PDA

View Full Version : why do we run?


utahmark
10-12-2009, 12:27 AM
if running the is so important why do we march the ball up and down the field once we give up on it. i know we didn't finish a couple of drives(mainly because we tried to run it in) but we scored 21 points in 2 quarters. hell, even the pick six was somewhat caused by running the ball on first down and getting stuffed for -4 yards. this team cant run the ball. and no, they were not in a prevent defense. they were blitzing and doing everything they could to slow us down.

Kubes, if you want to keep your job your going to have to give up on the run for the rest of this season.

beerlover
10-12-2009, 12:30 AM
if running the is so important why do we march the ball up and down the field once we give up on it. i know we didn't finish a couple of drives(mainly because we tried to run it in) but we scored 21 points in 2 quarters. hell, even the pick six was somewhat caused by running the ball on first down and getting stuffed for -4 yards. this team cant run the ball. and no, they were not in a prevent defense. they were blitzing and doing everything they could to slow us down.

Kubes, if you want to keep your job your going to have to give up on the run for the rest of this season.

they run because they want to project toughness, that they're not just a finesse team which in fact is excatly what they are, very frustrating :choke:

Leahmic223
10-12-2009, 12:30 AM
We run because according to Kubiak. It's impossible set up the pass without the run.

Even though the Colts do just that...so we run and maybe someday we will magically become a good running team or something...

We just ignore how dominant our pass attack really is, that it doesn't need to be set up.

mattieuk
10-12-2009, 01:11 AM
Matt Schaub threw the ball fifty times. Fifty freaking times.

Brown and Slaton had 17 carries between them.

What do you want to see, single digit carries for our running backs?

Alongside that, is the positive effect of play-action that our passing game sees completely lost on you?

We are already a hugely disproportionately passing team, but its just ridiculous to ask Schaub to throw the ball 65 times a game, when durability is already his weakest point.

I'm getting a beer...

m5kwatts
10-12-2009, 01:36 AM
Runs, even if for 2 yards are half of this offense. Without it play-action won't work. Our play-action works because teams know even if we're just getting any where from 3 yards to no gains we're still committed to running it.

Norg
10-12-2009, 01:42 AM
because in the red zone it helps to be able to run the ball

U seen Matts pass to dressen in the Red zone was incomplete

utahmark
10-12-2009, 01:46 AM
Matt Schaub threw the ball fifty times. Fifty freaking times.

Brown and Slaton had 17 carries between them.

What do you want to see, single digit carries for our running backs?

Alongside that, is the positive effect of play-action that our passing game sees completely lost on you?

We are already a hugely disproportionately passing team, but its just ridiculous to ask Schaub to throw the ball 65 times a game, when durability is already his weakest point.

I'm getting a beer...

i was talking more about the first half running plays. the second half we didn't run..... and we scored 21 points.

utahmark
10-12-2009, 01:52 AM
Runs, even if for 2 yards are half of this offense. Without it play-action won't work. Our play-action works because teams know even if we're just getting any where from 3 yards to no gains we're still committed to running it.

thats what i keep hearing. i really dont think the play action was slowing anyone down in the second half. they knew we were throwing, they tried to stop our passing attack and they couldn't.

mattieuk
10-12-2009, 01:54 AM
i was talking more about the first half running plays. the second half we didn't run..... and we scored 21 points.

Sorry bud, we ran the ball only 8 times in the first half, which is less than the 2nd half by my maths?

m5kwatts
10-12-2009, 01:55 AM
thats what i keep hearing. i really dont think the play action was slowing anyone down in the second half. they knew we were throwing, they tried to stop our passing attack and they couldn't.

Clearly the line needs better play from the interior and the running backs need to run harder and smarter. But when you can get open on another team like our receivers were you take advantage of it.

utahmark
10-12-2009, 02:17 AM
Sorry bud, we ran the ball only 8 times in the first half, which is less than the 2nd half by my maths?

thats ok bud. we had the ball about 15 more plays the second half, add to that about 4 of those runs in the second half were 1 yard dive plays and you see what the stats don't show. while not in the redzone(inside the 10 for our purposes) we pretty much stayed away from the running game in the second half. and one of the few times we did run, it was stuffed for a loss of 4 and indirectly led to the int for a td.

Malloy
10-12-2009, 02:29 AM
Matt Schaub threw the ball fifty times. Fifty freaking times.

Brown and Slaton had 17 carries between them.

What do you want to see, single digit carries for our running backs?

Alongside that, is the positive effect of play-action that our passing game sees completely lost on you?

We are already a hugely disproportionately passing team, but its just ridiculous to ask Schaub to throw the ball 65 times a game, when durability is already his weakest point.

I'm getting a beer...

I'm pretty sure that no one argues (at least I hope that is the case) that we did not pass the ball enough. What I do think people mean (and I guess I'm on the same page somewhat) is that the majority of those runs came in the first half.

An interesting observation, we used the shotgun alot last night in the second half, and despite teams knowing that we would pass (ea. being one-dimensional) we succeded anyway. I agree that play-action is pretty damn effective when a defense has to account for a run game, but when we're in shotgun and it still works?

What I'm trying to say is that I believe that this teams biggest asset is the passing game, playaction or not, and it is silly not to play to our strengths. I dont want us to run the ball MORE than we did last night, but I want them to balance the amount of runs in the first and second half.

Actually i want to see us do some of that crazy NE stuff Coach Hoodie did a couple of years ago when he, for whatever reason, chose to attempt to win games being completely one-dimensional (does anyone remember those games, think there was one passing it all day, and one rushing all the time). I want us to do that, see where it takes us, and from then on miz in the run.

mattieuk
10-12-2009, 02:34 AM
thats ok bud. we had the ball about 15 more plays the second half, add to that about 4 of those runs in the second half were 1 yard dive plays and you see what the stats don't show. while not in the red zone(inside the 10 for our purposes) we pretty much stayed away from the running game in the second half. and one of the few times we did run, it was stuffed for a loss of 4 and indirectly led to the int for a td.

Okay, I'll accept that then, fair point.

But the running game was fairly effective in the first half. Slaton was averaging nearly 5.5 yard per carry, which is plenty good enough for me. There wasn't much wrong with the run game in the first half on that basis.

In the 2nd half our YPC dropped (even when taking out the goaline attempts at the end of the game, and note the first half had at least one short yardage pickup run as well).

We didn't run the ball as well in the second half, because we were chasing the game so much, because of our inability to convert on 3rd down.

In the first half we failed to convert the 3rd down in a manageable yardage situation (I used the rule of thumb of 5 yards, as Slaton ran for 9 yards, when needing to pick up 15 for the 1st down) like this. 4 failed pass attempts, and 1 failed run attempt (the ultra annoying Slaton trying to get one yard effort).

The run game wasn't broken, but it became broken during the second half when we were using it as token to try and keep the play action going, without any real commitment. If the first half 3rd down attempts hadn't have failed (often failing with passing attempts mind), we wouldn't have been in that situation in the 2nd half.

Scooter
10-12-2009, 03:04 AM
the passing game moves like that because kubiak forces the run, teams know he'll force the run, and therefor we can throw 50 times and the play action will still be effective. almost all of our 20+ yard plays are because of our threat to run (whether successful or not). same as jacksonville did us with the fake reverse handoffs, that threat is always there whether used or successful or not, it must be accounted for.

utahmark
10-12-2009, 03:05 AM
Okay, I'll accept that then, fair point.

But the running game was fairly effective in the first half. Slaton was averaging nearly 5.5 yard per carry, which is plenty good enough for me. There wasn't much wrong with the run game in the first half on that basis.

In the 2nd half our YPC dropped (even when taking out the goaline attempts at the end of the game, and note the first half had at least one short yardage pickup run as well).

We didn't run the ball as well in the second half, because we were chasing the game so much, because of our inability to convert on 3rd down.

In the first half we failed to convert the 3rd down in a manageable yardage situation (I used the rule of thumb of 5 yards, as Slaton ran for 9 yards, when needing to pick up 15 for the 1st down) like this. 4 failed pass attempts, and 1 failed run attempt (the ultra annoying Slaton trying to get one yard effort).

The run game wasn't broken, but it became broken during the second half when we were using it as token to try and keep the play action going, without any real commitment. If the first half 3rd down attempts hadn't have failed (often failing with passing attempts mind), we wouldn't have been in that situation in the 2nd half.

the only time we are able to run the football is when teams are not expecting it. sometimes we can get small gains in the run game on 1st and 2cnd down. which just brings us to 3rd and 2. now we got 1 chance to complete a pass for a 1st down cause you know we cant run for a 1st on 3rd and 2. why not just pass on 1st and second down as well, that gives us 3 chances to get a first instead of 1.:runaway:

I know there is more to it than that. but the fact is we are a passing team. we might as well except it. we should only run after we have established the pass and teams or on there heals. then maybe some of these run plays would work a bit. some of these outside runs work sometimes but a run up the middle is just a waist of a down right now.

your right about one thing for sure, schaub may get killed throwing the ball 60 times a game. we do have to run the ball some. it's more the timing and the type of runs thats driving me crazy. if we would have got our passing game going early and then mixed some of these runs in i would of been happier.

mattieuk
10-12-2009, 03:08 AM
your right about one thing for sure, schaub may get killed throwing the ball 60 times a game. we do have to run the ball some. it's more the timing and the type of runs thats driving me crazy. if we would have got our passing game going early and then mixed some of these runs in i would of been happier.

I'm with you on these fronts. The style of running plays called is annoying me as well. I'm going to post on this tomorrow, as it'll send me crazy tonight trying to think about it, but for sure we don't make it easy on ourselves and our running backs.

utahmark
10-12-2009, 03:13 AM
the passing game moves like that because kubiak forces the run, teams know he'll force the run, and therefor we can throw 50 times and the play action will still be effective. almost all of our 20+ yard plays are because of our threat to run (whether successful or not). same as jacksonville did us with the fake reverse handoffs, that threat is always there whether used or successful or not, it must be accounted for.

good post! you may be right. i'm just not sure teams are going into a game with us thinking they must stop our run game. i think they are trying to figure out what to do with AJ, Owen Daniels, Kevin Walter, our speacial teams players, along with Slaton and Leach(out of the back field).

Scooter
10-12-2009, 03:35 AM
edit

MannyFresh
10-12-2009, 04:02 AM
Draft Jacquizz Rodgers in 2010.

utahmark
10-12-2009, 10:36 AM
http://blogs.chron.com/jeromesolomon/2009/10/problems_with_texans_running_g.html

-I do have a problem with:

Being a finesse team that doesn't know it. As Kubiak said, "When you can't make a half yard to win in this league, something's wrong. We couldn't run the ball again. I know you guys are tired of hearing it, and I'm tired of saying it." The Texans move the ball with ease when they play at a fast tempo. Then why do they start the game in a slow tempo as if they are a power team? I don't understand it.


Posted by Jerome Solomon at October 11, 2009 10:00 PM -




This team has wanted to run the ball since it's inception. So how do we go about building a great run team. We draft a qb with our #1 overall pick. The next year we pick a wr with our #3 overall pick. We have not drafted a running back with in the first or second round ever, unless you count that saftey out of texas tech(or wherever the hell he was from). Actually, I wouldnt care if we never drafted a running back early. We could still have a great running attack if we would start drafting offensive lineman in the first and second rounds. We don't do that much either.

We have had two different stratagies for getting our run game going. Caper's had the just ignore it and will will magically appear philosophy. While Kube's just expects to be able to run the ball no matter who manning the positions, his scheme will prevail.

Well, neither has worked. We went from a team that couldn't do anything offensively to a good passing team that want's to run. If our next coach wants to be a running team I just hope he drafts accordingly.