Just an observation

[boomermagic]

The Colts have one of the best passing offenses in the NFL but the lack of an effective running game got them beat IMO.. I have alway's said it is so important that OU establish a running game that is effective in the BIG games .. the colts offense reminds me of ours.. I know Bob understands the importance of balance on offense and hopefully we will see that next season because being one demensional is a sure fire way of not matching up in the big games where your opponant is as talented as you are.. We need to be equally as effective run blocking as we are pass blocking..

[rawlingsHOH]

I think the reason they lost can be traced to a single play. The late 2nd quarter drop by former DIII Mount Union standout, Pierre Garcon. The game changed entirely after that moment.

[stoops the eternal pimp]

The Saints had less rushing yards than the Colts did...

[yermom]

it looked like Addai was going to gash them early

[stoops the eternal pimp]

Addai had 9 carries for 75 yards at one point

[boomermagic]

The Saints had less rushing yards than the Colts did...

Yes, But if the colts had a rushing game they would have been a lot more effective I doubt anyone will argue that.. A ground game is so important, Look at Alabama they can run the football they didn't do too bad.. The colts went in respecting the saints ground game and game planned for it That in itsself was a tremendous advantage.. Just making someone have to prepare to stop your ground game makes all the difference.. Obviously, A strong ground and air attack offensively compliment each other.. I stand by what I said..

[boomermagic]

Addai had 9 carries for 75 yards at one point

Well, Step that may be true but Obviously it wasn't enough.. What I am saying is the colts passing game allowed them to run some by doing what the defense wasn't expecting but they are not nor did they show in the superbowl to be an effective running team.. Now, I will argue this point with you all day if thats what you want but I say a strong ground game is important and would have made a HUGE difference in that game..

[stoops the eternal pimp]

So, how did the Saints win then?

[boomermagic]

OH, I don't know.. Maybe just MAYBE they scored more points.. LOL

I think the 2 teams were pretty evenly matched but the colts had to game plan for a Saints running game that could have beaten them so that allowed the saints to be more effective with their passing game obviously.. It is my opinion that Had the Colts been able to run the ball more effectively there offense would have been unstoppable and the fact that New Orleans was able to control the ball offensively { again the running game threat being a factor? } and keep the ball out of Manning's hands was a huge factor But The saints had the advantage of playing a team that does not have an impressive running game from what I saw..

[NormanPride]

I have no idea how the Saints won that game. The fact remains that the powerful Colts offense put up 7 points in 3 quarters, though. Not sure what happened there...

[boomermagic]

I have no idea how the Saints won that game. The fact remains that the powerful Colts offense put up 7 points in 3 quarters, though. Not sure what happened there...

Obviously, Defense played a part as well..

[StoopTroup]

:mack: I think the Colts would have won if Colt had played. :mack:

[stoops the eternal pimp]

Well I'm saying neither one of these teams really focus on the running game and they both made it to the SB.....While teams like Miami, who really stress pounding the football, watched it on TV like we did...It just wasn't apart of what they wanted to do this season

[StoopTroup]

I think the Viking were the best Team this year. Sadly...They went flat in the Playoffs.

[madillsoonerfan5353]

What would you say is an established running game? Brown had over a 100 against the gaydors? :confused:

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

interesting take. mine was that the colts let up at 10-0 because they thought they had in the bag. once lost, old moe can be a fickle mistress. 35-7 kstate over us in the big 12 title game comes to mind.

[stoops the eternal pimp]

Watching the pre game, my thoughts were that the older coaches for the Colts would have their team more 1st quarter ready than the young whippersnappers at NO...that they would be more calm and have less jitters.....

[boomermagic]

Well I'm saying neither one of these teams really focus on the running game and they both made it to the SB.....While teams like Miami, who really stress pounding the football, watched it on TV like we did...It just wasn't apart of what they wanted to do this season

Well, Step Miami has no QB to speak of they have no choice but to pound the ball. The team with the best overall ground game between the two sb teams won.. Do you NOT think a rushing game is equally important ? Do you NOT agree that a balanced offense is preferable ? Obviously, The 2 sb teams this year both have great qb's..

[boomermagic]

What would you say is an established running game? Brown had over a 100 against the gaydors? :confused:

Balance is the thing but obviously if you have 30 yards and 15 are rushing and 15 are passing that sucks.. When OU has 200 each that is fantastic..

[rawlingsHOH]

Balance is the thing but obviously if you have 30 yards and 15 are rushing and 15 are passing that sucks.. When OU has 200 each that is fantastic..

Balance isn't about stats. It is about having the ability to do both well. And having your opposition know that.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

Balance isn't about stats. It is about having the ability to do both well. And having your opposition know that.

and balance isn't even about running/passing. switzer's teams were balanced -> they could run the ball to the left/middle/right with equal effectiveness.

balance, to me, is having the ability over a 12 game season to effectively exploit any weakness in personnel each opponent may manifest.

[boomermagic]

Balance isn't about stats. It is about having the ability to do both well. And having your opposition know that.

I believe when you have 200 yds. Running and 200 passing you probably did both well..

[stoops the eternal pimp]

I guess you could ask the team up at stoolwater how its worked out

[boomermagic]

and balance isn't even about running/passing. switzer's teams were balanced -> they could run the ball to the left/middle/right with equal effectiveness.

balance, to me, is having the ability over a 12 game season to effectively exploit any weakness in personnel each opponent may manifest.

Hmmm, Well maybe... But I guess that would depend on if you ran and threw doing it.. When people{coaches especially] speak of offensive balance they are talking about the pass/ run ratio or production by both I think.. I have heard Bob on many occasions say we had about 200 yds. running and 200 passing so thats a good balance.. }

[boomermagic]

I guess you could ask the team up at stoolwater how its worked out

Hey man, You think what you want and I'll do the same.. The team in stoolwater doesn't have a damn defense and you know it.. That doesn't even make sense..

[BoulderSooner79]

Nobody doubts a running game is important in general, but the SB game last night was a bad example. Neither team ran great, but the colts were far more effective running early when they had the lead. The game last night was all about passing and pass defense. The Saints had a reasonable pass rush and reasonable coverage - the Colts could move the ball, but they had to work for it. But once Freeney's ankle gave out Brees had little pressure and the Colts coverage was *terrible*. And it wasn't because they feared the run - that's the one thing they could stop with their speed. The Saints receivers were often open by 3-5 yards and the Colts had no answer. If the game had gone longer, Brees would have owned the SB record book for QBs. It was amazing that the Colts were trying to tie the game at the end given the situation. But even if they had tied, the Saints would have probably countered in regulation given how easy they could pass the ball and how well Hartley was kicking.

[Scott D]

I'm pretty sure that the problem was the Colts never had the ball in the second quarter. (yes I know they ran a whole 6 plays)

[boomermagic]

Nobody doubts a running game is important in general, but the SB game last night was a bad example. Neither team ran great, but the colts were far more effective running early when they had the lead. The game last night was all about passing and pass defense. The Saints had a reasonable pass rush and reasonable coverage - the Colts could move the ball, but they had to work for it. But once Freeney's ankle gave out Brees had little pressure and the Colts coverage was *terrible*. And it wasn't because they feared the run - that's the one thing they could stop with their speed. The Saints receivers were often open by 3-5 yards and the Colts had no answer. If the game had gone longer, Brees would have owned the SB record book for QBs. It was amazing that the Colts were trying to tie the game at the end given the situation. But even if they had tied, the Saints would have probably countered in regulation given how easy they could pass the ball and how well Hartley was kicking.

I still say IF the colts had had an effective running game they probably would have won that game.. I bring this up because Obviously they don't and they do have a great passing game but that great passing ability was not enough to get the job done now was it ? We all may have our own opinions but that is mine.. I'm out of here..

[cvsooner]

If you have a good running game but you're up against a team that has a great run defense, what does that buy you? Not much....

I'm with jkm here...balance means being able to do what you need to do when you need to do it. The Colts lost the game (but nearly tied it up), but I'd say the Saints special teams and a timely interception had an awful lot to do with it.

[OKC-SLC]

interesting take. mine was that the colts let up at 10-0 because they thought they had in the bag. once lost, old moe can be a fickle mistress. 35-7 kstate over us in the big 12 title game comes to mind.

This is what it felt like watching it as an impartial person who didn't care who won.

I thought Indy was going to run them into the ground early, then they didn't get the ball much for a quarter.

I bet they felt like I did before that quarter.

[stoops the eternal pimp]

Hey man, You think what you want and I'll do the same.. The team in stoolwater doesn't have a damn defense and you know it.. That doesn't even make sense..

and Indy does?

[boomermagic]

and Indy does?

That is a good point... I think either a better defense or a better running game would have made a huge difference.. It is amazing that Indy even got to the sb considering about all they have is a great qb and passing game.. My son who is an avid nfl fan and watches at least 2 games at once sometimes as many as 4 religiously tells me that todays NFL teams are weaker than the teams 10 years ago.. I am a big fan of a great offensive team but I am especially a fan of defense and the running game.. I still marvel at the great wishbone teams Switzer had.. Admittedly, I am not a fan of nfl football.. I am a college football fan..

[oudavid1]

Texas couldn't run the ball for sh** and look howthey turned out!

[boomermagic]

Texas couldn't run the ball for sh** and look howthey turned out!

Yep, They lost the BIG game as well.. Like Indy they too were one demensional..

[rawlingsHOH]

Yep, They lost the BIG game as well.. Like Indy they too were one demensional..
So only one team per season is balanced?

And even some of them aren't. Because obviously you wouldn't say the 2000 Sooners were a better running team than the 2008 version.

[oudavid1]

I think we could all agree that at the end of the day, Offense wins games, Defense wins championships. A great pass rush and coverage linebackers is unstopable.

[BoulderSooner79]

I think we could all agree that at the end of the day, Offense wins games, Defense wins championships. A great pass rush and coverage linebackers is unstopable.

Not all of us. Coaching cliches get to be that way because they are often right - but often doesn't mean always. The SB this year did not feature a great defense from either team (or a great running game). Not the typical situation, but proves the exception can happen. The Saints this year reminded me of the late '90s Bronco teams in that they dominated on offense and had an opportunistic (by not great) defense. But those Broncos did run the ball very well, so not quite the same.