mrt144":2ztlkzp8 said:
https://theathletic.com/994511/2019/05/31/not-adding-up-brian-schottenheimers-rule-of-53/
Charles Reep is known as both the founding father of soccer analytics and the man who “helped ruin decades of English soccer.”
Beginning in the 1950s, Reep published a series of papers examining the sequences that lead to scoring a goal. Reep found that most goals were scored after a series of three or fewer passes, which led to his recommendation: Teams should avoid long passing sequences by kicking the ball far down the field and trying to chase it down. Eventually, this advice became a cornerstone of English coaching.
The problem? Possession is fluid in soccer. Most goals were scored after short sequences because the vast majority of possessions were short sequences. When one accounts for the prevalence of each sequence length, it turns out that maintaining possession of the ball is associated with an increase in the likelihood of scoring a goal. The error in logic is akin to stating that motorcycles are safer than cars because there are fewer fatal accidents involving motorcycles, ignoring that motorcycles constitute a small percentage of vehicles on the road.
In other words, Reep’s advice was exactly backward. Reep’s contention that “passing for the sake of passing can be disastrous” was misguided.
We now turn to the Seahawks, whose actions suggest that they view passing with the same disdain that Reep did. And — like English soccer during the long-ball era — the Seahawks’ devotion to running the football appears to be based on bad math.
The article goes into the same kind of 'cart before horse' errors as we see specifically with the NFL and even more specifically with the Seahawks. Worth a read and even a subscription in my estimation. The Athletic does some really good work that compliments Fieldgulls and other Seahawks centric outlets and supplements our own thoughts here.
I know there are some soccer purists on the board who will vehemently disagree but after watching too much soccer it is my feeling that most soccer goals are the result of happy accidents. That is not to say that there aren't some spectacular plays on goal but that they are often the result of random, not planned, events.
As for whether we should pass more or not, we have the highest paid QB in the league, we should use every skill he possesses. And, that is not to say that we should go to a pass-happy offense, a balanced attack will always be the best offense when it sets the opposing defense on its heels. But that is predicated on the offense not only being balanced but less predictable.
What I AM saying is that we should have a passing attack that is capable of completing first downs and marching down the field when the opposing defense has stifled our running attack, e.g., the Cowboys' game. That, in turn, will open up the running game.
