[PokerFink]

[ QUOTE ]
1) Explain success rate to me. Success rate on 3rd and short?

[/ QUOTE ]

Edit: SL already explained it.

The overriding idea is that it's better to gain cosistant yardage than be a boom-or-bust type back. A high success rate means you're consistantly gaining the yardage needed for a first down or touchdown.

Success on 3rd/4th down and short is a different statistic called power runs.

[ QUOTE ]
2) Why aren't they scoring more? They're playing below average defenses.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's a good question. It could be poor performance on third down, it could be poor performance in the red zone. I don't know, if someone has access to the FO premium database, they could look up those splits.

Matt Bryant is 6/7 on field goals, and all six makes are under 40 yards. So, yeah it's probably poor performance in the red zone.

[ QUOTE ]
I had meant to ask last week how red zone play affects DVOA. Is red zone play viewed at similar to RISP in baseball?

[/ QUOTE ]

Red zone performance, like third down performance, has a bigger effect on the actual score of the game than your DVOA score. I think every play is more or less considered equal in DVOA.

Improved performance in the red zone and/or on third down is generally unsustainable. So teams that do better or worse are generally just running hot or cold.

The one thing that they've found is that good defensive performance in the red zone can be sustainable from year to year for certain teams. The Eagles (among others) fit that, which makes sense when you think about their scheme and personnel.