The Two-Back System Debate – Double the Trouble For the Opponent

December 11, 2009

Read the debate intro and the arguments from Bleacher Fan and Babe Ruthless about whether or not a two back system in the right approach for a successful NFL offense.



I am not totally convinced there is a so-called “right” way and “wrong” way to win in the NFL in the regular season. Coaches make decisions based on whatever fits the makeup of the team and whatever fits the personnel. If that means throwing the ball for big yardage like the Colts, Patriots, and Saints do, then that is fine. If that means building the team around the running game, like the Jets and Titans do, then so be it. However, as I stated in the intro, teams must generally be able to have some sort of running game to achieve postseason greatness. That is why we focused this debate on the running game.

It was the job of Babe Ruthless to argue that having a two-back system is the way to go. Living in the Charlotte area, he has seen up close the benefits of having a two-back system with the tandem of DeAngelo Williams and Jonathan Stewart. Those two guys helped the Panthers win the NFC South last season, and are having another solid season in 2009. The Panthers’ poor season has more to do with quarterback Jake Delhomme. In analyzing the tandem the Giants employed last year Babe Ruthless also proved that teams have to have the right personnel to run a two-back system, writing that Ahmad Bradshaw has not quite lived up to what Derrick Ward was able to do in 2008.

Meanwhile, Bleacher Fan, with a ringing endorsement of the Atkins Diet, wrote that the two-back system was not necessarily the best way. (By the way, to the makers of the Atkins Diet, Mr. Bleacher Fan would love to hear from you about endorsement possibilities.)

Bleacher Fan argues that just because the two-back system is effective does not mean it is the best fit and that it will last, using the Wildcat as a prime example.

I am awarding this victory to Babe Ruthless for arguing the issue at hand. Having a two-back system is more effective because, as Babe wrote, “coaches are able to keep the running backs fresher,” and that definitely helps the later in the season a team gets (assuming the head coach and offensive coordinator manages carries properly). On that point, I also agree with what grbaseball contributed in our comments section yesterday, writing that a team is able to get stronger and better blitz protection in a two-back system, and that the team will also own time of possession. Thanks for the comment Grbaseball!

I also believe a two-back system helps in cases where a team has one of the runners go down with an injury. Frank Gore went down for San Francisco earlier this season and missed a couple of games, and what happened to the team? The 49ers went on a free fall, and it started when Gore was hurt. If Jonathan Stewart were to go down with an injury, I believe the Panthers would be able to still have a strong running game with DeAngelo Williams.

It is important that you have the right personnel in place. But a two-back system is the most efficient and provides the best chance for a team to win consistently.

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg! Bookmark and Share

Leave a Comment » | The Two-Back System Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Loyal Homer

The Two-Back System Debate – Is Two Better Than One?

December 10, 2009

Read the arguments from Bleacher Fan and Babe Ruthless about whether or not a two back system in the right approach for a successful NFL offense.



It is often said that to win consistently in the National Football League a team must be able to run the football effectively. The Indianapolis Colts may not agree with that assessment – this year, at least – but generally that is the case. There is a reason the run and shoot offense and the Texas Tech/Hawaii type offenses are not run in the NFL.

There are currently two different “systems” that NFL teams are using. The Sports Debates will focus today on these systems.

On one end, there is the offense that features one running back. This is what the Atlanta Falcons do with Michael Turner… when he is healthy. The same approach is used by the San Francisco 49ers with Frank Gore. The philosophy is simple – one running back gets the bulk of the carriers and it does not matter if the ball is on the 50-yard line or on the goal line.

The other end of the spectrum is home to the two-back system, a maddening system for all of you fantasy football players who have a running back on your team that is within a two-back system. This is the approach taken by Arizona with Tim Hightower and Chris “Beanie” Wells. It is also used by the New York Giants with Brandon Jacobs and Ahmad Bradshaw. Both running backs get, in theory, an equal amount of carries.

Obviously, there are advantages and disadvantages to both approaches to the running game in the NFL, and I am relying on my colleagues Babe Ruthless and Bleacher Fan to argue this question and help the sports world determine which method is best.

Babe Ruthless will argue that the two-back system approach is the right approach to winning while Bleacher Fan will argue that the one-back system is the right way. Remember, the debate is focused on what is the best way to win the game. It does not matter which method produces the most fantasy points, for example. At the end of the day, winning is all that matters!

Bring it on, and let’s see who wins!!

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg! Bookmark and Share

3 Comments | The Two-Back System Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Loyal Homer

The Two-Back System Debate – If Every Other NFL Team Jumped Off a Bridge…

December 10, 2009

Read the debate intro and Babe Ruthless’ argument that a two-running back system is the right approach for a winning NFL offense.



Saying that an offensive scheme featuring two running backs is the right approach to a winning NFL offense is like saying that the Atkins Diet is the right approach to losing weight. It may bring success for some, but to say that it is the best way, or the only way, to find success is flawed logic. If the Atkins Diet was truly the right approach to losing weight, America would be a whole lot skinnier!

Strategy is very important in the NFL, but equally as important is execution. You could have the greatest strategy in the world when your team walks onto the field, but if it lacks the ability to successfully execute, the strategy is worthless.

Scheming in the NFL is one giant game of keeping up with the Joneses. The high expectations, combined with low tolerance for failure, have created a league where coaches and general managers are willing to try anything and everything if they think it might bring success. The result is a cycle of fads.

Think about the crazes of the past few seasons – the Wildcat and the resurgence of the 3-4 defense are two examples that come quickly to mind. Last season Miami Dolphins running back Ronnie Brown lit up the New England Patriots for FIVE touchdowns, and before you knew it EVERY team in the NFL was running the Wildcat. Several seasons earlier, the Patriots found success at the hands of a 3-4 defensive scheme. What happened next? You guessed it – teams all around the league scrambled to get a 3-4 defense set up. Did that mean that those other teams saw the same success that the Dolphins or Patriots did? Of course not!

The NFL is a fluid game, constantly evolving as teams adapt and reinvent. The West Coast Offense, for example, does not carry nearly the punch that it used to. Elements of these different strategies are still present in the game and will from time to time resurface as being successful, but when that happens it is due less to the genius behind the strategy and more to do with the timing of its implementation.

While much of the credit for the success of schemes such as the Wildcat is due to a well-designed strategy, some credit must also be given simply to differentiation and the element of surprise. By catching opponents unaware it is easier to take advantage of the situation. However, once the league at-large becomes aware of the new strategy and is able to better prepare for it, much of the original effectiveness is eliminated. As teams implement versions of the creative and (sometimes) new approaches to the game, they are able to understand it more and practice with it. That practice allows a team to perfect its execution while simultaneously allowing for better preparation when facing it. In the end, each of those schemes, ultimately, lose some of their impact.

It is like a Track and Field star that uses a new training regimen to enhance their speed. It appears wildly successful at first because this star (who is the only one doing it) begins to reap the benefits of the new technique. Once that training model infiltrates the ranks of the competition, however, it is no longer a unique advantage. Instead, it becomes an everyday happening because EVERYONE is following it, and the advantage is lost.

Is that to say that a two-back offensive system is a bad idea? Not necessarily, because teams have proven that they can find success with the two-back approach. I am simply pointing out that this scheme, like all NFL schemes, may be changing the way the game is played today – but that does not mean it MUST be the approach followed in order to win in the NFL. As teams are further exposed to it, it will lose some of its efficacy. Likewise, the strategy is worthless if a team does not have the right personnel in place to execute it properly. The NFL is far more complex than simply being a matter of implementing strategy. If that were REALLY the case, the Cleveland Browns (who have tried EVERY new gimmick) might have actually won a couple Super Bowls by now.

Like fashions on the runway, trends in the NFL are ever-changing. Those things that are considered successful today may not be considered successful tomorrow. The key to a winning offense in the NFL is not about finding the hip new fad and following it. It is about implementing and executing a strategy – ANY strategy – that best suits the personnel. Just because everyone else is doing it, there is no guarantee that it is right for you!

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg! Bookmark and Share

Leave a Comment » | The Two-Back System Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Bleacher Fan

The Two-Back System Debate – One is the Loneliest Number

December 10, 2009

Read the debate intro and the argument from Bleacher Fan about whether or not a two back system in the right approach for a successful NFL offense.



Looking around the NFL nowadays it becomes increasingly clear that the every-down type running back is nearing extinction. Teams are getting a plethora of players involved in the rushing attack. From short yardage specialist to third down pace-changers, more and more running backs are getting touches. But one approach to the rushing game is starting to garner support and has certainly piqued my interest – the two-back system.

Why not double your pleasure and double your fun with two full-time starting running backs? Now before your start to confuse my proposal with the enigma that is the running back by committee approach, let me clarify what I mean by the two-back system. The two-back system employs two primary running backs interchangeably. Coaches switch between the two backs in order to keep them fresh or alternate them on different drives. Running back by committee systems typically involve complex role assignments (e.g. the starter, the goal line back, the third down pace-changer, the fourth quarter clock grinder, etc.) that are meticulously assigned considering everything from defensive matchups to playing surface to statistical history. This is all too complex. The two-back system reduces this excessive entanglement with arbitrary stats and employs more of an old fashion gut feeling approach to calling the running game.

In 2008 the Carolina Panthers were a perfect example of a successful two-back system. Two running backs, DeAngello Williams and Jonathan Stewart, attempted 457 rushes for 2,351 yards and 28 touchdowns. While the dynamic duo did not split the load evenly (Williams had 273 attempts, 1,515 yards and 18 rushing scores while Stewart had 184 attempts, 836 yards and 10 rushing scores), they certainly were successful as a powerful tandem of starter quality running backs. The Panthers ended the season third in the NFL in rushing yards and first in rushing touchdowns, besting the next closest team by six scores. Even with the Panthers’ poor record in 2009 (5-7), the Panthers’ “double trouble” are primed to finish near the top of both categories again. It is clear that the two-back system is working in Carolina.

The New York Giants also experienced huge success last season leaning on the two-back system. The Giants led the NFL in rushing yards with 2,518. Brandon Jacobs and Derrick Ward accounted for the vast majority of this yardage while splitting the total number of carries somewhat evenly across the season. Brandon Jacobs had 1,089 yards on 219 attempts and 15 rushing touchdowns and Derrick Ward was not far behind with 1,025 yards on 182 carries and two rushing touchdowns. While Ward’s touchdowns are not comparable with Jacobs, the two backs were easily the envy of the league with dueling 1,000 yard seasons. This season the Giants rushing attack has taken a step back. Currently, the G Men are ranked tenth in rushing yardage entering week 14. This can be explained, in part, by the pounding Jacobs took last season. But I cannot help but wonder if the departure of Jacobs’ rushing brother-from-another-mother, Derrick Ward, is to blame. Ahmad Bradshaw (122 attempts for 596 yards and four rushing touchdowns) has not proven himself as an equivalent, starting caliber back that Derrick Ward was last season. In my opinion the Giants stuck with the two-back system, but the problem is the not the system but this season’s choice of backs.

The system is proving itself a winner. Teams like the Panthers, the Giants, and even this year’s Arizona Cardinals team, are really onto something. It is simple and effective and is quickly becoming a must for success in the NFL.

My Zimbio Blog Directory Sport Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Add us to your technorati favorites Digg! Bookmark and Share

Leave a Comment » | The Two-Back System Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Babe Ruthless

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.