huKSer Posted August 3, 2016 Share Posted August 3, 2016 Could he mean "I-back"? Quote Link to comment
Landlord Posted August 3, 2016 Share Posted August 3, 2016 But I thought this staff was lying through their teeth about fitting the offense around the players and never let Tommy run? Quote Link to comment
Mavric Posted August 3, 2016 Author Share Posted August 3, 2016 But I thought this staff was lying through their teeth about fitting the offense around the players and never let Tommy run? That's an impressive amount of hyperbole you've got going on there. Quote Link to comment
Landlord Posted August 4, 2016 Share Posted August 4, 2016 But I thought this staff was lying through their teeth about fitting the offense around the players and never let Tommy run? That's an impressive amount of hyperbole you've got going on there. Hyperbole, sure, but I've seen dozens of times over the last 9 months where posters have criticized Langsdorf for not calling the offense to Tommy's strength. For being a pure, pro-style west coast kind of guy, getting within the ballpark of Tommy's rushing numbers from 2014 is to be commended, and is pretty definitive of a tailored offensive gameplan, I think. Quote Link to comment
Mavric Posted August 4, 2016 Author Share Posted August 4, 2016 But I thought this staff was lying through their teeth about fitting the offense around the players and never let Tommy run? That's an impressive amount of hyperbole you've got going on there. Hyperbole, sure, but I've seen dozens of times over the last 9 months where posters have criticized Langsdorf for not calling the offense to Tommy's strength. For being a pure, pro-style west coast kind of guy, getting within the ballpark of Tommy's rushing numbers from 2014 is to be commended, and is pretty definitive of a tailored offensive gameplan, I think. So you're going to focus on one cherry-picked stat that gives the appearance of being "within the ballpark" - which is actually a 27% reduction - and ignore the part where there was the 26% increase in pass attempts per game and a 33% increase in interceptions? I guess if that's how you have to try to make your point..... 1 Quote Link to comment
Landlord Posted August 4, 2016 Share Posted August 4, 2016 But I thought this staff was lying through their teeth about fitting the offense around the players and never let Tommy run? That's an impressive amount of hyperbole you've got going on there. Hyperbole, sure, but I've seen dozens of times over the last 9 months where posters have criticized Langsdorf for not calling the offense to Tommy's strength. For being a pure, pro-style west coast kind of guy, getting within the ballpark of Tommy's rushing numbers from 2014 is to be commended, and is pretty definitive of a tailored offensive gameplan, I think. So you're going to focus on one cherry-picked stat that gives the appearance of being "within the ballpark" - which is actually a 27% reduction - and ignore the part where there was the 26% increase in pass attempts per game and a 33% increase in interceptions? I guess if that's how you have to try to make your point..... If the assertion that Langsdorf and Riley didn't adapt the offense to our players was true, then Tommy would have ended the season "within the ballpark" of zero rushing yards. Most Riley quarterbacks had negative yards on the seasons. All I'm doing is giving credit to the staff for working towards it, and pointing out that they weren't lying, like some here have claimed. No, Langsdorf didn't run Tim Beck's offense (not that we liked him anyways, am I rite?), but he definitely stretched himself out of his past ideal sweet spot as far as the quarterback run game goes. I'm not focusing on one cherry-picked stat - the stat was referenced by your post, and I see it as evidence of a claim I've made consistently since last season. 2 Quote Link to comment
It'sNotAFakeID Posted August 4, 2016 Share Posted August 4, 2016 Is 3 fewer carries per game and 305 fewer yards, which is almost half of his yardage total from 2014 in the ballpark? EDIT: The above was already addressed it looks like. I can't put too much blame for the coaching staff's hesitation for limiting Tommy's rushing attempt: there was nobody behind Tommy last year. You saw what happened when we didn't have Tommy (Purdue). It's risky running Tommy in that situation, and I think he ran it as much as he did in the bowl game because it was the bowl game. This year should be a little different. Quote Link to comment
Landlord Posted August 4, 2016 Share Posted August 4, 2016 Is 3 fewer carries per game and 305 fewer yards, which is almost half of his yardage total from 2014 in the ballpark? Maybe not. But would Eli Manning have had 400 yards rushing last season? That's all I'm saying. Quote Link to comment
It'sNotAFakeID Posted August 4, 2016 Share Posted August 4, 2016 Is 3 fewer carries per game and 305 fewer yards, which is almost half of his yardage total from 2014 in the ballpark? Maybe not. But would Eli Manning have had 400 yards rushing last season? That's all I'm saying. No, and you're right: Riley and Langsdorf did partly adapt their offense to the QB, there is no denying that. It's just that it wasn't as much of an adaptation as some fans wanted, especially coming from a staff who had Tommy run it more--to a larger degree of success. Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.