Why you Run the ball ~1:1 vs the Pass


Well-known member
Dec 25, 2014
Reaction score
I would like to see a summary of all the runs in the playoffs against Dallas a few years back, probably not too different but resulted in a loss


Well-known member
Mar 3, 2007
Reaction score
Newberg, Oregon

You win by leaning into your strengths.
If you run the ball 1:1 and you have an avg rush offense and above avg pass - you are squandering possessions. Passing plays are worth 3x more than run plays anyway.
Admittedly running the ball is easier on your line (and preferred by most OL), it does wear down defenses, and rest yours.

But winning football is not about balance, it is above winning matchups. If your strength is passing, your ratio should show that. If your strength is rushing, that should be the focus. You still have to use weaknesses enough to keep defenses honest, but you squander possessions if you lean out of your strengths.
(Unless the opponent has a key weakness where leaning away makes sense)

Rigidly adhering to numbers with no consideration into where you can leverage strengths or take advantage of weaknesses makes no sense. This team should at a minimum have a 1.5:1 ration on pass to run. And only that low because Geno regressed. 1:1 would be a recipe for failure. We don't have the RB for it.

Seattle already is the 7th most pass happy team in the league.

So you think Seattle is doing well on offense this year? They currently are only barely below your 1.5:1 ratio. This offense relies heavily on the play action, Play Action doesn't work if you don't/can't run the ball. I feel they abandon the run way to easily.


Well-known member
Jan 8, 2013
Reaction score
Do you have any data on the 'PA doesn't work if you don't run the ball'?

Because the data I have seen, indicates it isn't true.

Just curious where you got the data for the assertion. Teams that rarely ran have used PA effectively. It worked for them.

And again, run vs pass is not an equal conversion anyway. Pass plays are worth far more than run plays, so they should outnumber them. (Based on data checked last year. Maybe it changed this year, haven't checked.)

And also, part of this is a function of the effectiveness of your RBs. We don't have RBs that can produce enough to carry this offense, even if we had a 1:1 run-to-pass ratio. That would just end up in many more punts.
Sure we punt passing too, but we occasionally score. As pointed out, our RBs are near ZERO scoring threats. They might move the chains a few times, but probably not even that.