Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

What exactly is the point of running a conservative offense?!?


Best Answer Zod, 31 July 2013 - 04:55 PM

1. Minimize turnovers

2. Maximize time of posession

 

 

 

Go to the full post


  • Please log in to reply
97 replies to this topic

#31 csx

csx

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,797 posts

Posted 31 July 2013 - 02:37 PM

Atlanta literally made it to the NFCC game on 82 yards rushing a game. Baltimore's running game was average at best. Green Bay and New England are not rushing teams and they found some success in the playoffs.

It is no longer a requirement.

The Patriots were 7th in the league in rushing. The two SB teams were 4 & 11...I'm pretty sure it's a requirement to run effectively. If not we need to cut all of our good running backs.



#32 Frash Brastard

Frash Brastard

    The Frashmaker

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,598 posts

Posted 31 July 2013 - 02:37 PM

New England was beat by the Ravens, who were 11th in rushing (above average) and Green Bay and Atlanta were beaten by the 9ers who were 4th in rushing.
I realize that it's not a requirement to make the playoffs, and I'm not advocating foxball, but I don't have a problem with more conservative that what we've seen the last two years.


The ravens passed it over 57% of the time (or tried to since I'm also counting sack plays) and the Niners weren't running any kind of a conservative pound it up the middle offense with Kaepernick running and throwing all over the place so I'm not sure what point you are trying to prove bringing those teams up but it sure as hell doesn't prove that conservative, 3-yards and a cloud of dust offenses still work here.

#33 Frash Brastard

Frash Brastard

    The Frashmaker

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,598 posts

Posted 31 July 2013 - 02:45 PM

The Patriots were 7th in the league in rushing. The two SB teams were 4 & 11...I'm pretty sure it's a requirement to run effectively. If not we need to cut all of our good running backs.


Running effectively is different than running a lot more because you think it sets up everything else. The truth is that the pats had a ridiculous amount of snaps in general last year and they still passed a lot more than they ran, and for a lot more yards. It's inconsequential anyway for them because they were a very mediocre team the year before and made it to the Superbowl, losing to the worst rushing team in the league.

I'm pretty sure nobody's going to put eight in the box because your getting gashed up the middle by the patriots as long as brady's the qb.

#34 iamhubby1

iamhubby1

    SENIOR HUDDLER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,182 posts
  • LocationSpartanburg, SC

Posted 31 July 2013 - 02:57 PM

It always amazes me when fans think that just because a team is successful throwing the ball they don't want to run the ball. A one dimensional team is easier to defend. Almost everyone knows that. Teams want to run, and even though they are not successful, they still try to run the ball.

Even in today's NFL teams want to be as close to balanced as possible. Defenses are getting better, you need balance to keep those D's honest. As those D's go with 5DBs and smaller quicker LBs to defend the pass, you have to run to take advantage of those smaller Ds. The teams that can run and pass with equal success are going to be hard to stop.

But fans see the pass and are enthralled. So they believe that the pass is the way to go. Simplistic logic, and wrong logic.

#35 Frash Brastard

Frash Brastard

    The Frashmaker

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,598 posts

Posted 31 July 2013 - 03:01 PM

It always amazes me when fans think that just because a team is successful throwing the ball they don't want to run the ball. A one dimensional team is easier to defend. Almost everyone knows that. Teams want to run, and even though they are not successful, they still try to run the ball.

Even in today's NFL teams want to be as close to balanced as possible. Defenses are getting better, you need balance to keep those D's honest. As those D's go with 5DBs and smaller quicker LBs to defend the pass, you have to run to take advantage of those smaller Ds. The teams that can run and pass with equal success are going to be hard to stop.

But fans see the pass and are enthralled. So they believe that the pass is the way to go. Simplistic logic, and wrong logic.


Next caller

#36 lovelett

lovelett

    MEMBER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 433 posts
  • LocationWest Palm Beach, Florida

Posted 31 July 2013 - 03:21 PM

I do not see why everyone thinks that Shula is going to be so conservative.  He has to know Cam has a lot more talent than Trent Dilfer, and I do not see why he will not try to take advantage of it. He has to know he only has one year to make or break himself.



#37 googoodan

googoodan

    Memberest

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,385 posts
  • LocationBayside

Posted 31 July 2013 - 03:27 PM

Patriots, 2nd in rushing attempts: not a running team.

#38 Frash Brastard

Frash Brastard

    The Frashmaker

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,598 posts

Posted 31 July 2013 - 03:45 PM

Welcome to selective stats analysis with mr.belding

#39 Frash Brastard

Frash Brastard

    The Frashmaker

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,598 posts

Posted 31 July 2013 - 03:48 PM

The pats ran 523 times, dropped back 668 times


Jesus Christ people

#40 Leeroy Jenkins PhD

Leeroy Jenkins PhD

    HCIC

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,896 posts
  • LocationHouston Texas

Posted 31 July 2013 - 04:01 PM

OK, you are all missing the point.  To win games we have to score more points than the other team.  Or you could say, we have to not let the other team score as much as we do.  

 

There will be times when we need to score quickly and times when we need to take our time scoring.  There are multiple ways to move the ball forward, but the main goal should be at least gaining 10 yards within our first 3 attempts at doing it until we are in a position to either score a TD or FG.  The TD is usually preferable.  

 

If you have any questions, let me know.

 

 



#41 googoodan

googoodan

    Memberest

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,385 posts
  • LocationBayside

Posted 31 July 2013 - 04:04 PM

Welcome to selective stats analysis with mr.belding


sorry, who selectively said they weren't a running team?

#42 Udogg

Udogg

    Cardiac Victim since 95

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,137 posts

Posted 31 July 2013 - 04:06 PM

I think we should run the offense that best fits our team.   Not the one with Julio Jones and Roddy White.  Not the one with Drew Brees or Peyton Manning.  The one that fits this team. 

 

We don't have a strong overpowering OL at the moment.  Especially on the right side, but the left isn't airtight either.

We have probably the strongest overall backfield in the league

1 really good WR and a bunch of maybe good to OK WR's.  

1 really good TE and ?????????

An oustanding mobile, passing, 250lb 6ft 6 juggernaut at QB.

A brutal front 4 on defense.

Talent wise when healthy the best linebacking corp in the league.

A suspect but possibly competent secondary.

 

 

Past 2 years we have been a top 10 offense and a top 10 defense.  Problem is neither at the same time.  So what kind of team should we be?

 

A pass happy team?    Relying on the pass because it's a passing league now.  Even though statistically when we do that we lose.

A balanced team?        50/50 run pass.  Haven't really seen it implemented.

A run heavy team?       Foxball 2013?  Draw play on 3 and 9 anyone?

Conservative?              Play for first downs, Punt on 4th and 1?

Conventional?              I don't even know what this means.  Maybe play like the Giants?

Innovative?                  What we have tried to do the last 2 years to varying degrees of success.  Read option, anexation of puerto rico, etc.

 

 

 

 



#43 Frash Brastard

Frash Brastard

    The Frashmaker

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,598 posts

Posted 31 July 2013 - 04:06 PM

sorry, who selectively said they weren't a running team?

 

I did

 

because, you know, they're not



#44 CPcavedweller

CPcavedweller

    Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,265 posts

Posted 31 July 2013 - 04:08 PM

Does no one remember the 7 and 8 minute drives at the end of last season to close games out? This was because we had a more conventional offense that can take advantage of Cams mid to long range accuracy. Bring the linebackers up with the play action and force the DBs into cover 3, it'll leave our new slot reciever out in the open. If the safety bites, Ted Ginn takes the top off. Luckily, we have two great blocking WRs in Smith and Lafell.

This is not a plan for a conservative offense but you play to the game situation and don't force the issue, which Chud was good at.

#45 rayzor

rayzor

    shula is who i thought he was.

  • Moderators
  • -29,936 posts

Posted 31 July 2013 - 04:14 PM

The pats ran 523 times, dropped back 668 times


Jesus Christ people

the pats ran the ball on 44% of their plays. that's kind of a low percentage. not what i would call a running offense. yes, they ran a lot, but as a percentage of what they did...they were a pass heavy team.

 

you could make an argument that they were balanced, but not much more than that.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com - IP Content Design by Joshua Tree / TitansReport.