The coordinators

[ethat001]

Agree, great post.

Did someone already do an in-depth analysis on why our running game sucks? Callahan is supposed to be a O-line / run game guru, and everyone says the O-line is "one of the best" and we have two pro-bowlers --- but they only seem to pass-block well. I know Kelley isn't Elliott, but we're only 14th in rushing and they rarely create big holes. Kelley seems to have to make guys miss in the backfield & we seem like we're routinely 2nd and 8 or worse after running. I feel like our redzone ineffectiveness is likely partly due to a poor run game, and all the attempted fade routes in redzone are likely due to lack of confidence in run game. Aside from the Mack Brown long run and 1-2 runs from Thompson, all we had was Kelley 19 of 76 for 4 yard average against Chicago..

[SFREDSKIN]

Originally Posted by ethat001

Agree, great post.

Did someone already do an in-depth analysis on why our running game sucks? Callahan is supposed to be a O-line / run game guru, and everyone says the O-line is "one of the best" and we have two pro-bowlers --- but they only seem to pass-block well. I know Kelley isn't Elliott, but we're only 14th in rushing and they rarely create big holes. Kelley seems to have to make guys miss in the backfield & we seem like we're routinely 2nd and 8 or worse after running. I feel like our redzone ineffectiveness is likely partly due to a poor run game, and all the attempted fade routes in redzone are likely due to lack of confidence in run game. Aside from the Mack Brown long run and 1-2 runs from Thompson, all we had was Kelley 19 of 76 for 4 yard average against Chicago..

I'm not a Lauvao fan, Kouandjio should be starting in his place, only reason is not happening is the money invested in Lauvao.

[OmahaRedskins]

I am looking for a post but i can't find it. I thought I read a post where someone mentioned Cooley discussing possible replacements for Barry. Does anybody remember this post?

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by ethat001

Agree, great post.

Did someone already do an in-depth analysis on why our running game sucks? Callahan is supposed to be a O-line / run game guru, and everyone says the O-line is "one of the best" and we have two pro-bowlers --- but they only seem to pass-block well. I know Kelley isn't Elliott, but we're only 14th in rushing and they rarely create big holes. Kelley seems to have to make guys miss in the backfield & we seem like we're routinely 2nd and 8 or worse after running. I feel like our redzone ineffectiveness is likely partly due to a poor run game, and all the attempted fade routes in redzone are likely due to lack of confidence in run game. Aside from the Mack Brown long run and 1-2 runs from Thompson, all we had was Kelley 19 of 76 for 4 yard average against Chicago..

It comes down to the coaches' commitment. Moses, Trent and schreff all excel at run blocking. Lauvao is a much better run blocker than pass blocker. We have some inexperienced running backs but physical. So it comes down to Gruden and mcvay doing a better job gameplan and instituting a physical run attack consistently.

Certainly our stats state when we commit to the running game we win period. Mcvay and Gruden haven't shown that commitment every game and that is certainly where the fault lies. Damn shame cause we would probably be more effective in the red zone if we would.

[ethat001]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

Certainly our stats state when we commit to the running game we win period. Mcvay and Gruden haven't shown that commitment every game and that is certainly where the fault lies. Damn shame cause we would probably be more effective in the red zone if we would.

I agree with you, but it's always tricky to say simply running more leads to more wins. And the fact that we win more when we run more -- could simply be because when you're winning by the second half -- you run out the clock, increasing the numbers of runs. And if you're losing early by a lot or your run game sucks early, you may not call many runs -- and calling more runs in those situations would NOT help you win. In other words, simple run % may not determine the game but may reflect the nature of the game.

I think we need to fix the running game first, and then stay committed to it AFTER we've proven the run game is consistently effective.

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by ethat001

I agree with you, but it's always tricky to say simply running more leads to more wins. And the fact that we win more when we run more -- could simply be because when you're winning by the second half -- you run out the clock, increasing the numbers of runs. And if you're losing early by a lot or your run game sucks early, you may not call many runs -- and calling more runs in those situations would NOT help you win. In other words, simple run % may not determine the game but may reflect the nature of the game.

I think we need to fix the running game first, and then stay committed to it AFTER we've proven the run game is consistently effective.

Well, certainly a more balance attack in the offense is important...but my motivation is to keep the ball, control the clock and keep our leaky defense on the sideline. I've seen us too many times give the ball back on offense where we throw the ball 3 times in a row without any results...ashame when it happens in the red zone

[FrenchSkin]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

Well, certainly a more balance attack in the offense is important...but my motivation is to keep the ball, control the clock and keep our leaky defense on the sideline. I've seen us too many times give the ball back on offense where we throw the ball 3 times in a row without any results...ashame when it happens in the red zone

Agreed, fact is we won when we ran the ball and lost when we didn't.

But I'd say our O-line has been less consistant in the running game than in pass protection.
Some games it seems Fat Rob was contacted in the backfield on every carry.
No matter how good he is at breaking tackles, that doesn't speak great run blocking.

Envoyé de mon TOMMY en utilisant Tapatalk