An Analysis of the Running Attack

Discussion in 'Texans Talk' started by NEROtheZERO, Oct 17, 2006.

  1. NEROtheZERO

    NEROtheZERO Veteran

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2005
    Messages:
    467
    Likes Received:
    17
    I see a lot of people lambasting Kubiak for trying to stick to the running game. While I understand that the passing game is working for us and the running game is not, there are a few reasons it is necessary to run the ball. 1. It keeps our sub par defense off the field which gives us a chance to keep the game close and gives us a better chance to win. 2. Running the ball sets up the pass. We have a great deep threat in AJ but cannot utilize it because the opposing defense can sit on deep routes without having to worry about covering the run. 3. Play action. Play action is an invaluable tool in the NFL as we all know from watching our divisional rivals perfect it.

    Interestingly enough, the only game we have won is the only game we have run the ball more than 30 times (33.) The second most rush attempts (23) was against the Colts in our highest scoring game of the season.
     
  2. sleepwalker

    sleepwalker Veteran

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2006
    Messages:
    167
    Likes Received:
    6
    I think people are more mad about Kubiak insisting on running when he know's we don't have the talent...I agree with you 100%...You must be able to run the ball.

    Maybe Kubiak is trying change the way our players think....For example: Maybe his insistance on running the ball *when he knows they are not good enough yet* is putting even more pressure on them to get better or be embarassed.
     
  3. South Texan

    South Texan Veteran

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2006
    Messages:
    309
    Likes Received:
    16
    Location:
    I can see Mexico from here!
    If at first you don't succeed, run, run, again.

    We need to at least keep up a semblance of a running game to keep the other guy's defense honest, well OK, semi honest.
     
  4. Texans86

    Texans86 All Pro

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2005
    Messages:
    927
    Likes Received:
    15
    Location:
    Waco, Texas
    IT doesn't matter if the running game is not successful. The threat to run is all you really need to set up playaction pass. If the defense believes you MIGHT run the ball, no matter how bad the running game is, they have to respect the playaction pass. It won't get nine people in the box, but it might freeze the LB for another fraction of a second, and every little bit counts.
     
  5. Scooter

    Scooter Funky

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2004
    Messages:
    5,363
    Likes Received:
    562
    dallas didnt blitz 5+ or stack the line more than twice the entire game because they didnt respect the run. there is no threat to run if you cant accomplish it successfully. we can run the ball 90 times a game, but if we cant get past their base defense, there is absolutely no reason for them to stop guarding the pass ... as dallas made perfectly clear. a running game that doesnt beat the base defense is the biggest hinderence an offence can have. it doesnt open up the passing game. it's doesnt open up play-action. it leaves defenses guarding your strength because they defeat your weakness without even trying.

    there is no "threat to run". you either run the ball or you dont ... we dont.
     
  6. threetoedpete

    threetoedpete Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 26, 2004
    Messages:
    6,644
    Likes Received:
    197
    Location:
    Katy, Texas
    In Denver's scheme, everything is predicated on the threat of the run. We're coming to the point in time, when no matter what, the opponents will no longer honor that threat. When that occours, we will be dead ducks. Won't be able to do either. You already have defenses reading the waggle play and ignoring the dive. It's bad now. But it could get worse.
     
  7. Vinny

    Vinny shiny happy fan Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2004
    Messages:
    21,847
    Likes Received:
    1,513
    Arizona can't run the ball either but they don't throw a billion 4 yard passes as their only course of action offensively. You can move the ball without running it...its been done in the NFL for years...now, winning football requires that you do both well since teams can always take away your strength (ie teams have taken away our waggle and our little TE dump passes the last few games). At least we can try to get the ball down field and stretch the defense...we don't even do that....and honestly, we have never done it. This is the most frustrating team offense I've ever seen....we are at half a decade and the problems are always the same when it comes to challenging a defense vertically.
     
  8. Ghetto D

    Ghetto D Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2005
    Messages:
    51
    Likes Received:
    1
    So for those who are complaining about the amount of running plays, what would you have us do? Run a Texas Tech offense where only 20-25% of the plays are runs? That'll get us to respecatbility.

    I'm not wild about a 1.5 ypc average, but you MUST at least appear to balance the offense.
     


  9. wolfscar

    wolfscar Veteran

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2006
    Messages:
    178
    Likes Received:
    7
    Location:
    Edinburgh, Scotland
    It is vital that you run a significant number of carries a game, for all the reasons posted above. Where we're falling down is that opposing teams are able to close down our running game without having to think about it. I haven't been able to see most of the games (living in Scotland), but from the analysis I've read and what I saw of the Dallas game, we're getting stopped at the line without the opposing D having to bring anyone up to cover it. We're way too predictable. All our running plays are between the tackles and - like folk are saying above - we're not throwing deep as much as we should. We need some variation. Right now the Texan running attack is somewhere between :crutch: and :brickwall
     
  10. DocBar

    DocBar Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2005
    Messages:
    9,942
    Likes Received:
    473
    Location:
    I'm international
    I posted this in another thread
    Lot's of good posts on here, but I think one fundemental fact has been missed: Kubiak is a rookie HC and it shows. IMO, that's why he's making a lot of conservative calls on offense and knee-jerk reaction personnel decisions. I really started questioning his personnel moves when he let Wand and 'Baire Smith go. Trading Morency seemed bone headed to me. I would think a few scheme changes would be sufficient to help an RB that had blitz-pickup problems rather than wholesale changes at the position. How much of the O-line woes can be attributed to Mike Sherman's influence? Sherman is a former HC with a large ego(it's a must for an NFL HC) and definite opinions of how an offense should work. Maybe he's hurting more than helping.
     
  11. TheCD

    TheCD All Pro

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2006
    Messages:
    982
    Likes Received:
    63
    Location:
    Wichita Falls, TX
    There's no doubt you HAVE to run the ball, regardless of whether you are successful doing so. Part of the defense's job is to make the offense one-dimensional and attack the remaining dimension. If we just give up on running, how are we going to get past constant dime defenses?

    One thing I've noticed thus far this year is that Kubiak has had a lot of success with his scripted plays, and then has tended to have some difficulties as the game goes on. Hurry-up offenses (from what I have seen) have tended to be slightly successful as well. I think that the play calling will get better as time goes on.

    Kubiak is a rookie, too. If we don't give him time to develop, then we'll have shot ourself in the foot twice.
     
  12. Erratic Assassin

    Erratic Assassin All Pro

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2004
    Messages:
    534
    Likes Received:
    18
    Our inability to make first downs keeps our defense on the field. We turn the ball over every time we punt.
     
  13. underdog65

    underdog65 Veteran

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2006
    Messages:
    143
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Cypress
    Arizona used short passes and quick outs to compensate for thier lack of a running game against Chicago. I believe we need to do the same thing to spread the defenses out and maybe and I mean maybe open up some running lanes in the middle.
     
  14. powerfuldragon

    powerfuldragon g'mornin to you

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2006
    Messages:
    17,109
    Likes Received:
    1,110
    Location:
    your lady's sexdreams.
    Here's my writeup of our runnign game:
    [​IMG]
     
  15. tsip

    tsip Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 19, 2005
    Messages:
    1,277
    Likes Received:
    40
    ...at least it's football season
     
  16. Texan1

    Texan1 Veteran

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2005
    Messages:
    178
    Likes Received:
    3
    I like Kubiak - IMO the best coach we could get and an upgrade over the previous staff. But I agree that there have been some moves that I wonder whether Kubiak makes those moves after 3 years of HC experience....
     
  17. nunusguy

    nunusguy Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2004
    Messages:
    8,991
    Likes Received:
    244
    Location:
    Houston
    Are we now operating the same OLine blocking scheme(s) now that we were in the preseason ? I think not, but am unsure of the changes, if any, from then ?
    And the thought that we may have fallen victum of the "too many Chiefs and not enought Indians", dilemma has also crossed the minds of many of us.
     
  18. thunderkyss

    thunderkyss Salem Poor

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2005
    Messages:
    38,814
    Likes Received:
    1,739
    Location:
    Texas
    1. We are trying to learn how to run the ball.
    2. Our last two games were against the #3 & #2 defenses against the run on ypc. Miami(#3 allowing 3.1 ypc) & Dallas(#2 allowing 2.9 ypc). I'm not happy about our performance, but I don't think we are in as dire straits as it's beeing made out to be. & while Dallas didn't "stack the box" we were running against a 5 man front. there were time when Owen was lined up far right, with GregEllis covering him. first, we should have checked to a pass play.... but if we weren't going to do that, we shouldn't have motioned Owen to the RT, especially when we were running to that side, and the man he was blocking was against the sideline.
     
  19. TPIMP

    TPIMP Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2005
    Messages:
    157
    Likes Received:
    4
    Sounds simple. But if your line can't block long enough to get the receivers downfield it's impossible to strech the defense. Arizona is a good example of that. Kurt Warner was pummulled early this season. I watched Marino throw the ball for years without a running game but his line could pass block. When they started to slip he struggled big time. This isn't a philosophy thing. The Texans have had three different OC's and every one of them has been limited in their play calling by what the OL can handle.
     

Share This Page