PDA

View Full Version : Pass to set up the run.


jmerog
10-13-2006, 12:03 AM
OK, let me first backup and clarify something. YEs, you do have to be able to run the ball in the NFL to succeed, and we need to work on that a lot.

But

you dont have to run to set up the pass. When the strength of the team is its recieving corps and its strong armed QB, you can pass to set up the run.

If we started the game with a long series of well scripted short passes with only a few runs, it would have a similer effect as a run game. In a game where one team is eating up large chunks of yardage on the ground, safeties come up to help and sometimes corners are faked out and the recievers come open because the other team is trying to stop the run.

Similerly, when a team can be successfull with short dink and dunk stuff for gains of 5 and 8 yards all the way up the field, then teams start playing closer to the lines. when they come up to stop it, the fast recievers burn them deep. when they try to cover the recievers deep- we gash them with 8 yard dinks. that eats clock almost like a run.

This week, to make the running game more effective,
we need to run a lot of short gain pass pass plays mixed with a few runs and then burn them deep. THis will keep them afraid of the pass and respecting the pass, which will open up the run game. Its much easier to run when the other team fears your pass.

I know many other have shared this opinion but i would like to hear more opinions and discussion on it. I know all of you guys have opinions.:)

texflex513
10-13-2006, 12:12 AM
Hey im for what ever it takes to move the ball down the field (although a legit run game is mouth watering:drool: ) and if defenses are gonna give it to us i say we (milk the cow.....boy lol). This is only a temp solution to a problem that needs to be solved ASAP in order for the O to be at full strength.

Ibar_Harry
10-13-2006, 12:40 AM
OK, let me first backup and clarify something. YEs, you do have to be able to run the ball in the NFL to succeed, and we need to work on that a lot.

But

you dont have to run to set up the pass. When the strength of the team is its recieving corps and its strong armed QB, you can pass to set up the run.

If we started the game with a long series of well scripted short passes with only a few runs, it would have a similer effect as a run game. In a game where one team is eating up large chunks of yardage on the ground, safeties come up to help and sometimes corners are faked out and the recievers come open because the other team is trying to stop the run.

Similerly, when a team can be successfull with short dink and dunk stuff for gains of 5 and 8 yards all the way up the field, then teams start playing closer to the lines. when they come up to stop it, the fast recievers burn them deep. when they try to cover the recievers deep- we gash them with 8 yard dinks. that eats clock almost like a run.

This week, to make the running game more effective,
we need to run a lot of short gain pass pass plays mixed with a few runs and then burn them deep. THis will keep them afraid of the pass and respecting the pass, which will open up the run game. Its much easier to run when the other team fears your pass.

I know many other have shared this opinion but i would like to hear more opinions and discussion on it. I know all of you guys have opinions.:)

Its amazing that you haven't been burned at the stake yet. I've been saying this until I'm blue in the face. That's exactly what the Montana, Walsh, Rice group did with the 49ers, but no one wants to listen. Kubiak has already stated we have to RUN, RUN, RUN, the ball and if he does he will be run out of the stadium. Our only chance is the passing game, but there are no guarrantees there either. Why get beat doing what you do poorly. Why not do what you do best and say at least I gave it my best shot.

ccdude730
10-13-2006, 12:51 AM
IMO with this particular offense, the run needs to be established first since this offense is based on PAs and bootlegs to be truly effective at moving the ball. im sure just throwing the ball the first couple of plays might work but after each play without running the ball, there is a greater chance of something bad happening.

im sure the coaches and players adjusted accordingly this bye week to take care of the issue and i hope that we can move the ball on the ground alot better.

Hulk75
10-13-2006, 09:51 AM
Throw it!:logo:

Kaiser Toro
10-13-2006, 10:02 AM
Our history of passing has been more of the dump down and quick out variety. I am not a smart man, but not sure how this would set up the run.

However, I hope we stretch the field and test their Safeties due to their inability to cover. Roy Williams on his heels is much better than him on his toes for any defense.

thunderkyss
10-13-2006, 10:37 AM
Its amazing that you haven't been burned at the stake yet. I've been saying this until I'm blue in the face. That's exactly what the Montana, Walsh, Rice group did with the 49ers, but no one wants to listen. Kubiak has already stated we have to RUN, RUN, RUN, the ball and if he does he will be run out of the stadium. Our only chance is the passing game, but there are no guarrantees there either. Why get beat doing what you do poorly. Why not do what you do best and say at least I gave it my best shot.

It's amazing, because that is exactly what we've been doing, and it isn't working the way you & jmerog think it should.

first series against Philly, run, pass, pass, pass, run, run, pass, pass, run, pass(TD)

first series against Indy, pass(sack),

first series against Washington, run, run, pass(TD)

first series against Miami, pass, pass, run, pass, punt.

We've been passing close to a 2:1 ratio, with the exception of the Miami game, which was nearly 50/50.

I just don't know what you guys are watching, thinking we are just trying to force the run, when I'm saying we haven't been dedicated to the running game enough.

then you say our passing game is working, but we can't pick up first downs when we don't run the ball.

Runner
10-13-2006, 10:50 AM
Are we a passing team or runnng team? Seems like a simple question, but people can argue about it for days. Why? Because we don't have an offensive identity.

In past years we could run pretty well, but we would end up getting beat handily because we couldn't run well enough to dominate a game and for the most part our passing game was poor and unimaginative.

Now our passing is picking up, but our continued o-line problems limit us from dominating through the pass. We are getting back to throwing downfield so that's looking up, but we can't control a game with our passing attack right now. Our running is very ineffective primarily due to poor runnning backs assisted by an o-line that can't run block as well as it is used to.

Ironically both of these scenarios had left us with a similar result. A team that throws a lot of dump off passes in a rather boring offense.

Are we a running team? No.
Are we a passing team? No.
Are we trying to find an identity? Yes, but right now it is a struggle.

tsip
10-13-2006, 10:55 AM
It's amazing, because that is exactly what we've been doing, and it isn't working the way you & jmerog think it should.

first series against Philly, run, pass, pass, pass, run, run, pass, pass, run, pass(TD)

first series against Indy, pass(sack),

first series against Washington, run, run, pass(TD)

first series against Miami, pass, pass, run, pass, punt.

We've been passing close to a 2:1 ratio, with the exception of the Miami game, which was nearly 50/50.

I just don't know what you guys are watching, thinking we are just trying to force the run, when I'm saying we haven't been dedicated to the running game enough.

then you say our passing game is working, but we can't pick up first downs when we don't run the ball.


Hell-o, anybody home? We played from a 'catch-up' mode in the first 3 games, which changed the game plan--against Miami, we had the lead and ran the ball to keep the Dolphins off the field. There are 2 very different scenarios here, TK--kinda suprised you can't see that.

thunderkyss
10-13-2006, 11:04 AM
Hell-o, anybody home? We played from a 'catch-up' mode in the first 3 games, which changed the game plan--against Miami, we had the lead and ran the ball to keep the Dolphins off the field. There are 2 very different scenarios here, TK--kinda suprised you can't see that.

It's not that I can't see that. It's that I don't understand folks saying that we are trying to run the ball too much. that we should open up the passing game.

Whatever the reason, we are passing more than running...... & the basis of this thread seems a little misplaced to me.

On top of that, we had the lead in the Washington game, and the Philly game, but didn't focus on a running attack, our passing game gave the ball back to the Eagles in short time.

infantrycak
10-13-2006, 11:05 AM
then you say our passing game is working, but we can't pick up first downs when we don't run the ball.

Right now the Texans have the 2nd highest 3rd down conversion rate in the NFL at 44.2% and it is built (11 of 19 1st downs made) on passing for 1st downs (11 1sts on 21 attempts--53%) rather than rushing for 1st downs (7 1sts on 22 attempts--32%).

Ibar is wrong though in asserting the Texans have been insisting on run, run, run.

thunderkyss
10-13-2006, 11:12 AM
(7 1sts on 22 attempts--32%).


Is that 3rd & short situations only?? or does that 22 attempts include 1st & ten, or 3rd & 17 as well??

how does that stack up with the rest of the league??

We expect our passing game to average over 10 yards/completion...... We'd be happy, if our run game avg'd 5 ypc...... so you're already looking at a 50% 3rd down conversion, if we hit that goal.


We have more incomplete passes on third down, than we have runs that didn't convert on 3rd down.

We have more incomplete passes, than runs that didn't gain 3 yards.

We have more incomplete passes, than we have runs for a loss.

mancunian
10-13-2006, 11:12 AM
OK, let me first backup and clarify something. YEs, you do have to be able to run the ball in the NFL to succeed, and we need to work on that a lot.

But

you dont have to run to set up the pass. When the strength of the team is its recieving corps and its strong armed QB, you can pass to set up the run.

If we started the game with a long series of well scripted short passes with only a few runs, it would have a similer effect as a run game. In a game where one team is eating up large chunks of yardage on the ground, safeties come up to help and sometimes corners are faked out and the recievers come open because the other team is trying to stop the run.

Similerly, when a team can be successfull with short dink and dunk stuff for gains of 5 and 8 yards all the way up the field, then teams start playing closer to the lines. when they come up to stop it, the fast recievers burn them deep. when they try to cover the recievers deep- we gash them with 8 yard dinks. that eats clock almost like a run.

This week, to make the running game more effective,
we need to run a lot of short gain pass pass plays mixed with a few runs and then burn them deep. THis will keep them afraid of the pass and respecting the pass, which will open up the run game. Its much easier to run when the other team fears your pass.

I know many other have shared this opinion but i would like to hear more opinions and discussion on it. I know all of you guys have opinions.:)

The pass to set up the run is the Seahawks offence to a T. But it is Holmgrens version of the WCO.

infantrycak
10-13-2006, 11:24 AM
Is that 3rd & short situations only?? or does that 22 attempts include 1st & ten, or 3rd & 17 as well??

That is 3rd downs period--no 1st or 2nd downs. Yes that includes some 3rd and long runs just as it includes 3rd and 17 passes.

how does that stack up with the rest of the league??

Depends on the team. Teams with no running game tend to convert 3rd downs if at all by passing--see Indy 34 of 38 3rd downs converted. Teams with great rushing games don't have to pass for 1st downs--see Atlanta 25 rushing 1st downs and 6 passing.

We expect our passing game to average over 10 yards/completion...... We'd be happy, if our run game avg'd 5 ypc...... so you're already looking at a 50% 3rd down conversion, if we hit that goal.

Pull back the reins that isn't how it works.

We have more incomplete passes on third down, than we have runs that didn't convert on 3rd down.

Where do you get that? 7 passes on 3rd down which didn't result in 1st downs, 3 of which were receptions short of 1st down for 4 incomplete passes vs. 15 rushing attempts on 3rd down which did not get a 1st down.

We have more incomplete passes, than runs that didn't gain 3 yards.

We have more incomplete passes, than we have runs for a loss.

And the Holy Batman award for who cares about completely expected stats common to every NFL team goes to...

powerfuldragon
10-13-2006, 11:27 AM
When our RB's can barely juke the Dline into submission, i'd feel more comfortable with the ball in Carr's hands....

I'm waiting for all the gasps and foul cries.

thunderkyss
10-13-2006, 11:28 AM
That is 3rd downs period--no 1st or 2nd downs. Yes that includes some 3rd and long runs just as it includes 3rd and 17 passes.



Well that's eye opening..... didn't realize we've tried to run the ball 22 times on third down..

I may be wrong.....

tsip
10-13-2006, 11:34 AM
That is 3rd downs period--no 1st or 2nd downs. Yes that includes some 3rd and long runs just as it includes 3rd and 17 passes.



Depends on the team. Teams with no running game tend to convert 3rd downs if at all by passing--see Indy 34 of 38 3rd downs converted. Teams with great rushing games don't have to pass for 1st downs--see Atlanta 25 rushing 1st downs and 6 passing.



Pull back the reins that isn't how it works.



Where do you get that? 7 passes on 3rd down which didn't result in 1st downs, 3 of which were receptions short of 1st down for 4 incomplete passes vs. 15 rushing attempts on 3rd down which did not get a 1st down.



And the Holy Batman award for who cares about completely expected stats common to every NFL team goes to...

...c'mon iCak, you gotta admit that nobody--and I mean nobody--can 'rant' and 'expunge' about nothing the way TK can...besides, in a couple of weeks, our 'run' game situation will come to him and he'll find a new topic to 'disertate' about--gotta admit, however, that his 'short' posts (though rare) often have very good 'points'

thunderkyss
10-13-2006, 12:37 PM
Right now the Texans have the 2nd highest 3rd down conversion rate in the NFL at 44.2% and it is built (11 of 19 1st downs made) on passing for 1st downs (11 1sts on 21 attempts--53%) rather than rushing for 1st downs (7 1sts on 22 attempts--32%).

Ibar is wrong though in asserting the Texans have been insisting on run, run, run.

Okay, help me out with my counting.....

I'm not saying you or NFL.com is wrong, you both have us going 19/43 for 44% (2nd only to Indy)

I'm counting 21/45 for 46% (but I admit it was a quick count.

Running on third down, I count us 6 for 12, 50% that is counting David's run on 3rd & 1 against Miami, and his 1 yard TD run. But I am not counting his 4 scrambles(2 of 4), as it wasn't in the game plan to run on those downs. I also didn't figure them in the conversion calculations for passing on 3rd down. of which we are 13/28 or 46% .

Running on 3rd down, I've got us.....
1/2 against philly
0/3 against Indy
2/2 against Washington correction, we were 2 for 2 against Washington
3/6 against Miami

I'm off by 2 attempts somewhere, but it isn't even close to the 22 attempts you have us converting only 7 times on.


I've recounted, we were 12/27 passing, for 44%
we were 6/12 running....... 50%
& David was 2/4 scrambling....... 50%

20/43...... 46%
I'll count again... but I don't see how I could be that far off.

jagibelieve
10-13-2006, 03:57 PM
Allow me to express my opinion.

First of all, for either the run or pass-to-set-up-the-run to work, you need a good offensive line. One thing that I have gotten used to hearing and watching lately is that "It all starts up front", and that is so true.

If you talk to a Colts fan, especially after losing the Edge, they will all claim that they "pass to set up the run". That is not entirely true. James is/was one of the best blocking backs in the NFL, and that's behind a pretty good offensive line, so Peyton has plenty of time to throw. When teams tried to compensate for that by dropping more players into coverage, they would burn you with Edge and the run.

The other thing to consider is the defense that you play. The short quick passes work only if the opposing defense plays primarily a zone defense. If the DBs are up pressing receivers, the quick-outs don't work because timing is off.

Get some physical, beefy guys on the O line to open up holes for the running game and protect the QB in the passing game and the offense works.

Just my :twocents: .

awtysst
10-13-2006, 04:44 PM
When our RB's can barely juke the Dline into submission, i'd feel more comfortable with the ball in Carr's hands....

I'm waiting for all the gasps and foul cries.

I compleltey agree. And Carr should throw that pass to AJ or Moulds. The Texans and my fantasy team would be appreciative!

run-david-run
10-13-2006, 05:16 PM
I compleltey agree. And Carr should throw that pass to AJ or Moulds. The Texans and my fantasy team would be appreciative!

Lol, Peyton is on his bye week so Carr is leading me into battle this weekend. The funny thing is the guy im going up against is starting Bledsoe, TO and Glenn, so my fantasy and real teams are tied together for this weekend.