Running

[Undone]

cm - you asked me to point to an example of someone saying Wisconsin's offense is potent. I then quoted you saying it.

 

The reason you don't get banned for trolling is because you are one of the best we've ever seen. You stop shy of saying anything inflammatory; that allows you to stay around.

 

But I know your one and only purpose here is not to discuss Husker football. It's to troll people to piss them off.

Fortunately, there's the 'Ignore' feature.

[Mavric]

again, never stated you said or didn't say anything about inside runs - that's you making up stuff and then saying that i'm the one doing it. I just used both inside/outside runs to show that neither was that great. If you think an average of 3.4 yards per carry is going to get you the W then so be it (seems to prove my point about - being tough yards around the line of scrimmage). If you take out your 5 chunk plays and assuming there were no more that were 9+ yards then our running stats were sitting around 2.4 per carry. Pretty hard to move the chains when 39 of your run plays averaged 2.4 yards.

So what was the point of your comment about "never running inside"?

 

Yes, if you try to ignore the good plays, what you are left with is less than good plays. For the third time, the reason there aren't a lot of examples is because there weren't many of those plays being called. Until you prove otherwise, you have no argument.

 

So far most of my research has been from what I observed from watching the game - not sure how that is much different then yours, besides going and finding 5 plays that seem to be cherry picked since you didn't even give one example of the opposite until you were called out on it. I will go back and watch the game again within the next day or two and will try to do some of "your level" of research.

You didn't call me on anything. I volunteered that information. I never said that every play we ran to the outside was successful. I guess you're trying to add that part. You were the one who said we weren't any more successful either place. But you don't provide anything to back that up.

 

In another thread you accused me of name calling and not once did I call you a name - just stated that you are showing your true colors. However ironically, about 3 post early you called me ignorant - It's funny, almost like you are having a dream, you do something and then instantly accuse me of doing what you just did. Not sure how I set you off but maybe if you take a deep breath and read what I said then type what you want to say and then proof it about 4 times you may get to something worth posting that we can discuss logically.

I did not call you ignorant. Try reading it again. I said you may be being "intentionally ignorant" - that is, ignoring things that you don't want to believe. Which you've pretty well shown to be the case.

[Mavric]

Fortunately for you, GBR, HuskerChalkTalk has done the research for you. Unfortunately, it's devastating to your case.

 

According to them, we ran Inside Zone 21 times and averaged 3.81 ypc.

 

We ran Outside Zone 6 times and averaged 5.6 ypc.

 

So on the zone play, we ran inside about 78% of the time. Even though the outside zone plays were nearly 50% more successful.

 

We also ran 5 of what they lumped into Power/Counter/Draw/Iso. I would consider those to generally be more inside runs - especailly Draws and Isos - but I give Counters a little more credit for having some misdirection involved and Draws are supposed to be deceptive but we don't seem to be very good at RB draws. They claim four of those plays were draws.

 

We also ran one Jet Sweep and the reverse to Westy.

 

So we had 8 outside runs and 26 inside runs or 76% inside run. Even if you shave the Power/Counter and move it to the outside column, that's over 73% inside.

 

So actually doing the research shows we ran inside about 75% of the time but had noticably more success running outside.

[Nebfanatic]

Fortunately for you, GBR, HuskerChalkTalk has done the research for you. Unfortunately, it's devastating to your case.

 

According to them, we ran Inside Zone 21 times and averaged 3.81 ypc.

 

We ran Outside Zone 6 times and averaged 5.6 ypc.

 

So on the zone play, we ran inside about 78% of the time. Even though the outside zone plays were nearly 50% more successful.

 

We also ran 5 of what they lumped into Power/Counter/Draw/Iso. I would consider those to generally be more inside runs - especailly Draws and Isos - but I give Counters a little more credit for having some misdirection involved and Draws are supposed to be deceptive but we don't seem to be very good at RB draws. They claim four of those plays were draws.

 

We also ran one Jet Sweep and the reverse to Westy.

 

So we had 8 outside runs and 26 inside runs or 76% inside run. Even if you shave the Power/Counter and move it to the outside column, that's over 73% inside.

 

So actually doing the research shows we ran inside about 75% of the time but had noticably more success running outside.

you missed the slice play and bluff plays on the inside run count and some of those other outside runs would have brought down the YPC which was closer to 30% more successfull than 50%. All in all we had a little more success outside but I wouldn't say a huge amount and you could argue the inside plays were needed for the outside runs to work.

 

That being said we did have a few nice gains on some outside runs as you pointed out and while some others didn't have success, odds are running it 5-7 more times outside would have resulted in probably 2-4 runs of 5 or more yards.

[Mavric]

Put another way, they charted Inside Zone as 21 carries for 80 yards.

 

At the pace we were on, had we run Outside Zone 21 times, we would have gained 117 yards.

 

That seems significantly more successful.

[Nebfanatic]

 

 

 

Fortunately for you, GBR, HuskerChalkTalk has done the research for you. Unfortunately, it's devastating to your case.

 

According to them, we ran Inside Zone 21 times and averaged 3.81 ypc.

 

We ran Outside Zone 6 times and averaged 5.6 ypc.

 

So on the zone play, we ran inside about 78% of the time. Even though the outside zone plays were nearly 50% more successful.

 

We also ran 5 of what they lumped into Power/Counter/Draw/Iso. I would consider those to generally be more inside runs - especailly Draws and Isos - but I give Counters a little more credit for having some misdirection involved and Draws are supposed to be deceptive but we don't seem to be very good at RB draws. They claim four of those plays were draws.

 

We also ran one Jet Sweep and the reverse to Westy.

 

So we had 8 outside runs and 26 inside runs or 76% inside run. Even if you shave the Power/Counter and move it to the outside column, that's over 73% inside.

 

So actually doing the research shows we ran inside about 75% of the time but had noticably more success running outside.

you missed the slice play and bluff plays on the inside run count and some of those other outside runs would have brought down the YPC which was closer to 30% more successfull than 50%. All in all we had a little more success outside but I wouldn't say a huge amount and you could argue the inside plays were needed for the outside runs to work.

 

That being said we did have a few nice gains on some outside runs as you pointed out and while some others didn't have success, odds are running it 5-7 more times outside would have resulted in probably 2-4 runs of 5 or more yards.

They have the Slice and Bluff as Inside Zone plays. You can argue with them if you like.

completely misinterpreted how it was broken down I apologize

[Mavric]

 

Fortunately for you, GBR, HuskerChalkTalk has done the research for you. Unfortunately, it's devastating to your case.

 

According to them, we ran Inside Zone 21 times and averaged 3.81 ypc.

 

We ran Outside Zone 6 times and averaged 5.6 ypc.

 

So on the zone play, we ran inside about 78% of the time. Even though the outside zone plays were nearly 50% more successful.

 

We also ran 5 of what they lumped into Power/Counter/Draw/Iso. I would consider those to generally be more inside runs - especailly Draws and Isos - but I give Counters a little more credit for having some misdirection involved and Draws are supposed to be deceptive but we don't seem to be very good at RB draws. They claim four of those plays were draws.

 

We also ran one Jet Sweep and the reverse to Westy.

 

So we had 8 outside runs and 26 inside runs or 76% inside run. Even if you shave the Power/Counter and move it to the outside column, that's over 73% inside.

 

So actually doing the research shows we ran inside about 75% of the time but had noticably more success running outside.

you missed the slice play and bluff plays on the inside run count and some of those other outside runs would have brought down the YPC which was closer to 30% more successfull than 50%. All in all we had a little more success outside but I wouldn't say a huge amount and you could argue the inside plays were needed for the outside runs to work.

 

That being said we did have a few nice gains on some outside runs as you pointed out and while some others didn't have success, odds are running it 5-7 more times outside would have resulted in probably 2-4 runs of 5 or more yards.

 

 

What do you mean I missed them? I just went with what that article had. They had the Slice and Bluff included in the Inside Zone categories which is where I listed them.

 

The main numbers I compared were the Inside and Outside zone plays because those are plays to the RBs. I included the other plays in how many we ran but they didn't always exact yardages so I didn't include them in the yardage calculations.

 

And if you're going to nit-pick, I didn't really care for either of the receiver runs we ran. I honestly can't remember if DPE has ever been successful on the Jet Sweep. Reilly and Moore have done well but not DPE. I have no idea why but it really not that great to call that play to him at this point. And I really have no idea why we ran the reverse to Westy. I love him as a receiver but he's not very fast. Moore or Reilly are much better options. So yes we didn't have much success on those plays. But those are also pretty questionable personnel choices if you're going to throw a curve ball.

 

And it's nice of you to assume that the things went well would get worse if we did them more. But that's pretty self-serving. Newby could also have broken a 60 yard touchdown as he's done in other games. But that wouldn't fit your narrative.

[Mavric]

 

 

 

Fortunately for you, GBR, HuskerChalkTalk has done the research for you. Unfortunately, it's devastating to your case.

 

According to them, we ran Inside Zone 21 times and averaged 3.81 ypc.

 

We ran Outside Zone 6 times and averaged 5.6 ypc.

 

So on the zone play, we ran inside about 78% of the time. Even though the outside zone plays were nearly 50% more successful.

 

We also ran 5 of what they lumped into Power/Counter/Draw/Iso. I would consider those to generally be more inside runs - especailly Draws and Isos - but I give Counters a little more credit for having some misdirection involved and Draws are supposed to be deceptive but we don't seem to be very good at RB draws. They claim four of those plays were draws.

 

We also ran one Jet Sweep and the reverse to Westy.

 

So we had 8 outside runs and 26 inside runs or 76% inside run. Even if you shave the Power/Counter and move it to the outside column, that's over 73% inside.

 

So actually doing the research shows we ran inside about 75% of the time but had noticably more success running outside.

you missed the slice play and bluff plays on the inside run count and some of those other outside runs would have brought down the YPC which was closer to 30% more successfull than 50%. All in all we had a little more success outside but I wouldn't say a huge amount and you could argue the inside plays were needed for the outside runs to work.

 

That being said we did have a few nice gains on some outside runs as you pointed out and while some others didn't have success, odds are running it 5-7 more times outside would have resulted in probably 2-4 runs of 5 or more yards.

They have the Slice and Bluff as Inside Zone plays. You can argue with them if you like.

completely misinterpreted how it was broken down I apologize

 

 

I deleted this original response because I thought I mis-read your statement. You can ignore my first comment in my previous post.

[Nebfanatic]

 

 

 

 

 

Fortunately for you, GBR, HuskerChalkTalk has done the research for you. Unfortunately, it's devastating to your case.

 

According to them, we ran Inside Zone 21 times and averaged 3.81 ypc.

 

We ran Outside Zone 6 times and averaged 5.6 ypc.

 

So on the zone play, we ran inside about 78% of the time. Even though the outside zone plays were nearly 50% more successful.

 

We also ran 5 of what they lumped into Power/Counter/Draw/Iso. I would consider those to generally be more inside runs - especailly Draws and Isos - but I give Counters a little more credit for having some misdirection involved and Draws are supposed to be deceptive but we don't seem to be very good at RB draws. They claim four of those plays were draws.

 

We also ran one Jet Sweep and the reverse to Westy.

 

So we had 8 outside runs and 26 inside runs or 76% inside run. Even if you shave the Power/Counter and move it to the outside column, that's over 73% inside.

 

So actually doing the research shows we ran inside about 75% of the time but had noticably more success running outside.

you missed the slice play and bluff plays on the inside run count and some of those other outside runs would have brought down the YPC which was closer to 30% more successfull than 50%. All in all we had a little more success outside but I wouldn't say a huge amount and you could argue the inside plays were needed for the outside runs to work.

 

That being said we did have a few nice gains on some outside runs as you pointed out and while some others didn't have success, odds are running it 5-7 more times outside would have resulted in probably 2-4 runs of 5 or more yards.

They have the Slice and Bluff as Inside Zone plays. You can argue with them if you like.

completely misinterpreted how it was broken down I apologize

I deleted this original response because I thought I mis-read your statement. You can ignore my first comment in my previous post.

I pretty much agree with you. I dont mind running inside as much as we do if we were a bigger threat in the pass game. Even still I'd much prefer closer to 15 outside runs than 5

[lo country]

Put another way, they charted Inside Zone as 21 carries for 80 yards.

 

At the pace we were on, had we run Outside Zone 21 times, we would have gained 117 yards.

 

That seems significantly more successful.