|
Dye, Gallman, Brooks & Choice
storage
This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.
|
Replies: 11
| visibility 1,066
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Dye, Gallman, Brooks & Choice
Nov 23, 2014, 1:44 PM
|
|
Would it hurt anyone's feelings if we ran the ball 50 times a game once MH and JF get here?
How deadly would Deshaun Watson be off play-action in a true "smashmouth" spread? And with 7-8 in the box on every down?
What say you? With a QB like Watson, do you still lean on the running backs if you can?
|
|
|
|
 |
110%er [8015]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7922
Joined: 5/27/08
|
We would be a better version of Auburn.
Nov 23, 2014, 1:46 PM
|
|
Because we'd have a QB who can throw.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: We would be a better version of Auburn.
Nov 23, 2014, 1:48 PM
|
|
True dat. I guess my point is that I'd rather pass 30 times and run 50 times than vice-versa...even with the elite QB. Every pass is more effective on a play-by-play basis in addition to the obvious benefits of clock control and wearing a defense down.
The Chad's offense is a different beast when we're able to get 6 yards on that first down.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [8015]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7922
Joined: 5/27/08
|
Re: We would be a better version of Auburn.
Nov 23, 2014, 1:56 PM
|
|
I'm with you. Imagine having an effective rushing attack and then having Watson's arm on the playaction. Scary.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [22418]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 31311
Joined: 11/30/98
|
With the balance we'll have next year if these runners
Nov 23, 2014, 2:00 PM
[ in reply to Re: We would be a better version of Auburn. ] |
|
develop as we expect they will to go with outstanding wide receivers and tight ends and a nice mix of experience and talented youth on the oline, to go with a rare mobile arm talent in Watson, I would hope for a more even split between pass and run, but favoring the running game late in games after we get a nice lead using an unpredictable balanced approach. 55%-45%
Being good at both allows you to avoid tendencies on first down, which improves your offensive efficiency. Plus, I would think our tempo will ramp up dramatically with that type of balanced talent and we'll be shooting for 90-100 plays per game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [1051]
TigerPulse: 31%
Posts: 3302
Joined: 6/10/12
|
Re: With the balance we'll have next year if these runners
Nov 23, 2014, 2:15 PM
|
|
as long as we have the current oc you will NEVER see him run the ball 50 times in a game. he uses the bubble screen, speed sweep, and qb draw as his run game. when he first got here he said he ran a power run game with spread. it may be the chicken and egg theory but I have witnessed him give up the run game with several really good backs. imo, he just likes the hunh pass game as the basis of his offense. but finally I will give him the benefit of the doubt in that he has never had a true power back, but even never wanted to run a fullback type in short yardage situations like Diehl. chad likes to fool or finesse teams to prove his superiority.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [22418]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 31311
Joined: 11/30/98
|
It's much simpler than that. Until you get a good big back,
Nov 23, 2014, 2:27 PM
|
|
or a dominant offensive line(most all teams struggle to find 5 great olinemen) you can't be a smashmouth team. Chad has played to his strengths since he has been here and manufactured a running game from whatever was available to him to work with(Rod McDowell, Tajh Boyd, Shatley, Timothy et al). We've not had the combination of good big back and good oline while he's been here.
Give him a good oline and a good big back(s) and quarterback that can make good decisions and he is going to light some people up next year.
It could start next week.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [8681]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8888
Joined: 10/19/11
|
Well if we are shooting for 80-85 plays a game
Nov 23, 2014, 1:48 PM
|
|
50 run plays a game still puts the ball in Watson's hand 30-35, which is more than enough to be very dangerous in the passing game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Well if we are shooting for 80-85 plays a game
Nov 23, 2014, 1:52 PM
|
|
Exactly my point. I guess I should emphasize "runs by RBs and WRs"...with the occasional 7-10 carries/scrambles by Watson.
We may have been close to 50/50 in terms of rush/pass in the past, but that total was heavily intertwined with called passes the turned to scrambles and called QB runs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3507]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4149
Joined: 9/27/14
|
Re: Dye, Gallman, Brooks & Choice
Nov 23, 2014, 1:49 PM
|
|
Absolutely. DW would be DEADLY off play action in a smash mouth system like that. If he plays Sat, that should be the game plan.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [28641]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14125
Joined: 6/27/14
|
Re: Dye, Gallman, Brooks & Choice
Nov 23, 2014, 1:50 PM
|
|
totally agree. and with those lineman coming in - be hard to stop
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [30593]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 28685
Joined: 8/17/05
|
Id love to be able to use them all...
Nov 23, 2014, 1:53 PM
|
|
but there's only one football to go around, and DW 's gonna get carries. I would anticipate losing one of those guys. Those are all guys that are gonna want touches.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 11
| visibility 1,066
|
|
|
|
50
