OWH Pick Six Podcast 4/18 - Spring Observations

[Nebfanatic]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

the only thing i will say about the run game is that you are also going to see a lot of bubble screens and tunnel screens that while they are technically "passes" are just an extension of the run game. People I think tend to get obsessed with handing the ball to the RB out of the backfield and look at the pure rushing numbers rather than seeing that we will be running a lot of quick passes and screens in addition to the traditional runs in order to achieve the same thing.

Yes, there will be more screen plays called, but every report I saw said that the team and o-line really struggled in the screen game.

 

I agree that focusing on an arbitrary number for the run game production isn't the best thing to do, but I don't think it's far-fetched to believe that the team needs to be able to run the ball successfully to have a successful season. If the success of the offense depends too much on the right arm of Tanner Lee, the offense may not be as successful as we would like.

It is no different than the offense being dependent on TA being effective running the ball. As we saw after he was hurt he was not worth a crap because he couldn't move and he couldn't throw the ball so that really hurt the production.

Yes, you are correct. But that's the exact point that Sam is trying to make. If the team can't run the ball effectively using the RB's (or WR in jet sweep) than the offense could struggle. If the team can only average 125 YPG running, it puts a lot of pressure on Lee to be "great".

Sure possibly, but it is possible that a good passing game can open up the run. Throwing the ball at a 65% clip is going to loosen up the defense and allow for more running lanes. Teams dared Nebraska to throw last year, because they were only a 50% passing team. They loaded the box and dared TA to beat them with his arm which he couldn't do.

I don't buy the premise of the passing game opening up the run. Also, the QB run game takes away a defender to stop the RB run game, just like a quality passing game does.

 

There is no sense going around and around on this. We each have our opinions. Sam has questions and concerns about the offense, and I think they are viable concerns. I think a lot of fans are saying "The offense will be fine with a new QB" and I don't think it's that easy to say.

Well you should buy the premise the pass can open up the run because alot of successful offenses were built on that premise

Not really, almost all coaches would rather hand the ball off all game if they could get 5-6 yards a carry. Most pass a lot becuase they can't run a lot. Coaches want to win and they want to win with the easiest and safest method possible.

Yes the great Bill Walsh was an idiot

Yeah...they never ran the ball.

 

But like I said they want to win the easiest way possible and Montana to Rice is pretty easy.

Never ran the ball? Learn your history man in '87 Bill's second to last year they ran the ball nearly 100 more times than they attempted to pass it that season. The pass can set up the run and if you try and argue otherwise I will bury you with stats from successful offenses that did just that.

[teachercd]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

the only thing i will say about the run game is that you are also going to see a lot of bubble screens and tunnel screens that while they are technically "passes" are just an extension of the run game. People I think tend to get obsessed with handing the ball to the RB out of the backfield and look at the pure rushing numbers rather than seeing that we will be running a lot of quick passes and screens in addition to the traditional runs in order to achieve the same thing.

Yes, there will be more screen plays called, but every report I saw said that the team and o-line really struggled in the screen game.

 

I agree that focusing on an arbitrary number for the run game production isn't the best thing to do, but I don't think it's far-fetched to believe that the team needs to be able to run the ball successfully to have a successful season. If the success of the offense depends too much on the right arm of Tanner Lee, the offense may not be as successful as we would like.

It is no different than the offense being dependent on TA being effective running the ball. As we saw after he was hurt he was not worth a crap because he couldn't move and he couldn't throw the ball so that really hurt the production.

Yes, you are correct. But that's the exact point that Sam is trying to make. If the team can't run the ball effectively using the RB's (or WR in jet sweep) than the offense could struggle. If the team can only average 125 YPG running, it puts a lot of pressure on Lee to be "great".

Sure possibly, but it is possible that a good passing game can open up the run. Throwing the ball at a 65% clip is going to loosen up the defense and allow for more running lanes. Teams dared Nebraska to throw last year, because they were only a 50% passing team. They loaded the box and dared TA to beat them with his arm which he couldn't do.

I don't buy the premise of the passing game opening up the run. Also, the QB run game takes away a defender to stop the RB run game, just like a quality passing game does.

 

There is no sense going around and around on this. We each have our opinions. Sam has questions and concerns about the offense, and I think they are viable concerns. I think a lot of fans are saying "The offense will be fine with a new QB" and I don't think it's that easy to say.

Well you should buy the premise the pass can open up the run because alot of successful offenses were built on that premise

Not really, almost all coaches would rather hand the ball off all game if they could get 5-6 yards a carry. Most pass a lot becuase they can't run a lot. Coaches want to win and they want to win with the easiest and safest method possible.

Yes the great Bill Walsh was an idiot

Yeah...they never ran the ball.

But like I said they want to win the easiest way possible and Montana to Rice is pretty easy.

Never ran the ball? Learn your history man in '87 Bill's second to last year they ran the ball nearly 100 more times than they attempted to pass it that season. The pass can set up the run and if you try and argue otherwise I will bury you with stats from successful offenses that did just that.

That was me being sarcastic. They ran the ball a ton. Riley will not be able too.

You can bury me if you want...I don't care and neither do you. It's a message board

[Nebfanatic]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

the only thing i will say about the run game is that you are also going to see a lot of bubble screens and tunnel screens that while they are technically "passes" are just an extension of the run game. People I think tend to get obsessed with handing the ball to the RB out of the backfield and look at the pure rushing numbers rather than seeing that we will be running a lot of quick passes and screens in addition to the traditional runs in order to achieve the same thing.

Yes, there will be more screen plays called, but every report I saw said that the team and o-line really struggled in the screen game.

 

I agree that focusing on an arbitrary number for the run game production isn't the best thing to do, but I don't think it's far-fetched to believe that the team needs to be able to run the ball successfully to have a successful season. If the success of the offense depends too much on the right arm of Tanner Lee, the offense may not be as successful as we would like.

It is no different than the offense being dependent on TA being effective running the ball. As we saw after he was hurt he was not worth a crap because he couldn't move and he couldn't throw the ball so that really hurt the production.

Yes, you are correct. But that's the exact point that Sam is trying to make. If the team can't run the ball effectively using the RB's (or WR in jet sweep) than the offense could struggle. If the team can only average 125 YPG running, it puts a lot of pressure on Lee to be "great".

Sure possibly, but it is possible that a good passing game can open up the run. Throwing the ball at a 65% clip is going to loosen up the defense and allow for more running lanes. Teams dared Nebraska to throw last year, because they were only a 50% passing team. They loaded the box and dared TA to beat them with his arm which he couldn't do.

I don't buy the premise of the passing game opening up the run. Also, the QB run game takes away a defender to stop the RB run game, just like a quality passing game does.

 

There is no sense going around and around on this. We each have our opinions. Sam has questions and concerns about the offense, and I think they are viable concerns. I think a lot of fans are saying "The offense will be fine with a new QB" and I don't think it's that easy to say.

Well you should buy the premise the pass can open up the run because alot of successful offenses were built on that premise

Not really, almost all coaches would rather hand the ball off all game if they could get 5-6 yards a carry. Most pass a lot becuase they can't run a lot. Coaches want to win and they want to win with the easiest and safest method possible.

Yes the great Bill Walsh was an idiot

Yeah...they never ran the ball.

But like I said they want to win the easiest way possible and Montana to Rice is pretty easy.

Never ran the ball? Learn your history man in '87 Bill's second to last year they ran the ball nearly 100 more times than they attempted to pass it that season. The pass can set up the run and if you try and argue otherwise I will bury you with stats from successful offenses that did just that.

That was me being sarcastic. They ran the ball a ton. Riley will not be able too.

You can bury me if you want...I don't care and neither do you. It's a message board

you weren't being sarcastic come on now lol just because I proved you wrong doesnt mean you can pretend you dodged the uppercut. Riley will run the ball and the run game will be aided by a dangerous passing game, facts.

 

 

Even if you were being sarcastic it doesn't help your cause. Bill Walsh invented setting up the run with the pass which is the point I was trying to make.

[teachercd]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

the only thing i will say about the run game is that you are also going to see a lot of bubble screens and tunnel screens that while they are technically "passes" are just an extension of the run game. People I think tend to get obsessed with handing the ball to the RB out of the backfield and look at the pure rushing numbers rather than seeing that we will be running a lot of quick passes and screens in addition to the traditional runs in order to achieve the same thing.

Yes, there will be more screen plays called, but every report I saw said that the team and o-line really struggled in the screen game.

 

I agree that focusing on an arbitrary number for the run game production isn't the best thing to do, but I don't think it's far-fetched to believe that the team needs to be able to run the ball successfully to have a successful season. If the success of the offense depends too much on the right arm of Tanner Lee, the offense may not be as successful as we would like.

It is no different than the offense being dependent on TA being effective running the ball. As we saw after he was hurt he was not worth a crap because he couldn't move and he couldn't throw the ball so that really hurt the production.

Yes, you are correct. But that's the exact point that Sam is trying to make. If the team can't run the ball effectively using the RB's (or WR in jet sweep) than the offense could struggle. If the team can only average 125 YPG running, it puts a lot of pressure on Lee to be "great".

Sure possibly, but it is possible that a good passing game can open up the run. Throwing the ball at a 65% clip is going to loosen up the defense and allow for more running lanes. Teams dared Nebraska to throw last year, because they were only a 50% passing team. They loaded the box and dared TA to beat them with his arm which he couldn't do.

I don't buy the premise of the passing game opening up the run. Also, the QB run game takes away a defender to stop the RB run game, just like a quality passing game does.

 

There is no sense going around and around on this. We each have our opinions. Sam has questions and concerns about the offense, and I think they are viable concerns. I think a lot of fans are saying "The offense will be fine with a new QB" and I don't think it's that easy to say.

Well you should buy the premise the pass can open up the run because alot of successful offenses were built on that premise

Not really, almost all coaches would rather hand the ball off all game if they could get 5-6 yards a carry. Most pass a lot becuase they can't run a lot. Coaches want to win and they want to win with the easiest and safest method possible.

Yes the great Bill Walsh was an idiot

Yeah...they never ran the ball.

But like I said they want to win the easiest way possible and Montana to Rice is pretty easy.

Never ran the ball? Learn your history man in '87 Bill's second to last year they ran the ball nearly 100 more times than they attempted to pass it that season. The pass can set up the run and if you try and argue otherwise I will bury you with stats from successful offenses that did just that.

That was me being sarcastic. They ran the ball a ton. Riley will not be able too.

You can bury me if you want...I don't care and neither do you. It's a message board

you weren't being sarcastic come on now lol just because I proved you wrong doesnt mean you can pretend you dodged the uppercut. Riley will run the ball and the run game will be aided by a dangerous passing game, facts.

Even if you were being sarcastic it doesn't help your cause. Bill Walsh invented setting up the run with the pass which is the point I was trying to make.

I was...good lord they had Roger Craig...

 

The Huskers won't average over 125 yards rushing this year. And I'm guessing fewer than 30 attempts a game at running

[Nebfanatic]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

the only thing i will say about the run game is that you are also going to see a lot of bubble screens and tunnel screens that while they are technically "passes" are just an extension of the run game. People I think tend to get obsessed with handing the ball to the RB out of the backfield and look at the pure rushing numbers rather than seeing that we will be running a lot of quick passes and screens in addition to the traditional runs in order to achieve the same thing.

Yes, there will be more screen plays called, but every report I saw said that the team and o-line really struggled in the screen game.

 

I agree that focusing on an arbitrary number for the run game production isn't the best thing to do, but I don't think it's far-fetched to believe that the team needs to be able to run the ball successfully to have a successful season. If the success of the offense depends too much on the right arm of Tanner Lee, the offense may not be as successful as we would like.

It is no different than the offense being dependent on TA being effective running the ball. As we saw after he was hurt he was not worth a crap because he couldn't move and he couldn't throw the ball so that really hurt the production.

Yes, you are correct. But that's the exact point that Sam is trying to make. If the team can't run the ball effectively using the RB's (or WR in jet sweep) than the offense could struggle. If the team can only average 125 YPG running, it puts a lot of pressure on Lee to be "great".

Sure possibly, but it is possible that a good passing game can open up the run. Throwing the ball at a 65% clip is going to loosen up the defense and allow for more running lanes. Teams dared Nebraska to throw last year, because they were only a 50% passing team. They loaded the box and dared TA to beat them with his arm which he couldn't do.

I don't buy the premise of the passing game opening up the run. Also, the QB run game takes away a defender to stop the RB run game, just like a quality passing game does.

 

There is no sense going around and around on this. We each have our opinions. Sam has questions and concerns about the offense, and I think they are viable concerns. I think a lot of fans are saying "The offense will be fine with a new QB" and I don't think it's that easy to say.

Well you should buy the premise the pass can open up the run because alot of successful offenses were built on that premise

Not really, almost all coaches would rather hand the ball off all game if they could get 5-6 yards a carry. Most pass a lot becuase they can't run a lot. Coaches want to win and they want to win with the easiest and safest method possible.

Yes the great Bill Walsh was an idiot

Yeah...they never ran the ball.

But like I said they want to win the easiest way possible and Montana to Rice is pretty easy.

Never ran the ball? Learn your history man in '87 Bill's second to last year they ran the ball nearly 100 more times than they attempted to pass it that season. The pass can set up the run and if you try and argue otherwise I will bury you with stats from successful offenses that did just that.

That was me being sarcastic. They ran the ball a ton. Riley will not be able too.

You can bury me if you want...I don't care and neither do you. It's a message board

you weren't being sarcastic come on now lol just because I proved you wrong doesnt mean you can pretend you dodged the uppercut. Riley will run the ball and the run game will be aided by a dangerous passing game, facts.

Even if you were being sarcastic it doesn't help your cause. Bill Walsh invented setting up the run with the pass which is the point I was trying to make.

I was...good lord they had Roger Craig...

 

The Huskers won't average over 125 yards rushing this year. And I'm guessing fewer than 30 attempts a game at running

Ok so we agree, the pass is an effective method to set up the running game as proven by the '87 49ers and many a team since.

 

Had to redirect back to my original point since you moved the goalposts across the field

[teachercd]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

the only thing i will say about the run game is that you are also going to see a lot of bubble screens and tunnel screens that while they are technically "passes" are just an extension of the run game. People I think tend to get obsessed with handing the ball to the RB out of the backfield and look at the pure rushing numbers rather than seeing that we will be running a lot of quick passes and screens in addition to the traditional runs in order to achieve the same thing.

Yes, there will be more screen plays called, but every report I saw said that the team and o-line really struggled in the screen game.

 

I agree that focusing on an arbitrary number for the run game production isn't the best thing to do, but I don't think it's far-fetched to believe that the team needs to be able to run the ball successfully to have a successful season. If the success of the offense depends too much on the right arm of Tanner Lee, the offense may not be as successful as we would like.

It is no different than the offense being dependent on TA being effective running the ball. As we saw after he was hurt he was not worth a crap because he couldn't move and he couldn't throw the ball so that really hurt the production.

Yes, you are correct. But that's the exact point that Sam is trying to make. If the team can't run the ball effectively using the RB's (or WR in jet sweep) than the offense could struggle. If the team can only average 125 YPG running, it puts a lot of pressure on Lee to be "great".

Sure possibly, but it is possible that a good passing game can open up the run. Throwing the ball at a 65% clip is going to loosen up the defense and allow for more running lanes. Teams dared Nebraska to throw last year, because they were only a 50% passing team. They loaded the box and dared TA to beat them with his arm which he couldn't do.

I don't buy the premise of the passing game opening up the run. Also, the QB run game takes away a defender to stop the RB run game, just like a quality passing game does.

 

There is no sense going around and around on this. We each have our opinions. Sam has questions and concerns about the offense, and I think they are viable concerns. I think a lot of fans are saying "The offense will be fine with a new QB" and I don't think it's that easy to say.

Well you should buy the premise the pass can open up the run because alot of successful offenses were built on that premise

Not really, almost all coaches would rather hand the ball off all game if they could get 5-6 yards a carry. Most pass a lot becuase they can't run a lot. Coaches want to win and they want to win with the easiest and safest method possible.

Yes the great Bill Walsh was an idiot

Yeah...they never ran the ball.

But like I said they want to win the easiest way possible and Montana to Rice is pretty easy.

Never ran the ball? Learn your history man in '87 Bill's second to last year they ran the ball nearly 100 more times than they attempted to pass it that season. The pass can set up the run and if you try and argue otherwise I will bury you with stats from successful offenses that did just that.

That was me being sarcastic. They ran the ball a ton. Riley will not be able too.

You can bury me if you want...I don't care and neither do you. It's a message board

you weren't being sarcastic come on now lol just because I proved you wrong doesnt mean you can pretend you dodged the uppercut. Riley will run the ball and the run game will be aided by a dangerous passing game, facts.

Even if you were being sarcastic it doesn't help your cause. Bill Walsh invented setting up the run with the pass which is the point I was trying to make.

I was...good lord they had Roger Craig...

The Huskers won't average over 125 yards rushing this year. And I'm guessing fewer than 30 attempts a game at running

Ok so we agree, the pass is an effective method to set up the running game as proven by the '87 49ers and many a team since.

Yep

[ColoradoHusk]

It's interesting that the '87 49ers suffered one of the biggest upsets in NFL playoff history when they lost in the Divisional round to the Minnesota Vikings.

 

The vaunted run game got only 17 yards from Roger Craig. Joe Montana was 12 of 26 for 109 yards, 0 TD's, and a Pick 6. Montana was benched in favor of Steve Young, who was 12 of 17 for 158 yards AND had 72 yards rushing and a TD.

[Nebfanatic]

Ok well what about all the times they won a super bowl? Still running the pass first run off of the pass West Coast philosophy. You can not buy into that all you want but it works too. Power run isn't the only way. I picked the 87 season but I could have picked any of them during his tenure I just quickly was skimming stats.

[teachercd]

It's interesting that the '87 49ers suffered one of the biggest upsets in NFL playoff history when they lost in the Divisional round to the Minnesota Vikings.

 

The vaunted run game got only 17 yards from Roger Craig. Joe Montana was 12 of 26 for 109 yards, 0 TD's, and a Pick 6. Montana was benched in favor of Steve Young, who was 12 of 17 for 158 yards AND had 72 yards rushing and a TD.

Wait...the QB ran???? And when he was able to run the passing game got better?

[Elf]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

the only thing i will say about the run game is that you are also going to see a lot of bubble screens and tunnel screens that while they are technically "passes" are just an extension of the run game. People I think tend to get obsessed with handing the ball to the RB out of the backfield and look at the pure rushing numbers rather than seeing that we will be running a lot of quick passes and screens in addition to the traditional runs in order to achieve the same thing.

Yes, there will be more screen plays called, but every report I saw said that the team and o-line really struggled in the screen game.

 

I agree that focusing on an arbitrary number for the run game production isn't the best thing to do, but I don't think it's far-fetched to believe that the team needs to be able to run the ball successfully to have a successful season. If the success of the offense depends too much on the right arm of Tanner Lee, the offense may not be as successful as we would like.

 

It is no different than the offense being dependent on TA being effective running the ball. As we saw after he was hurt he was not worth a crap because he couldn't move and he couldn't throw the ball so that really hurt the production.

 

Yes, you are correct. But that's the exact point that Sam is trying to make. If the team can't run the ball effectively using the RB's (or WR in jet sweep) than the offense could struggle. If the team can only average 125 YPG running, it puts a lot of pressure on Lee to be "great".

 

Sure possibly, but it is possible that a good passing game can open up the run. Throwing the ball at a 65% clip is going to loosen up the defense and allow for more running lanes. Teams dared Nebraska to throw last year, because they were only a 50% passing team. They loaded the box and dared TA to beat them with his arm which he couldn't do.

 

I don't buy the premise of the passing game opening up the run. Also, the QB run game takes away a defender to stop the RB run game, just like a quality passing game does.

 

There is no sense going around and around on this. We each have our opinions. Sam has questions and concerns about the offense, and I think they are viable concerns. I think a lot of fans are saying "The offense will be fine with a new QB" and I don't think it's that easy to say.

 

Well you should buy the premise the pass can open up the run because alot of successful offenses were built on that premise

 

Not really, almost all coaches would rather hand the ball off all game if they could get 5-6 yards a carry. Most pass a lot becuase they can't run a lot. Coaches want to win and they want to win with the easiest and safest method possible.

 

Yes the great Bill Walsh was an idiot

 

Yeah...they never ran the ball.

But like I said they want to win the easiest way possible and Montana to Rice is pretty easy.

 

Never ran the ball? Learn your history man in '87 Bill's second to last year they ran the ball nearly 100 more times than they attempted to pass it that season. The pass can set up the run and if you try and argue otherwise I will bury you with stats from successful offenses that did just that.

 

That was me being sarcastic. They ran the ball a ton. Riley will not be able too.

You can bury me if you want...I don't care and neither do you. It's a message board

 

At least you're not still calling it a "post board".

[Nebfanatic]

Be thick, go right ahead but this is what we are going to do. It doesn't mean we will pass more than we run necessarily. It is effective and has been proven by many many offenses. So you guys can bash on that philosophy all you want to because clearly nothing good said about it will get through.

[Elf]

 

It's interesting that the '87 49ers suffered one of the biggest upsets in NFL playoff history when they lost in the Divisional round to the Minnesota Vikings.

 

The vaunted run game got only 17 yards from Roger Craig. Joe Montana was 12 of 26 for 109 yards, 0 TD's, and a Pick 6. Montana was benched in favor of Steve Young, who was 12 of 17 for 158 yards AND had 72 yards rushing and a TD.

Wait...the QB ran???? And when he was able to run the passing game got better?

 

No, Montana was just having a really bad day. And Steve Young was a pretty darn good runner in his own right.

[GBRFAN]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

the only thing i will say about the run game is that you are also going to see a lot of bubble screens and tunnel screens that while they are technically "passes" are just an extension of the run game. People I think tend to get obsessed with handing the ball to the RB out of the backfield and look at the pure rushing numbers rather than seeing that we will be running a lot of quick passes and screens in addition to the traditional runs in order to achieve the same thing.

Yes, there will be more screen plays called, but every report I saw said that the team and o-line really struggled in the screen game.

 

I agree that focusing on an arbitrary number for the run game production isn't the best thing to do, but I don't think it's far-fetched to believe that the team needs to be able to run the ball successfully to have a successful season. If the success of the offense depends too much on the right arm of Tanner Lee, the offense may not be as successful as we would like.

It is no different than the offense being dependent on TA being effective running the ball. As we saw after he was hurt he was not worth a crap because he couldn't move and he couldn't throw the ball so that really hurt the production.

Yes, you are correct. But that's the exact point that Sam is trying to make. If the team can't run the ball effectively using the RB's (or WR in jet sweep) than the offense could struggle. If the team can only average 125 YPG running, it puts a lot of pressure on Lee to be "great".

Sure possibly, but it is possible that a good passing game can open up the run. Throwing the ball at a 65% clip is going to loosen up the defense and allow for more running lanes. Teams dared Nebraska to throw last year, because they were only a 50% passing team. They loaded the box and dared TA to beat them with his arm which he couldn't do.

I don't buy the premise of the passing game opening up the run. Also, the QB run game takes away a defender to stop the RB run game, just like a quality passing game does.

 

There is no sense going around and around on this. We each have our opinions. Sam has questions and concerns about the offense, and I think they are viable concerns. I think a lot of fans are saying "The offense will be fine with a new QB" and I don't think it's that easy to say.

Well you should buy the premise the pass can open up the run because alot of successful offenses were built on that premise

Not really, almost all coaches would rather hand the ball off all game if they could get 5-6 yards a carry. Most pass a lot becuase they can't run a lot. Coaches want to win and they want to win with the easiest and safest method possible.

 

 

Actually 100% of coaches would run the ball EVERY play if it worked - because it is the play that has the least amount of risk. However this has nothing to do with the post that you are replying to. that post stated that an effective passing game opens up the run - which is 100% true. Every coach dreams of having 5 lineman that can laugh at the defense saying they are going to run the ball and do it with ease - currently 0% of the teams in the nation are in that position. If you don't have the strength to do that then taking some risk is required.

[teachercd]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

the only thing i will say about the run game is that you are also going to see a lot of bubble screens and tunnel screens that while they are technically "passes" are just an extension of the run game. People I think tend to get obsessed with handing the ball to the RB out of the backfield and look at the pure rushing numbers rather than seeing that we will be running a lot of quick passes and screens in addition to the traditional runs in order to achieve the same thing.

Yes, there will be more screen plays called, but every report I saw said that the team and o-line really struggled in the screen game. I agree that focusing on an arbitrary number for the run game production isn't the best thing to do, but I don't think it's far-fetched to believe that the team needs to be able to run the ball successfully to have a successful season. If the success of the offense depends too much on the right arm of Tanner Lee, the offense may not be as successful as we would like.

It is no different than the offense being dependent on TA being effective running the ball. As we saw after he was hurt he was not worth a crap because he couldn't move and he couldn't throw the ball so that really hurt the production.

Yes, you are correct. But that's the exact point that Sam is trying to make. If the team can't run the ball effectively using the RB's (or WR in jet sweep) than the offense could struggle. If the team can only average 125 YPG running, it puts a lot of pressure on Lee to be "great".

Sure possibly, but it is possible that a good passing game can open up the run. Throwing the ball at a 65% clip is going to loosen up the defense and allow for more running lanes. Teams dared Nebraska to throw last year, because they were only a 50% passing team. They loaded the box and dared TA to beat them with his arm which he couldn't do.

I don't buy the premise of the passing game opening up the run. Also, the QB run game takes away a defender to stop the RB run game, just like a quality passing game does. There is no sense going around and around on this. We each have our opinions. Sam has questions and concerns about the offense, and I think they are viable concerns. I think a lot of fans are saying "The offense will be fine with a new QB" and I don't think it's that easy to say.

Well you should buy the premise the pass can open up the run because alot of successful offenses were built on that premise

Not really, almost all coaches would rather hand the ball off all game if they could get 5-6 yards a carry. Most pass a lot becuase they can't run a lot. Coaches want to win and they want to win with the easiest and safest method possible.

Yes the great Bill Walsh was an idiot

Yeah...they never ran the ball.But like I said they want to win the easiest way possible and Montana to Rice is pretty easy.

Never ran the ball? Learn your history man in '87 Bill's second to last year they ran the ball nearly 100 more times than they attempted to pass it that season. The pass can set up the run and if you try and argue otherwise I will bury you with stats from successful offenses that did just that.

That was me being sarcastic. They ran the ball a ton. Riley will not be able too.You can bury me if you want...I don't care and neither do you. It's a message board

At least you're not still calling it a "post board".

Dang it! Did I call it that?

[teachercd]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

the only thing i will say about the run game is that you are also going to see a lot of bubble screens and tunnel screens that while they are technically "passes" are just an extension of the run game. People I think tend to get obsessed with handing the ball to the RB out of the backfield and look at the pure rushing numbers rather than seeing that we will be running a lot of quick passes and screens in addition to the traditional runs in order to achieve the same thing.

 

Yes, there will be more screen plays called, but every report I saw said that the team and o-line really struggled in the screen game.

 

I agree that focusing on an arbitrary number for the run game production isn't the best thing to do, but I don't think it's far-fetched to believe that the team needs to be able to run the ball successfully to have a successful season. If the success of the offense depends too much on the right arm of Tanner Lee, the offense may not be as successful as we would like.

It is no different than the offense being dependent on TA being effective running the ball. As we saw after he was hurt he was not worth a crap because he couldn't move and he couldn't throw the ball so that really hurt the production.

Yes, you are correct. But that's the exact point that Sam is trying to make. If the team can't run the ball effectively using the RB's (or WR in jet sweep) than the offense could struggle. If the team can only average 125 YPG running, it puts a lot of pressure on Lee to be "great".

Sure possibly, but it is possible that a good passing game can open up the run. Throwing the ball at a 65% clip is going to loosen up the defense and allow for more running lanes. Teams dared Nebraska to throw last year, because they were only a 50% passing team. They loaded the box and dared TA to beat them with his arm which he couldn't do.

I don't buy the premise of the passing game opening up the run. Also, the QB run game takes away a defender to stop the RB run game, just like a quality passing game does.

 

There is no sense going around and around on this. We each have our opinions. Sam has questions and concerns about the offense, and I think they are viable concerns. I think a lot of fans are saying "The offense will be fine with a new QB" and I don't think it's that easy to say.

Well you should buy the premise the pass can open up the run because alot of successful offenses were built on that premise

Not really, almost all coaches would rather hand the ball off all game if they could get 5-6 yards a carry. Most pass a lot becuase they can't run a lot. Coaches want to win and they want to win with the easiest and safest method possible.

Actually 100% of coaches would run the ball EVERY play if it worked - because it is the play that has the least amount of risk. However this has nothing to do with the post that you are replying to. that post stated that an effective passing game opens up the run - which is 100% true. Every coach dreams of having 5 lineman that can laugh at the defense saying they are going to run the ball and do it with ease - currently 0% of the teams in the nation are in that position. If you don't have the strength to do that then taking some risk is required.

it does