Offensive Play Discussion - 2020

I want to see more of Rahmir Johnson. Just give him more snaps and see if he really catches fire like he did on a couple plays against Iowa.

The downfield passing game is getting the most attention this year as far as offensive struggles go, but having a RB that could get 5 yards when the next best guy only gets 3, or picks up 9 yards when the next best guy only picks up 6 on the same play would be huge.

The better your running back is at juking, twisting, & creating something out of nothing, the fewer 3rd & longs you get into. 

 
Undone said:
I want to see more of Rahmir Johnson. Just give him more snaps and see if he really catches fire like he did on a couple plays against Iowa.

The downfield passing game is getting the most attention this year as far as offensive struggles go, but having a RB that could get 5 yards when the next best guy only gets 3, or picks up 9 yards when the next best guy only picks up 6 on the same play would be huge.

The better your running back is at juking, twisting, & creating something out of nothing, the fewer 3rd & longs you get into. 
Click to expand...


I'd like to see him too, but I'm more interested in quicker hitting run plays where our OL shoots forward as opposed to lateral plays where you're asking our guys to run sideways while maintaining good blocks.  It appears that in response to our predilection to run those lateral plays, that opposing defenses are running a lot of hard slants which are creating a significant amount of penetration, and too many plays with negative yards.  So as much as I like RJ, ripping those higher risk lateral run plays (and pass plays for that matter) from our playbook would be my first request.  

 
Canadian Fan said:
I'd like to see him too, but I'm more interested in quicker hitting run plays where our OL shoots forward as opposed to lateral plays where you're asking our guys to run sideways while maintaining good blocks.
Click to expand...


We've seen plenty of them and have enough data from them to form a good conclusion that we just don't execute them well - especially when combined with specific personnel.

Marvin Scott's season yards per carry numbers since he's gotten the start proves the thesis correct, IMO.

 
Undone said:
We've seen plenty of them and have enough data from them to form a good conclusion that we just don't execute them well - especially when combined with specific personnel.

Marvin Scott's season yards per carry numbers since he's gotten the start proves the thesis correct, IMO.
Click to expand...


My key argument being that running inside we've been far more likely to get 2 or 3 yards, while outside and lateral it feels like more often than not we're losing 1 or 2 yards.

It could also be argued that the personnel packages are clearly telegraphing the playcall allowing the opposing defense a HUGE advantage, which is also playing a role in our outcomes.

If you only run inside with Scott, and he comes into the game, and the opposing DC immediately says "Hey, they're running inside again.  Run blitz between the tackles and cheat the safeties up.".

Subsequent failures on those plays are not solely on the OL. On the contrary the majority of the blame should go on the OC.

It's like blaming your bad cards for losing in a poker hand while having those cards facing your opponent.

 
Undone said:
I want to see more of Rahmir Johnson. Just give him more snaps and see if he really catches fire like he did on a couple plays against Iowa.

The downfield passing game is getting the most attention this year as far as offensive struggles go, but having a RB that could get 5 yards when the next best guy only gets 3, or picks up 9 yards when the next best guy only picks up 6 on the same play would be huge.

The better your running back is at juking, twisting, & creating something out of nothing, the fewer 3rd & longs you get into. 
Click to expand...


He had some really solid looking runs on Friday so I hope they give him more touches this weekend. Honestly we are so beat up at that position we need someone to emerge and he has looked the closest so far.

 
Canadian Fan said:
It could also be argued that the personnel packages are clearly telegraphing the playcall allowing the opposing defense a HUGE advantage, which is also playing a role in our outcomes.
Click to expand...


I can't disagree with that.

The biggest thing I notice is that Mills & Marvin Scott don't have much shake n' bake or spin moves to fight for extra yardage. While we aren't blocking all that well on interior running - and to boot are running into a stacked line of scrimmage - the point is that the "hand off to your running back" part of our offense is struggling badly and we need to try something different.

I know we need Wan'Dale at receiver more than running back, but just to bolster my point: When he's in there he jukes, spins, & fights for those extra couple of yards. This then sets up fewer 3rd & longs.

So my own thesis is this: We need either consistently better play at running back or need to be better at mixing up those run plays to catch defenses off guard. Our downfield passing attack is taking all of the heat but it's not the only problem.

 
Undone said:
So my own thesis is this: We need either consistently better play at running back or need to be better at mixing up those run plays to catch defenses off guard. Our downfield passing attack is taking all of the heat but it's not the only problem.
Click to expand...
While things have been bad, this is a pretty good point of emphasis. Play call, design, and or execution for RB run plays that are not options, sweeps, or swings/laterals depending on how you want to classify them have been pretty bad. Handing the ball to the RB who isn't Robinson has been pretty poor to this point. Maybe defenses know we can't throw and that is why we have RPO's ending with QB runs and not RB touches. 

Even Iowa came out against us and threw three straight passes to try and loosen up our defense. Petras has been a pretty sad thrower this year and even Brian Ferentz knew he needed to show it to get us to back off. Our continued lack of pulling the trigger on passes is hurting us and probably plays into our lack of success in the RB run game. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
@deedsker, I actually think the swing passes may be one of the things that have bailed us out. Last year they were horrible because Martinez didn't have the right touch/accuracy on those balls, but this season both he & Luke have thrown those passes very well.

The swing pass is a great play to punish defenses for crowding the box/blitzing into a wedge - it's a quick hitting play that immediately gets the ball around that inside pressure.

I've also noticed that Frost is sometimes putting a tight end like Allen on the edge to help block on those plays, and their execution has been much better.

 
Undone said:
@deedsker, I actually think the swing passes may be one of the things that have bailed us out. Last year they were horrible because Martinez didn't have the right touch/accuracy on those balls, but this season both he & Luke have thrown those passes very well.

The swing pass is a great play to punish defenses for crowding the box/blitzing into a wedge - it's a quick hitting play that immediately gets the ball around that inside pressure.

I've also noticed that Frost is sometimes putting a tight end like Allen on the edge to help block on those plays, and their execution has been much better.
Click to expand...
I agree.  I saw a couple of those passes work to perfection against Iowa.  Those do relieve the pressure of box stuffing if consistently executed properly.   EVENTUALLY, whenever that is, that we get a down field threat on the field, they will help to free up the long ball game as well.  Perfect play to keep the D 'honest'.   I may be mistaken, but it seems to me that the reverse was set up in a similar fashion. 

 
But it isn't what I would call a "traditional" run play. That is why I was trying to exclude them from my point. I would agree that AM did a better job against Iowa, but it doesn't fix our typical run game.

I was trying to emphasize, without real data to look at, that those swings and/or options probably constitute a lot of our RB production. Handing the ball to the RB hasn't been successful.

Side note, the swing does help relive stacking the box, but corners and safeties playing tight on the outside makes those blocks on the edge harder to make. Another key of having downfield attempts/success.

 
TGHusker said:
I agree.  I saw a couple of those passes work to perfection against Iowa.  Those do relieve the pressure of box stuffing if consistently executed properly.
Click to expand...


Yeah, and they don't have to go for 10 - 15 yards to be a success. I think they're kind of a "run replacement" play in the modern spread offense.

Ideally they loosen up the defense and then you come back with the inside handoffs - but because our interior line is struggling right now, that element isn't there.

 
deedsker said:
But it isn't what I would call a "traditional" run play. That is why I was trying to exclude them from my point. I would agree that AM did a better job against Iowa, but it doesn't fix our typical run game.

I was trying to emphasize, without real data to look at, that those swings and/or options probably constitute a lot of our RB production. Handing the ball to the RB hasn't been successful.

Side note, the swing does help relive stacking the box, but corners and safeties playing tight on the outside makes those blocks on the edge harder to make. Another key of having downfield attempts/success.
Click to expand...


Oh, great points and I totally agree that they don't fall under the category of a 'run play' whatsoever. 

Although I can't know for sure whether Frost views it this way exactly, I do think the benefit of the swing pass is to spread the defense out - which is of course the style of play this offense is designed for.

The bold part of your quote is really perhaps the root of our entire offensive problems - but like I said a few posts up, the thing the team is taking the most heat for is not throwing downfield enough.

 
Undone said:
Yeah, and they don't have to go for 10 - 15 yards to be a success. I think they're kind of a "run replacement" play in the modern spread offense.

Ideally they loosen up the defense and then you come back with the inside handoffs - but because our interior line is struggling right now, that element isn't there.
Click to expand...
I've always viewed these plays as doing the same thing our old option plays did in the 80s and 90s.  Try to get the ball quickly to the outside and make the defense defend from side line to side line.  

If we run one on 1st down and it only goes for 6-8 yards, it accomplished something good.  Sometimes they are broken for big gains.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top