07-19-2018, 10:13 AM
(07-19-2018, 08:36 AM)Au165 Wrote: This is always a chicken and the egg type thing to me. Teams that are generally winning games run more because they are trying to keep the clock moving. Teams that are trailing in games tend to have to throw more to catch up. One could argue that the amount of running isn't a predictor of success, but rather a product of success.Dave Lapham always used to throw out some stat about rushing attempts and the Bengals winning trying to associate it with causation, but again if the team is rushing that much it is because they most likely have a lead. It used to drive me nuts!
As to the question, you have to be able to run at least at an average clip to win.
There's a whole lot of truth to what you're saying and I mostly agree, but......
I feel for Andy Dalton and the Bengals O to operate on all 8 cylinders we need a "productive" running game. Dalton, as good as he is, isn't going to take over every game and throw us to victory.
We need to be able to convert those 3rd and two, 3rd and three's that we haven't been able to for several seasons now. Opposing D's have known we can't run and it's hurt us badly.
We don't have to have 200 yards rushing a game to be successful. But we do need productive gains, at least more so than in the recent past than we've been getting.
IMHO, it's very important