He’s not wrong, but he really butchers the logic in this piece
Admittedly, some of the new football statistics leave me cold — not because they’re nonsensical, but because the analytical side of my brain hasn’t functioned well since grade-school arithmetic. I’m quite sure it’s smart, valuable stuff for those open-minded enough to use it. Baseball went through its own Bill James revolution, with several younger general managers preaching the “Moneyball” gospel and the joy of on-base percentage.
I also think you can overanalyze and get confused by the gobbledygook of new statistics.
Football, at its essence, is still a pretty simple game.
To win championships, you still have to run the ball (effectively, if not frequently) and you still have to stop the run.
Bob’s main point: You have to run when it counts…is 100% valid. The 2006 Colts ran when it mattered (4th quarter, Baltimore. In the rain, Chicago). The 2008 Colts couldn’t. He’s not wrong. But I hate, HATE when people start being dismissive of math and drag everything back to simplistic reasoning. Bob treads that line. I don’t think he really crossed it, so I’m not going to kill him, but I think this whole article could have been framed better. This isn’t his finest work, but he is right: to be a major title contender, Indy HAS to be able to finish off games with the run. I don’t give a crap if you rack up 3.5 yards in quarters 1-3, but when you need to kill 6 minutes in the fourth quarter, I want to see 4 yards a carry and third and fourth down conversions.
Add The Sports Daily to your Google News Feed!
