Rhule on Why CMC lack of rushes

[Camp Fodder]

I never thought I would miss Rivera so much

[Peon Awesome]

1 hour ago, Sgt Schultz said:

The problem is situational.  In this game we have a rookie LT, who may turn out to be great, but he's playing his first game opposite perhaps the best pass rushing DE in the game.  Our QB is playing his first game with us, against his former team, and the smart play is to take the onus off him initially.  That same QB is pretty good at play action, which gets set up by running the ball some.  The rest of our OL is mostly playing their first games together, so how they function as a unit is a question mark.

All that points to at least showing the run early to give the OL a chance to establish itself, the LT a chance to attack (and run blocking is his strength right now), the QB a chance to settle, and to set up the play action later, which may just give that stud DE a pause on his rush to the QB.

Might the game plan next week be different?  Sure, it depends on the opponent and what our various offensive units look like after game 1.  And it might be different yet again the week after that based on those same questions.  Maybe McCaffrey gets 22 carries in game 1 and 12 in game 2.

This team is not good enough to "inflict its will" on most opponents.  Maybe not any, who knows?  Truth is, in the NFL being able to do that is rare these days.  So you have to game plan to put the players in a position to succeed.  We did not do that Sunday.  We game planned seemingly without any regard to the situation or the opponent.  Kinda like we have done for the last 12 years, at least.

Yeah and that makes sense but you could easily craft a narrative to argue the opposite. Let's say we do a run heavy scheme against Cleveland.

So you have injury prone McCaffrey, who has only played in 10 games the past 2 years, and you decide to run him 20+ times in his first action in a year and a half? Let's say he dings himself up. What the hell were we thinking? We didn't learn a thing from the last 2 years? Especially when you have Baker playing his old team with a gigantic chip on his shoulder ready for the ultimate revenge game and you decide to neuter him so you can run McCaffrey ragged? What a complete idiot Rhule. Refusing to budge on his failing run heavy mindset when all the successful franchises have moved to a pass oriented offense.

[mc52beast]

Rhule has the right idea… he has one of the best rb’s in the game and doesn’t want to use him in the running game.

Im telling you guys, he’ll be in Canton when his career is over.

[CRA]

11 minutes ago, Peon Awesome said:

Yeah and that makes sense but you could easily craft a narrative to argue the opposite. Let's say we do a run heavy scheme against Cleveland.

So you have injury prone McCaffrey, who has only played in 10 games the past 2 years, and you decide to run him 20+ times in his first action in a year and a half? Let's say he dings himself up. What the hell were we thinking? We didn't learn a thing from the last 2 years? Especially when you have Baker playing his old team with a gigantic chip on his shoulder ready for the ultimate revenge game and you decide to neuter him so you can run McCaffrey ragged? What a complete idiot Rhule. Refusing to budge on his failing run heavy mindset when all the successful franchises have moved to a pass oriented offense.

you can run a collection of CMC, Hubbard, and Foreman at the Browns.  All 3 can run.   Hubbard just can’t catch.  

that was supposedly why we drafted Hubbard and then added Foreman.  It’s not a run CMC into the dirt or no running choice. 

there isn’t a comparable counter narrative of why you would come out with a pass heavy gameplan.  

we weren’t even close to balanced with that opening game either.  A Joe freaking Brady game plan emphasized the run more than what they came out with