The "Portis vs Betts" thread got me thinking about whether the problem is really all down to our O-Line. Maybe CP isn't declining that badly, and maybe it's just a case of our line being so destroyed that, as several posters have posited, "even [LT | Payton | Sanders] couldn't run behind this line".
With that in mind I decided to check some stats and try to identify some other teams who have a bad O-line, and see what their run game numbers look like. The basic premise I used to select these other teams was to look for teams who have given up a lot of sacks. Admittedly, this allows for things like coverage sacks, and doesn't correlate 100% to run blocking, but I didn't want to use any run game averages in the calculation since that could be tainted by a talent issue at the RB position.
Here are the NFL leaders in team sacks allowed:
1
Detroit Lions 35
2
Philadelphia Eagles 27
3
San Francisco 49ers 26
4
Atlanta Falcons 25
5
St. Louis Rams 25
6
Oakland Raiders 22
7
Chicago Bears 21
8
Kansas City Chiefs 20
9
Minnesota Vikings 20
10
New York Jets 20
11
Jacksonville Jaguars 20
REDSKINS: 12 sacks allowed
And now, those same teams yards per carry average, and % of rushing plays:
Detroit Lions 4.2 - 34.7%
Philadelphia Eagles 4.5 - 40.8%
San Francisco 49ers 4.1 - 38.0%
Atlanta Falcons 3.9 - 37.7%
St. Louis Rams 3.5 - 37.1%
Oakland Raiders 4.3 - 50.8%
Chicago Bears 3.2 - 38.9%
Kansas City Chiefs 3.3 - 41.0%
Minnesota Vikings 5.2 - 49.2%
New York Jets 3.5 - 43.7%
Jacksonville Jaguars 4.5 - 52.5%
REDSKINS: 3.5 - 49.1%
So what conclusions to draw from this?
First, we are 19th in the league in sacks allowed, yet only four teams have a worse running game than ours. Despite this, we still choose to rush more than 24 other teams in the league, even those who have much higher yards per rush than we do.
Second, our rush averages put us on par with the following teams: Chicago, St. Louis, KC, NYJ, Seattle, GB, New Orleans. Most of those teams are sub .500 clubs, with the exception of Seattle (sitting at 4-3) and the improbable Packers, who are hanging on by the grace of Favre and Cortisone.
Third, our play selection puts us near these teams: Minnesota, Indy, New England (!), Oakland, San Diego. Obviously Indy and New England are a tier above everyone else in the league, but San Diego appears to be righting the ship somewhat, and Oakland and Minnesota are both languishing.
The team that is closest to our yards per carry and play selection is Buffalo, at 3.6 ypc with 50.8% running plays (versus our 3.5 / 49.1%). They gave up 16 sacks versus our 12 and are 3-4 compared to our 4-3. Ironic, I suppose considering our recent Buffalo ties with Gggrilliamss and London Fletcher.
What I can't make sense of are teams like Minnesota, Oakland, Jacksonville, Detroit and Philly who also appear to have terrible lines but are having a lot more success running the ball (based on yd/carry). All of those teams have given up a lot more sacks than we have, but have rush averages over 4.0.
Is is still so crystal clear that nobody could run behind this line? I'm not so sure.