I think what we're seeing in 2016 is a resurgence in the running game. It's still a passing league by and large, but teams like the Dolphins, Titans, Texans and Cowboys are showing us that you can be successful with a great running game and efficient play at QB (Mariota and Prescott are likely destined for top-tier star status, however, right now they're a notch below that. But they've made plays when needed and made few mistakes, so I'm not knocking or downgrading their play at all. Miami and Houston's QB are less settled).
Looking at the rest of the top 10 running teams, sure there are some bad teams on the list (Jets and 49ers), but 5 of the 10 (Dallas, New England, Miami, Oakland and Houston) are in playoff position and a couple others are still in the hunt (Tennessee and Buffalo).
Going forward, there's a couple of lessons we should glean:
1. A rugged, physical OL is making a comeback, and high picks should be spent on these players. I don't want guys who are turnstiles in pass blocking but I also am less inclined to draft a super athletic LT with no mean streak and who's below average in physicality. I want my OL to be nasty, I want them to physically dominate the opposing D-Line. I think that wears on a team over time both physically and also psychologically. Anyone who's been beat down on the football field, or even made a mistake during a work presentation knows that just a hint of confidence is lost and unless you make a concerted effort to keep your head in the game, it can be demoralising. Psychology matters.
2. Running backs are not quite a dime a dozen and the 1st round RB is not dead. Elite level talents like Elliot do provide a real advantage over your run-of-the-mill late round/UDFA.
3. A great running game takes a lot of pressure off the passing game, and it opens things up for it too. A constant theme of this season has been the 1st down run for zero or even negative yards. It puts the team in a 2nd and long and basically tells the defence that we're passing the ball. Much easier to defend the pass when you can put 5, 6 or 7 guys in coverage because the run is not a real threat. I know we all hate the 1st down run and harp on the play calling. But what if the unthinkable happened, and the team was actually able to regularly gain 4-8 yards on the ground on 1st down? All of a sudden its 2nd and short and that foolish 1st down play call isn't an issue anymore.
In summary, the plan for this offseason should be to rebuild the OL. Spend a couple of draft picks and bring in some veteran free agents. Find fits for what we're trying to do, and that doesn't mean to just hand out $100 million contracts. Just as there are value signings in baseball, I believe there are value signings in football. Don't necessarily pass on Fournette if he's available just because of his position. Yes, Bortles needs to be evaluated and a decision should be made from there, even if it's a tough one to swallow. If he does stay, focus on making things a bit easier on him. Maybe he responds and has a bounce-back year. If not, a greatly improved running game could allow this team to get away with a stop-gap veteran signing or trade (like Alex Smith was to the Chiefs, for example) before a long-term answer is found.
Running game never left. Teams who win championships run the ball well and play good defense. Denver last year, Seattle in 2013, Baltimore. Was it the Giants that didnt run the ball well in their title year but had a killer pass rush? Ultimately, it's about winning the LOS. This fallacy that the running game was dying off is untrue and effected by fantasy football'S popularity. There isn't a clear cut #1 RB anymore because of the RB by committee approach, but the running game never went away. Just that passing stats have become gaudy due to the rules. Football is still a physical game and the most physical teams are usually playing in January.
This thread makes me miss 2007's team even more. I miss teams fearing the week they would play us, and the week after would be daily ice baths.
What do you think would happen if Elliot was running behind our line? Wasn't Ivory better behind a true running line?
Quote:I think what we're seeing in 2016 is a resurgence in the running game. It's still a passing league by and large, but teams like the Dolphins, Titans, Texans and Cowboys are showing us that you can be successful with a great running game and efficient play at QB (Mariota and Prescott are likely destined for top-tier star status, however, right now they're a notch below that. But they've made plays when needed and made few mistakes, so I'm not knocking or downgrading their play at all. Miami and Houston's QB are less settled).
Looking at the rest of the top 10 running teams, sure there are some bad teams on the list (Jets and 49ers), but 5 of the 10 (Dallas, New England, Miami, Oakland and Houston) are in playoff position and a couple others are still in the hunt (Tennessee and Buffalo).
Going forward, there's a couple of lessons we should glean:
1. A rugged, physical OL is making a comeback, and high picks should be spent on these players. I don't want guys who are turnstiles in pass blocking but I also am less inclined to draft a super athletic LT with no mean streak and who's below average in physicality. I want my OL to be nasty, I want them to physically dominate the opposing D-Line. I think that wears on a team over time both physically and also psychologically. Anyone who's been beat down on the football field, or even made a mistake during a work presentation knows that just a hint of confidence is lost and unless you make a concerted effort to keep your head in the game, it can be demoralising. Psychology matters.
2. Running backs are not quite a dime a dozen and the 1st round RB is not dead. Elite level talents like Elliot do provide a real advantage over your run-of-the-mill late round/UDFA.
3. A great running game takes a lot of pressure off the passing game, and it opens things up for it too. A constant theme of this season has been the 1st down run for zero or even negative yards. It puts the team in a 2nd and long and basically tells the defence that we're passing the ball. Much easier to defend the pass when you can put 5, 6 or 7 guys in coverage because the run is not a real threat. I know we all hate the 1st down run and harp on the play calling. But what if the unthinkable happened, and the team was actually able to regularly gain 4-8 yards on the ground on 1st down? All of a sudden its 2nd and short and that foolish 1st down play call isn't an issue anymore.
In summary, the plan for this offseason should be to rebuild the OL. Spend a couple of draft picks and bring in some veteran free agents. Find fits for what we're trying to do, and that doesn't mean to just hand out $100 million contracts. Just as there are value signings in baseball, I believe there are value signings in football. Don't necessarily pass on Fournette if he's available just because of his position. Yes, Bortles needs to be evaluated and a decision should be made from there, even if it's a tough one to swallow. If he does stay, focus on making things a bit easier on him. Maybe he responds and has a bounce-back year. If not, a greatly improved running game could allow this team to get away with a stop-gap veteran signing or trade (like Alex Smith was to the Chiefs, for example) before a long-term answer is found.
I agree with everything you said, but the more I've watched college football this year, the more I believe Fournette is injury prone. I am totally enamored by Texas RB D'onta Foreman though. The kid is huge and he's a very physical runner with that extra gear to break away from people in the open field. As for the O-Line, I want a physical run blocker at RT and OG/C who can open holes in the running lanes like Pat Elflein of Ohio State, Ethan Pocic of LSU, Dan Freeman of Indiana or Mason Cole of Michigan. I also believe we need a LT if for no other purpose than depth, which is something we are sorely missing right now. Like you said, no more finesse blockers, but guys who can actually push opposing D-Linemen back and open running lanes. Once we are able to do this, we won't be such a one dimensional offense.
Quote:We need a FB too
Agreed.
Quote:What do you think would happen if Elliot was running behind our line? Wasn't Ivory better behind a true running line?
If we had Elliott we'd have a so-so run game instead of terrible one. We would have a better RB, but the problem with the O-Line would still be a glaring need. Our guys just can't run block. Ivory was a good RB with the Jets, but he was never great, because he lacked that extra gear to break away from the defense in the open field. He just isn't that kind of runner. I also don't know what kind of injury/illness that he had at the beginning of the season, but he looks nothing like the player we saw in 2015. He looks much more sluggish, weak and indecisive. I don't know if he can bounce back or not, but right now, I doubt it.
You can't run the ball when you are down two scores in the second half of games. It is no coincidence that our run game has started to look better in the last two games when we aren't hopelessly behind by the half. The best teams in the league tend to have leads in the second half and can keep pounding the rock.
It also helps if you don't get hit as the ball is handed to you.
We have the reigning AFC rushing champion on our team and we drafted an RB with a pick in the high 30s overall. It's fairly hard to invest more in the position than that.
Quote:If we had Elliott we'd have a so-so run game instead of terrible one. We would have a better RB, but the problem with the O-Line would still be a glaring need. Our guys just can't run block. Ivory was a good RB with the Jets, but he was never great, because he lacked that extra gear to break away from the defense in the open field. He just isn't that kind of runner. I also don't know what kind of injury/illness that he had at the beginning of the season, but he looks nothing like the player we saw in 2015. He looks much more sluggish, weak and indecisive. I don't know if he can bounce back or not, but right now, I doubt it.
We have a so-so run game right now. We're in the teens on a per attempt average. We just need more attempts to have the respectable totals that we are getting on a per carry rate.
Unfortunately that requires a QB that can extend drives on third downs.
Ivory would be worth the money if he could hold on to a football.
A good offensive line will make even average quarterbacks and running backs look much better. Everyone wants to pay attention to the flashy, showy positions like receivers, but a winning team starts with the line. I don't know that it matters if either a running game or passing game is emphasized; what matters is that whatever type game is used that it is done efficiently... and that depends on the o-line.
Like the foundation of a house, it doesn't get much attention until it isn't doing it's job. When it isn't right, nothing else works right either.
There is no 'right way' to build an offense. You just have to be good at whatever you decide to do.
I prefer to build mine with an S.
You can be a good team with a good oline, but you still win Super Bowls with franchise QBs.
You also don't win sustainably with good olines. The salary cap just doesn't allow for it, after only a few years you have to let an Osemele or Sitton go.
If you want to consistently win long term you get a franchise QB. That's still the only way to do it in the salary cap era.
Quote:
I prefer to build mine with an S.
Perhaps he is a UK Jags fan?
Quote:You can be a good team with a good oline, but you still win Super Bowls with franchise QBs.
You also don't win sustainably with good olines. The salary cap just doesn't allow for it, after only a few years you have to let an Osemele or Sitton go.
If you want to consistently win long term you get a franchise QB. That's still the only way to do it in the salary cap era.
I agree with line 1.
I disagree with line 2. Yes, you eventually will lose good O-Linemen to free agency, that's why the best teams are pro-active and consistently draft depth behind those star O-Linemen. That way when they leave, you can replace them with someone of fairly equal value.
A good offensive line will always help a franchise QB develop and grow. Part of what has held the Colts back, is that they have a franchise QB in Andrew Luck, but they have a horrendous O-Line. He has to rush his throws and put the ball in very tight windows, just to keep from getting flattened by opposing defenses. The team would go a lot further if they would address the weaknesses at the OT position.
Quote:I disagree with line 2. Yes, you eventually will lose good O-Linemen to free agency, that's why the best teams are pro-active and consistently draft depth behind those star O-Linemen. That way when they leave, you can replace them with someone of fairly equal value.
A good offensive line will always help a franchise QB develop and grow. Part of what has held the Colts back, is that they have a franchise QB in Andrew Luck, but they have a horrendous O-Line. He has to rush his throws and put the ball in very tight windows, just to keep from getting flattened by opposing defenses. The team would go a lot further if they would address the weaknesses at the OT position.
Can you name a team in the salary cap era that has successfully built a team around their oline that won consistently for a long period of time? I think the current Bengals are probably the closest a team has come to that. If a peak of 4 winning seasons and no playoff wins is your idea of success then sure you can build around an oline.
The Colts have certainly addressed their oline, too. In the Luck era they have spent first round picks on Castanzo and Kelly, second round picks on Mewhort and Ijalana, and third rounders on Thornton and Holmes. They also gave big money to Gosder Cherilus. They just missed on all of it except Mewhort and Kelly.