improved, running backs have gotten better by a whopping 6 chain links.
In the NSFL, we’ve seen precious little of that mythical “statistical consistency.” It’s no surprise that QBs have gotten more accurate or receivers more reliable, those improvements are exclusively internal. But there is one change that is both notable and unexpected: the death of the NSFL running back.
Last season’s MVP, Bubba Nuck, led the league in rushing yards (and lapped the rest of the field) while posting a very robust 4.4 yards per carry average. This year his YPC has plummeted to 3.6, a decline that you’d expect as a player crawls to his career twilight, not as he sprints towards his prime. Omar Wright? A drop of more than a full yard, from 4.4. to 3.3. Reg Mackworthy has gone from one of the league’s most efficient backs to one of the league’s least. Moreover, these players aren’t outliers, they represent a concerning trend for GMs and players alike. The average team in Season 1 rushed for an average of 3.85 yards-per-carry. That team in Season 2 would lead the league by a fairly healthy margin as the average has fallen to a mere 3.24. Last season’s least efficient rushing team, the Baltimore Hawks would be in a tie for second place this year. The running game is dead, the true question is what killed it.
According to Ray Stefani, a professor at Cal State, Long Beach, there are four factors that can cause widespread change in sports: physiology, technology, coaching and equipment. From the jump, we can eliminate equipment and technology as possibilities since both are held static year to year in a league like ours. Coaching however, represents a legitimate possibility. Perhaps NSFL defensive coordinators have, across the board, simply figured out how to neutralize rushing attacks. Without access to the gameplans from this season and the last, testing that theory is impossible. However, it does seem unlikely that every team drew up a magic bullet strategy to stop the ground game and that no offense in the league has adjusted at all.
By process of elimination, we are left with physiology as the only factor that could cause such a drastic league-wide decline. The average NSFL running back has changed physically, but those changes logically wouldn’t lead to decline. I’m not an expert, but players collecting getting faster, stronger and more agile tends to create better rushers, not worse. Realistically, at worst, the physical improvements from running backs is offset by improvements at defensive positions, leading to no net change. It is certainly possible that the TPE gains on the less-glamorous side of the ball have been, on a per-player basis, larger than those of running backs. But again, it is incredibly unlikely that the difference is enough to explain such a massive drop in yards per carry. However, there is a potential offset that is far more likely and equally impactful.
Among skill players, there is no position as dependent on others as running back. It doesn’t matter if Jesus is in the backfield, a stacked box and pressure behind the LOS make a fine Black Saturday tombstone. While running backs have likely matched the TPE gains of their defensive counterparts, the same can’t be said for the big nasties up front. Offensive Line is by far the league’s least active position group and is, to the best of my knowledge, the only one where bots receive significant playing time. As offensive lines stagnate and defensive players continue to improve, the league’s collective rushing problem is only going to get worse.
As it stands right now, we’re still a ways away from the rushing midnight hour. With dedication and a proper game plan, a team can conceivably still build around a dominant ground game. But that may not be true forever, especially if this trend continues unabated. Fortunately, there are a couple of solutions to prevent running back from becoming unplayable. Obviously, the league should continue to beat the drumbeat for more active linemen to join and encourage their continued activity. That task is easier said than done, but it is also the only option that has benefits aside from solving the immediate problem. Another option would be tethering the attributes of bot offensive line to the league average defensive linemen. While the bots would of course still be comparatively below average and fielding them would significantly impact a team’s offensive line, if bots are going to remain a part of the league, the gap between their skill level and that of defensive linemen should probably be monitored. While choosing the gap will likely require sim engine testing, the larger point is that it should remain constant to ensure both balanced game-play and realism. Barring rule changes, the offense-defense pendulum doesn’t typically swing too far in either direction in most sports leagues.
The running back is dead. Offensive lines killed him.
Parting Thoughts:
The nature of planning is to solve problems before they occur, it is my hope that this article spurs greater discussion on the decline in running back effectiveness, including more statistics-based research into positional TPE counts and offensive line effectiveness. I will also note that while my conclusion seems plausible, it is not without its flaws. One would expect to see an increase in sacks as a result of comparatively worse offensive line play, however, in both Season 1 and Season 2, the average team allowed 2.7 sacks per game. Additionally, I did not tabulate the TFL data that would have supported, or disproven, my conclusion. I will leave that to someone who isn’t preparing to move back in.
Wordcount: 1128
[div align=center]
[div align=center]
[div align=center]
![[Image: BVsashy.png]](https://i.imgur.com/BVsashy.png)
![[Image: 018p.png]](https://i.postimg.cc/WbJGDCCK/018p.png)
![[Image: TBFYuND.png]](https://i.imgur.com/TBFYuND.png)
![[Image: ca3d5e3deb7f6e174784ef978f719cc9.png]](https://i.gyazo.com/ca3d5e3deb7f6e174784ef978f719cc9.png)
![[Image: 7ac9817c0637443996b440dbb0737e7c.png]](https://gyazo.com/7ac9817c0637443996b440dbb0737e7c.png)
![[Image: XrWFjz1.png]](http://i.imgur.com/XrWFjz1.png)
