3WE
Forum User
Joined: 13 Sep 2007
Posts: 40
Post subject: A running game...
Posted: 08 Nov 2009 06:56 am
Lots of interesting talk. Pinkel should go, Pinkel should stay, and some interesting facts to support both. The second half records and stats are troubling.
But no one is bringing up our largely-lacking running game (at least not this week). A balanced offense- that can run AND can pass! Until we get that, we are stuck. Pinkel's signature is fancy-schmancy pass plays, which succesfully trick and beat a lot of teams. Of course, when do we get beat: when someone shuts down our passing game and hits us with an offense that can run AND pass.
How can Pinkel get us a running game? Doe he have running talent? Is this a big flaw in his generally good recruiting?
Insight?
acidbill
Forum User
Joined: 25 Nov 2007
Posts: 1324
Post subject: Re: A running game...
Posted: 08 Nov 2009 07:38 am
3WE wrote
Lots of interesting talk. Pinkel should go, Pinkel should stay, and some interesting facts to support both. The second half records and stats are troubling.
But no one is bringing up our largely-lacking running game (at least not this week). A balanced offense- that can run AND can pass! Until we get that, we are stuck. Pinkel's signature is fancy-schmancy pass plays, which succesfully trick and beat a lot of teams. Of course, when do we get beat: when someone shuts down our passing game and hits us with an offense that can run AND pass.
How can Pinkel get us a running game? Doe he have running talent? Is this a big flaw in his generally good recruiting?
Insight?
I expect our running game to improve next season for 2 reasons:
1) Our offensive line should improve. The Mizzou currently has only 1 senior and 3 freshmen on their 2-deep depth chart. This group can only get better and the addition of Demien, Morse and Freeman(?) can only make it better.
2) Gabbert should improve as a QB. Gabbert is clearly a very raw QB, although it seems like he has learned a lot this year. He seems to be somewhat dependent on Alexander, just as Brad Smith was dependent on Gage. Hopefully he will be able to spread the ball around more in the future, and given his obvious intelligence and physical skills, I see no reason why that wouldn't happen. In Mizzou's offense, the pass sets up the run, so an improved passing game should actually improve the running game, too.
I don't see a reason to believe that the quality of our RBs will dramatically improve next year. I don't think Lawrence has shown that he is any better than Moore or Washington, so our 3-deep at the position should be the same. Mizzou's RBs are good but by no means great by Big 12 standards.
Mortie68
Forum User
Joined: 23 Oct 2009
Posts: 76
Post subject: Re: A running game...
Posted: 08 Nov 2009 08:31 am
How about this thought?
Put Daniel at QB
Add Maclin at WR
Add Coffman at TE
would we be doing any better? Would this team be better? I dunno but suspect no. Alexander is getting his yards. Gabbert gets his yards. Probably the same yards that Daniel and Maclin would have.
Coffman, or a talent near his skills, would make a difference.
So it narrows down to is the defense actually making stops and the OL making the running game work? This is not a sudden and blinding flash of the obvious is it?
As I have said before the secondary is a bend don't break strategy. The DL is read and react and slow in quickness and is easily beat. The OL seems slower off the ball against most teams, which is probably quickness as well. Put great skill players in that situation and the results might be close to the same. Can this be improved or not?
rlwpdx
Forum User
Joined: 22 Jul 2006
Posts: 395
Post subject: Re: A running game...
Posted: 08 Nov 2009 10:09 am
Insight?[/quote]
I expect our running game to improve next season for 2 reasons:
2) Gabbert should improve as a QB. Gabbert is clearly a very raw QB, although it seems like he has learned a lot this year.
Yep there is a big difference in HS and D1 FB.
The coaching staff , in 5 minutes, could have taught BG how to run up to line and point left, right, whatever to give appearance to fans , friends, relatives, scouts and oh yes opponents that he knows and is practicing Excellent game/play Management skills even if the lineman are ignoring his finger pointing.
_________________
UMC ALUM AND TIGER FOREVER
LwtnTigerX
Forum User
Joined: 01 Sep 2008
Posts: 42
Post subject: And Gabbert's ball handling
Posted: 08 Nov 2009 13:43 pm
Blaine Gabbert needs to make more magic moves when he handles the ball. On the run plays from shotgun, he hands off and then looks back over his shoulder at the point of attack rather than carrying out a good fake.
Also, he tends to stare down the primary receiver in pressure situations as soon as he has the ball.
And, if his leg is well, why not let him run the ball to the backside when the DE crashes strong on the zone run?
Also, take what the defense gives you: With a three man rush - DEs lining up wide - why not take the snap, hoist the ball for a second, and then just take off running?
He did that maybe twice against Baylor, even though TV replays show he could have done that a whole lot more during the second half. This works best, of course, if a couple of receivers go long each play, and stretch the secondary.
Mortie68
Forum User
Joined: 23 Oct 2009
Posts: 76
Post subject: Re: A running game...
Posted: 08 Nov 2009 23:57 pm
is BG really the athletic QB that can be expected to tuck and run effectively and with effective quickness and speed?
stlfb
Forum User
Joined: 14 Sep 2009
Posts: 16
Post subject: Re: A running game...
Posted: 09 Nov 2009 01:23 am
Fullback. I formation. Traditional TEs (Two of em) Linemen in 3 pt stances with closer splits...run a little big 10 style football every so often. This is easier said then done because I don't think we are very strong on the offensive front.
Kenny Boy
Forum User
Joined: 29 Sep 2009
Posts: 4
Post subject: Re: A running game...
Posted: 09 Nov 2009 07:05 am
It's the same thing every year. They can't play defense and they can't run the ball. Losing to Baylor, at home, without Baylor's top QB, is just sad!
Mortie68
Forum User
Joined: 23 Oct 2009
Posts: 76
Post subject: Re: A running game...
Posted: 09 Nov 2009 08:18 am
without the top QB..........think had the top QB been there? Imagine Baylor next year, a bottom dwellin team typically and suddenly they have a QB controversy.
edwin drood
Forum User
Joined: 19 Oct 1998
Posts: 2330
Location: Lincoln Nebraska
Post subject: Re: A running game...
Posted: 09 Nov 2009 09:37 am
By far the most frustrating aspect of this game:
Rushing attempts (by running backs): 15
Rushing yards (by running backs): 43
Against Colorado, running backs rushed 39 times for about 160 yards.
Granted, every team is different and some teams are easier than others to run against, but come on! Running the ball eats clock, keeps the opposing offense on the bench and forces them to take more chances when they do get on the field.
Baylor's rush defense was ranked 89th coming in, giving up 160 yards / game.
_________________
E. Drood - Father of Snickens and a diversified multicultural postmodern deconstructionist warlord.
skeezix
Forum User
Joined: 15 Nov 2004
Posts: 70
Post subject: The Spread Formation
Posted: 09 Nov 2009 10:00 am
Until Mizzou scraps the spread, running the football is a pipedream. Defenses eventually catch up with new offenses, which is what is happening to the spread. QB under center, with two backs in the backfield, which opens up the play-action pass.
Give the defense a rest, rather than take the chance of a three-and-out, taking less than one minute off the clock. But, this requires that you recruit fullbacks, which hasn't happened in a LONG time.
Mortie68
Forum User
Joined: 23 Oct 2009
Posts: 76
Post subject: Re: The Spread Formation
Posted: 09 Nov 2009 16:15 pm
skeezix wrote
Until Mizzou scraps the spread, running the football is a pipedream. Defenses eventually catch up with new offenses, which is what is happening to the spread.
There are a LOT of spread offense teams; no make that successful spread offense teams in the college and pro ranks. IMHO MU only has a few parts of the equations that make them successful. They do have the strong armed accurate QB but he is not the sneaky runner that makes the QB position multi-faceted and dangerous. (Last year Colt McCoy came in a little stronger and amazingly a better runner and theat worked all the miracles that offense needed compared to the 07 season.) MU does have some RB that have decent talent but not necessarily great speed especially with the apparent lack of OL speed. The spread offense also lacks some diversionary looks that other highly successful spread teams seem to use. So scrapping is not the complete answer; putting the right players with the right offense is a better way to look at it.
