09-14-2022, 11:41 PM
(09-14-2022, 10:38 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Using the SIS DataHub, I pulled data from 2015-2019 to compare the relationship between a team’s EPA per Rush with their EPA per Play-Action Dropback. The results are in agreement with previous findings, as there’s very little relationship between the two. If we compare success rates, we see a slightly stronger relationship, though still weak by most standards.
https://cowboyswire.usatoday.com/2020/01/18/nfl-analytics-study-running-the-ball-play-action-success-mike-mccarthy-dallas-cowboys/
This is the main relationship of interest. Regardless of which of the six measures of rushing one chooses, there is no meaningful relationship between the effectiveness of play-action passing and a team's rushing statistics in the game to that point. Aside from a couple extreme cases with very small sample sizes (zero rushes or eight rushes in the previous 10 plays), there is no relationship in the data between the median, mean, or 75th percentile of yards gained and a team's previous rush attempts. This is consistent with the scatterplots of team rushing versus team play-action passing for entire seasons that were displayed in the beginning of this article.
https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2018/rushing-success-and-play-action-passing
Research from both Hermsmeyer and Baldwin has shown that not only is play action much more effective than regular drop-back passing, it is also effective regardless of rushing attempts or rushing success.
https://theathletic.com/980870/2019/07/26/teams-dont-have-to-establish-the-run-to-win-games-and-the-analytics-proves-it-but-the-run-isnt-dead-either/
A study done by Sean Clements, who is now a data analyst for the Baltimore Ravens, found that establishing the run early in NFL games does not open the passing game later in games.
https://atbnetwork.com/2022/07/01/does-running-the-ball-set-up-the-pass/
As you can see, the data points are all over the place, indicating there really isn’t any correlation between rushing efficiency and play-action efficiency. Indeed, the correlation is p = .1477 (not significant), meaning a better running attack doesn’t result in better play-action passing.
https://cheeseheadtv.com/blog/setting-up-play-action-with-the-run-is-false
Thanks for posting this. Over the years, I have found nothing that fellow fans will fight me more on than this topic. And I get it, it makes logical sense that a better running attack would result in better play-action passing, but it just doesn’t.
I’m familiar with all of these articles, having read them myself and also sifting through the data on numerous occasions. I’ve looked at it from a season’s perspective, game perspective, drive-by-drive perspective, QB tier perspective, RB tier perspective and play-by-play perspective. Nothing exists. Play-action simply works because of the way a defense has to play ball. They are reading the offense, and each defensive call has run fits. If a defense doesn’t play those run fits, then you have a no-name, backup running back running all over you.
Play-action works because it creates conflict, the same reason why RPOs work. The mere threat of running the ball has to be respected, regardless of efficacy.
