I may be mistaken (I didn't do play counts etc.) but it felt to me as if Olson was quick to abandon the run and would go pass heavy when he felt like he was in "catch up" mode (which also seemed to be most of the time, lol)

Olson really only did that in two games. (Tennessee and Oakland.)

 

He called an average of  25.6 carries per game. 

---

To add to that, McCaffrey is a guy you'd like to be able to move him around to do a lot of different things (not just leave him in the backfield.)

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

Exactly. 

If only he was black

---

Olson really only did that in two games. (Tennessee and Oakland.)

 

He called an average of  25.6 carries per game. 

 

Need deeper analysis.  Which quarters were they called?

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

http://www.rotoworld.com/headlines/nfl/3...-committee  

 

could mean something or perhaps nothing at all. Relevant none the less.

---

Need deeper analysis.  Which quarters were they called?

Yeah - I'm not going to dig that deep . LOL

 

Hackett = 28.1 runs called per game. 

Olson = 25.6 

 

The run efficiency differential between those coordinators is huge  regardless of when they were running in the ball game. 

---

http://www.rotoworld.com/headlines/nfl/3...-committee

 

could mean something or perhaps nothing at all. Relevant none the less.

 

If we go into 2017 with the same RB group, the offense will again be undone 

---

If we go into 2017 with the same RB group, the offense will again be undone 

 

 

...even though that group was on pace for 2000 yards per season over their last 9 games behind a line that's almost certain to be upgraded. 

---

Yeah - I'm not going to dig that deep . LOL

 

Hackett = 28.1 runs called per game. 

Olson = 25.6 

 

The run efficiency differential between those coordinators is huge  regardless of when they were running in the ball game. 

 

Not sure we should be looking at runs/passes per game without including total plays per game.  If we aren't getting first downs, our totals for both running and passing will be lower.

 

Here's something fun.

 

Through the first five games, we were extremely lopsided (pass heavy.)

 

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the...ppy-teams/

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

If we go into 2017 with the same RB group, the offense will again be undone 

Its not ideal but it all depends on the Oline anyway you go. Fix the line and all will be well. Think we need a home run threat though, unless Grant somehow becomes that.

---

2016 Yards per game under Olson:  72.6

 

2016 Yards per game under Hackett:  124.8

 

Tell me again why Ivory and Yeldon can't be effective behind a better line and why I can't use coaching as an "excuse?"

 

 

You're adding in Bortles' rushing yards. That should be separated. Here are Ivory and Yeldon's rushing stats (in no particular order,) after Hackett took over.

 

 

Yeldon

 

7-33

9-32

4-16

14-55

6-17

17-59

8-28

 

 

Ivory

 

14-45

18-107

9-31

17-39

9-44

10-44

 

 

Where is the huge improvement? I see the same type of stats that were typical all season.

---

You're adding in Bortles' rushing yards. That should be separated. Here are Ivory and Yeldon's rushing stats (in no particular order,) after Hackett took over.

 

 

Yeldon

 

7-33

9-32

4-16

14-55

6-17

17-59

8-28

 

 

Ivory

 

14-45

18-107

9-31

17-39

9-44

10-44

 

 

Where is the huge improvement? I see the same type of stats that were typical all season.

 

 

Ummm.  Hackett was smarter about using Bortles' legs and I wouldn't just leave that out.  And you are throwing up very incomplete stats here. 

 

Yeldon's yards per game running and receiving went up under Hackett very marginally. It wasn't a big number. A few yards per game in each category. 

I'll concede that. 

 

Ivory went from 26 yards per game on the ground under Olson to 51.7 under Hackett.  His receiving numbers also increased greatly under Hackett. 

---

Ummm.  Hackett was smarter about using Bortles' legs and I wouldn't just leave that out.  And you are throwing up very incomplete stats here. 

 

Yeldon's yards per game running and receiving went up under Hackett very marginally. It wasn't a big number. A few yards per game in each category. 

I'll concede that. 

 

Ivory went from 26 yards per game on the ground under Olson to 51.7 under Hackett.  His receiving numbers also increased greatly under Hackett. 

 

 

Any way you look at it, 26 yards per game or 52, they both suck out loud!

---

Any way you look at it, 26 yards per game or 52, they both suck out loud!

It's a committee approach. His touches were limited.  He was really only ineffective in one of six games  (detroit) under Hackett as opposed to three of five games under Olson. 

 

He doubled his average yards per game after the switch of coordinators.

  You can write that off as nothing if you choose. I don't. 

 

I see it as a positive sign regarding what he could accomplish under Hackett's play calling with an improved line.  

---

The run game needs to be supplemented, not overhauled. The oline and the QB make the run game way more than all but the very elite of backs, of which there are none available in FA or the draft.

---

You're adding in Bortles' rushing yards. That should be separated. Here are Ivory and Yeldon's rushing stats (in no particular order,) after Hackett took over.

 

 

Yeldon

 

7-33

9-32

4-16

14-55

6-17

17-59

8-28

 

 

Ivory

 

14-45

18-107

9-31

17-39

9-44

10-44

 

 

Where is the huge improvement? I see the same type of stats that were typical all season.

Don't forget about Grant. Didn't he drop 100 on the Colts?

---

In the frame of one off-season I'd much rather allocate resources to the line over the backs.


Then re-evaluate the backs next year.

---

Both of them looked horrible all year. Hard to watch even

---

short answer:  hell no

---

<FONT face="Comic Sans MS" size=3><B><FONT face=Verdana color=#ff6600 size=4></FONT></B></FONT>

The run game needs to be supplemented, not overhauled. The oline and the QB make the run game way more than all but the very elite of backs, of which there are none available in FA or the draft.

 

well, this QB definitely isn't going to help with the running game.  He can't audible out of a bad play and into a god one to save his life.

 

I disagree about the RB position in the draft - I think there are 3-4 players that could become elite from the group.   

 

If it was me, I would spend a lot of money and draft picks on the offensive line.  Everything is better with a good offensive line.

---

<FONT face="Comic Sans MS" size=3><B><FONT face=Verdana color=#ff6600 size=4></FONT></B></FONT>