PDA

View Full Version : Running game isn't as bad as YOU think



madness
10-20-2008, 10:39 AM
A lot of people are under the impression that our running is struggling mightily and I'm hear to tell you although it definitely could be better, it really isn't as bad as people say it is.

First thing to realize is that we run a varient of of the WCO. Once we understand that, we can understand how a lot of things differ from a convential offense.

Here is a little breakdown of a typical WCO.



The objective of the West Coast Offense is to:

Spread the defense out horizontally as well as vertically, forcing slower linebackers into coverage.
Maintain possession of the football by utilizing a short passing attack almost as an extension of the running game.
Create mismatches with speed, size, or number of receivers.
Avoid tendencies that defenses can key on by throwing on any down and distance.Ideal player qualities:

Quarterback - More of a focus is placed on decision-making and accuracy over arm strength in this system. A quarterback must be able to choose from multiple options and deliver the ball quickly. Mobility is also a big plus.
Running Back - In the West Coast Offense, running backs are generally used more as receivers out of the backfield than in other systems, so you need a guy with all-around skills. Good hands and route-running skills are a must.
Tight End - The tight end’s role is generally that of a possession receiver and blocker. The ability to catch the ball in traffic is a huge plus.
Wide Receiver - With the focus on a short passing attack, precision and timing are of the utmost importance, so receivers have to run precise routes. Straight-line speed isn’t as important as an ability to separate in traffic. And an ability to make plays after the catch can turn a good receiver into a superstar in this offense.
Offensive Linemen - You’re generally not trying to pound the ball on the ground in the West Coast Offense, so guys who can consistently blow defenders off the line aren’t necessary. Actually quicker, more mobile linemen are more ideal because of their ability to pull or get outside in a rolling pocket on plays designed to get the quarterback outside.Yesterday's receiving and rushing stats:
<TABLE><TBODY><TR><TH class=nameCell>Receiving</TH><TH>REC</TH><TH>YDS</TH><TH>TD</TH><TH>LG</TH></TR><TR><TD class=nameCell>L. Evans (http://www.nfl.com/players/profile?id=00-0022910) </TD><TD>8</TD><TD>89</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>20</TD></TR><TR><TD class=nameCell>R. Royal (http://www.nfl.com/players/profile?id=00-0021273) </TD><TD>4</TD><TD>53</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>20</TD></TR><TR><TD class=nameCell>J. Reed (http://www.nfl.com/players/profile?id=00-0021166) </TD><TD>3</TD><TD>32</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>16</TD></TR><TR><TD class=nameCell>F. Jackson (http://www.nfl.com/players/profile?id=00-0024204) </TD><TD>3</TD><TD>28</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>14</TD></TR><TR><TD class=nameCell>M. Lynch (http://www.nfl.com/players/profile?id=00-0025399) </TD><TD>4</TD><TD>22</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>10</TD></TR><TR><TD class=nameCell>R. Parrish (http://www.nfl.com/players/profile?id=00-0023490) </TD><TD>2</TD><TD>19</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>22</TD></TR><TR><TD class=nameCell>D. Schouman (http://www.nfl.com/players/profile?id=00-0025609) </TD><TD>1</TD><TD>18</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>18</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

<TABLE><TBODY><TR><TH class=nameCell>Rushing</TH><TH>ATT</TH><TH>YDS</TH><TH>TD</TH><TH>LG</TH></TR><TR><TD class=nameCell>M. Lynch (http://www.nfl.com/players/profile?id=00-0025399) </TD><TD>19</TD><TD>70</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>19</TD></TR><TR><TD class=nameCell>F. Jackson (http://www.nfl.com/players/profile?id=00-0024204) </TD><TD>9</TD><TD>33</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>7</TD></TR><TR><TD class=nameCell>T. Edwards (http://www.nfl.com/players/profile?id=00-0025479) </TD><TD>4</TD><TD>6</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>12</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

Lynch and Jackson combine for a total of 153 all purpose yards. That number could be better but not too shabby. With the no call on the Lynch facemask, it could have been +20! :mad:


Now here's some key statements that may help explain our running woes.



"Basic football knowledge leads one to believe that the "correct" offensive philosophy is first to establish a strong running game. This will control the clock and the tempo of the game and set a physical tone while wearing down the defensive players. Additionally, the defense will need to adjust to stop the running game, bringing more players closer to the line of scrimmage and center of the field. As that change occurs, the offensive team will pass the ball in the now open, deep areas of the field. Overall, at least 50-60% of the offensive calls will be some form of a running play. The West Coast offense is essence the exact opposite of this classic style (http://www.associatedcontent.com/theme/1635/style.html) of play."
"The West Coast Offense emphasizes short, quick passes in place of a running game. At least 60% of the plays called will be passes and in stricter practices of the West Coast offense it could range up to 80% or more." (On a side note: Trent's completion % falls in the line of WC QB's such as Joe M. and Steve Young as opposed to verticle passing QB's such as "John Elway (57%), Dan Marino (59%), and Ken Stabler (59%).")
"A defense still has to bring players close to the line of scrimmage to adjust to the offense, the difference being that the defense needs to be spread out across the entire width of the field as opposed to being concentrated in the center to counter a running game. In this way the defense is now vulnerable to the run and the deep pass at the same time."
"The passing game normally will substitute for the running game with one basic principle.. it's easier to run down field and gain yards if you just cut out all the middle men and completely circumvent your O-line and their D-line. That way, you don't have to look for holes to run through. An average running game is normally needed to keep a defense "honest" and allow teams to run the short passes. Slants, quick outs, and curls are all mainstays of the West Coast."
In most conventional offenses, the idea is to run the ball to draw the safeties and linebackers in closer to the line of scrimmage, thus opening up passing lanes for a vertical attack. The West Coast Offense does just the opposite, using a quick, horizontal passing attack to set up the running game.
"Another key part of the Walsh implementation was "pass first, run later." It was Walsh's intention to gain an early lead by passing the ball, then run the ball on a tired defense late in the game, wearing them down further and running down the clock. The San Francisco 49ers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco_49ers) under Walsh often executed this very effectively.
Another key element in Walsh's attack was the three step dropback instead of traditional seven step drops or shotgun formations. The three step drop helped the quarterback get the ball out faster resulting in far fewer sacks. "WCO" plays unfold quicker than in traditional offenses and are usually based on timing routes by the receivers. In this offense the receivers also have reads and change their routes based on the coverages presented to them. The quarterback makes three reads and if no opportunity is available after three reads, the QB will then check off to a back or tight end. Five step and even 7 step dropbacks are now implemented in modern day WCO's because defensive speed has increased since the 80's. Some modern WCO's have even used shotgun formations (e.g. Green Bay, Atlanta '04-'06)."So as we can see, the short passing game sets up the run that usually doesn't pay dividends until later in the game which the Bills pattern fits. It's pretty common knowledge that teams scouting reports say stack the box to stop the Bills which actually works in the WCO's favor. Lynch and Jackson are getting a nice dose of receptions and Trent can deliver the intermediate to deep ball to keep defenses honest.

As I stated in the beginning, there is obviously room for improvement but a lot of what we are seeing is by design.


Sources:
http://football.about.com/od/offensivestrategy/a/West-Coast.htm
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/357807/understanding_nfl_football_the_west.html?page=2&cat=14
http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/5913880/West-Coast-Offense-Simplified
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_coast_offense

madness
10-20-2008, 10:47 AM
I also like to add what Confused said in another thread...


Look at it this way, with our two back system, we are not poundling the crap out of marshawn making him run 25-30 times a game. Meaning he'll be healthy for years. With Trent's surgical passing attack, we dont need to pound the ball as much.

http://www.billszone.com/fanzone/showpost.php?p=2698984&postcount=10

TigerJ
10-20-2008, 11:29 AM
I agree. Part of the reason that Buffalo's running game isn't as productive as some teams enjoy is Trent Edwards. He is so accurate that the pass is a viable option when Buffalo needs short yardage. As a consequence, the Bills may opt to pass on a number of occasions when another team might pound the ball out. Fewer reps for the running game means defensive linemen don't get worn down quite as much during the game. Than may keep Buffalo's yards per carry down a little bit late in games. I liken it to Miami with Marino as QB. Miami could never muster a decent running game while Marino was QB. I think Buffalo's running game is still better than Miami endured during the Marino years.

I'm not excusing Buffalo's run blocking, which still needs to get a lot better.

Pinkerton Security
10-20-2008, 11:44 AM
very good post, madness.

yordad
10-20-2008, 11:45 AM
Well, I appreciate the info. But, it seems you are almost saying, "our running game has to be below average because we are running the WCO." I disagree with this.

Our RBs are studs. And, I don't see how having poor run blocking favors the WCO. Or, how the WCO contributes to poor run blocking.

trapezeus
10-20-2008, 12:08 PM
good post madness. my issue is that after the KM INT, we couldn't pick up 2 yards fora first down to run out the clock. granted the team seems to run the ball better at the end of the game, but it would go a long way to saving trent from getting injured again.

jimbohastle51
10-20-2008, 12:29 PM
we dont use our running game to set up the pass. that is the difference in our game. we run when we want to and we run out of shot gun probably almost half the time. the way marshawn got his 19 carries (tosses and draws mostly) 70 yards is very respectable. shounert use such a crazy array of pass and run that you cant tell whats going to happen if your the defence (hence the draw plays and shotgun runs and tosses), if we lined up just in the power I and ran to marshawn 19 times against that D i think he would have had over 100 yards, but i'll take our surprize attack O over ground and pound tight games anytime!

billsburgh
10-20-2008, 12:56 PM
What we would like is for it to be more consistent. Too many times they have been stopped short on 3rd and 1 or 2. Alot of the time, the yards Lynch does get are completely because of his effort.

yordad
10-20-2008, 01:02 PM
i'll take our surprize attack O over ground and pound tight games anytime!How about when we need that 1 tough yard? And, isn't our "surprize attack O" still producing "tight games"?

How about a "surprize attack O" with the abilty to "ground and pound"? Because any offense that lacks the ability to ground and pound will have the deficiency become a glaring liability at some point.

I don't think our inability to block effectively can be blamed on the WCO.

yordad
10-20-2008, 01:08 PM
Now, if you said "we don't have a ground and pound running back because the WCO requires a more versitile RB", then that would make sense. But, being that we have a versitle/pounding RB (2 actually), we have no excuse IMO.

Blocking is the problem. The WCO can not explain poor blocking, as far as I know.

justasportsfan
10-20-2008, 01:11 PM
I thought we were just running a blend of the WCO and Turk added in the Wyche system they ran way back when.

madness
10-20-2008, 01:17 PM
Thanks, guys. No one is making excuses for the poor run blocking. Poor run blocking is a whole other issue and is not meant to be in this conversation.

I'm just stating if you're expecting Marshawn to go over 100 yards every week while getting 25-30 carries, it's not going to happen. Those two stats are irrevelant to getting W's in this offense.

yordad
10-20-2008, 05:12 PM
Thanks, guys. No one is making excuses for the poor run blocking. Poor run blocking is a whole other issue and is not meant to be in this conversation.

I'm just stating if you're expecting Marshawn to go over 100 yards every week while getting 25-30 carries, it's not going to happen. Those two stats are irrevelant to getting W's in this offense.Now I am confussed. You are saying the running game isn't as bad as we think, and then saying "Poor run blocking is a whole other issue"?

The run game comes down to a few things:

1). Yards per carry. Many factors effect this, of course. Including RB ability, blocking, threat of pass, and play calling (mixing it up). If we don't run alot, and, run out of a spread formation when we do, this should raise ypc. So, this begs the question "why does our ypc suck?"

2). Getting the tough yard. Something we only get through super RB second efforts. I have seen like one play all year where the line did this like it should. That was the play were Josh Reed got that CB ejected after bench pressing him into the endzone.

My point is, our scheme can make it so Lynch doesn't get a lot of yards per game, but it cannot explain his lack of yards per carry. And, I think the running game is bad, because it comes up short on the 2 things mentioned above.

casdhf
10-20-2008, 05:26 PM
WCO will be a tough sell in DEC.

Griff
10-20-2008, 05:55 PM
When I say our running game is bad, I mean that our offensive line seem to have a hard time opening holes, preventing Lynch and Jackson from getting to even the second level without a huge fight.