Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Marshall Faulk: Panthers Need To Commit To The Run


TylerDurden

Recommended Posts

Marshall Faulk was just on NFLN, and for his "Marshall Plan" today he discussed our run game. Leading up to the segment, the story was titled "Trouble In Carolina?"

So, during the segment, Marshall said our problem is that opposing teams are (or at least were) determined to stop the run and make a rookie QB beat them. Furthermore, he said when we have run, the 10 guys outside of the ballcarrier haven't committed to the run and gave him a chance.

He then followed that up with a few different clips showing the "lack of commitment," with one clip being Legadu's whiff on a block on Adrian Wilson Week 1 that we all were heated about. The next clip was a read-option by Cam in which he showed the DE crashing down (which is Cam's key to hand it to the RB instead of keeping it) and Cam kept the ball and was tackled for a loss or right at the LOS.

Marshall said if Legadu would've sold out for the run and blocked his man with any kid of effort, Deangelo would've been able to cut it back and it would've went for a huge gain.

He also showed a clip against the Packers where Hangartner and Shockey lost the outside on a toss - this one doesn't bother me as bad, as it was the Packers and their front 7 is pretty good.

But all in all, good points. Again, I've stated in previous threads that I thought part of our problems with the run game was that our new philosophy isn't conducive to it - in Marshall's words, not committed. These clips showed it.

We're aggressive, but we aren't looking to pound teams to death anymore... But still, with our backs, we should've had more big plays to this point, I just think that our offense is more focused on the pass and the run is seen as secondary - so sometimes the effort is as well.

As we all know, Cam has done great and all indications are, he will be great long-term... With that established, I'm hoping the defenses know we can hurt them in the passing game now and we're smart about catching them off guard with the run now. I really think we should see some progress in the run game this week.

Once the run game gets up to speed, I actually think Cam will be even more effective. Just wanted to share...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope we pound the rock today. Regardless of whether its been working or not, you have to run the football to keep the Defense honest and off balance. I understand that the passing attack has been great , but is it too much to ask to give one of our running backs 15 carries?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We dont have to do anything but execute our game plan and make adjustments like we planned to do. I dont get why people think we HAVE to run the ball. . . I mean, yes, of course you do, but its not like anything good will come of forcing 40 carries if its not there for the taking. The beautiful thing is that Cam can throw and we have receivers who can catch. Take what the D gives you and light em long when they do something stupid.

If theyre gonna give us the run then so be it. Guess we'll see how much confidence Del Rio has in his D very shortly. My guess is that they drop into coverage all day, and we'll end up running it anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I agree with him to the extent that it would help keep defenses honest. Towards the end of the Packers game, they actually started dropping 8 guys into coverage. I just think our guys could be getting a lot more yards on runs if we executed better (I know, Captain Obvious).

If we executed better, then in turn, I think the red zone problems would be solved and it's possible Cam would look even better.

TBH, I love the passing attack and pass-oriented philosphy, and obviously Cam, Smitty, and the TEs are exciting to watch. I love the offense, but I think the balance will really benefit us to the max in terms of efficiency.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Word. The run game needs to complement the passing game better. 2 yd carries or not. Just keep pushing the rock forward and our passing will take care of the rest. Strangely we've only seen Cam actually try to "take off" once when it wasn't by design. Even that could help to a degree if defenses are committed to playing coverage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we executed better, then in turn, I think the red zone problems would be solved and it's possible Cam would look even better.

Exactly. We need to get the run game going to help in the red zone. When we get inside the 5, the run should be a viable option, and not just with Cam on a QB keeper.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Would Morgan or Beason have been HOFers' if injuries hadn't derailed their careers?  I was not a close watcher of the game when Morgan was in his prime but I thought Beason had a few seasons at close to Lukes' level of play.
    • Franchise QBs feast when things are rolling and the tide that raises boats when things are going sideways.  Bryce isn't that. He's a complimentary player, that's it.  When the defense and STs are on point, he plays loose and it shows.  When we are in a dog fight and things haven't gone our way, he struggles.  It's that simple. He's not a horrible QB, but he's not top tier either.  So the question begs, is this worthy of a second contract?  The answer should be no.  It definitely is my answer. Bryce will never be a QB that can produce wins largely on his arm.  That's a FRANCHISE QB, any other QB is simply a placeholder at the starter's position until that guy can be found.   At some point the excuses of lack of weapons will be a straw man.  Heck, it's nearly there now.  I mean if he doesn't look even better than last year will we blame it on the TE position?  'Well if Bryce only had a player like Kelce, Kittle or Gronk on this team...'  Are we really going to do that?  
    • When I arrived at college, I was 18, not too much younger than some of these draft picks.  It was not a huge school, but there were guys on the team who were 21, 22, 23....playing ahead of me.  I was seventh on the depth chart.  Those guys have been through a few seasons, were stronger, more knowledgeable.  I was a better raw player than some of them, but those other factors matter.  As I grew stronger, more familiar with the playbook, and learned what it was like to play in college, I gradually improved and with that, I rose up the depth chart.  It took most of my freshman year for the light to come on.  Had the coach thrown me into the starting lineup day 1, I would have probably failed.    And that was college.  So I agree with you based on my experience on a much lower level.  Frankly, I think that is why so many kids drafted to fill huge gaps bust.  The teams are desperate.  Anyone who looks to fill vacancies in the starting lineup through the draft is desperate.  You draft depth to develop.  For this reason, I say, "Let Walker start for a while."  Maybe Brazzell can be our WR 4.  Throw Hunter into a rotation and ask him to do one or two things.  Freeling needs some strength and he needs to work on run blocking.
×
×
  • Create New...