Running Backs for Next Year....

[oudavid1]

We are in trouble. We have no real depth. We have Whaley, coming over a horrible injury. Wouldn't surprise anyone if he is not what he once was. I always liked Clay, but he not fast or big enough to make any really good plays. Finch is small, runs like it. The only good news is that we have no two backs that are really alike the only bad news is we have no solid bets at RB next year. With questions of who the quarterback will be and the three best players on defense gone (4 if Demontre leaves), next year is looking to be puzzling for odds makers. Oh, and WR isnt looking great either. I think at this point, you would have to expect offensive production to decline.

[Sooner_Tuf]

Yep, the sky is falling no doubt about it.

I don't know what to tell you that you haven't already been told a million times. Might be a good time to register the name OSUPete1 while it's still available.

[Curly Bill]

The ol: go become an aggy retort - weak sauce!

[SoonerTerry]

Yep, the sky is falling no doubt about it.

I don't know what to tell you that you haven't already been told a million times. Might be a good time to register the name OSUPenis1 while it's still available.

FIFY

[SoonerMarkVA]

I'd like to see Millard with more time at TB, and Ripkowski at FB. That'd be a bruising backfield. Also, if Landry leaves, Bell gives us another big, strong runner in there, assuming they're willing to go The Full Tebow on him.

Stoops has his work cut out for him, that's for sure. Then again, going into 2003, no one had any idea where we were going to get any offense, and look what happened. You can't anticipate development and chemistry.

I do wonder what Calhoun and Miller are thinking right now about their transfers, though.

[Sooner in Tampa]

The ol: go become an aggy retort - weak sauce!
It's really the only response to the OP...his concerns are SPOT On!

But, hey...why let facts get in the way?

[SoonerTerry]

meh, I like Whaley, and think finch will come in off the bench after Whaley has pounded the D and get some good runs. but what do I know

[Curly Bill]

It's really the only response to the OP...his concerns are SPOT On!

But, hey...why let facts get in the way?

Concerns? We're not allowed to have concerns, not if you're a real fan. If you're a real fan you just blindly trust in our coaching staff.

[rock on sooner]

With only one RB committed for next year, I'm sure Gundy has a few in his sights...WR might not be as
bad as you think if Metoyer makes it, Reynolds and Jackson keep their noses clean and that hot shot
from Missouri signs. TE is an issue, though. When LJ announces he's returning (or not), a lot will happen
to the roster.

[kevpks]

I have big hopes for Alex Ross. Hopefully Danzel Williams can contribute as well next year. I'm not going to bust out the tired "we'll be fine" response, but there is some room for optimism.

[picasso]

We are in trouble. We have no real depth. We have Whaley, coming over a horrible injury. Wouldn't surprise anyone if he is not what he once was. I always liked Clay, but he not fast or big enough to make any really good plays. Finch is small, runs like it. The only good news is that we have no two backs that are really alike the only bad news is we have no solid bets at RB next year. With questions of who the quarterback will be and the three best players on defense gone (4 if Demontre leaves), next year is looking to be puzzling for odds makers. Oh, and WR isnt looking great either. I think at this point, you would have to expect offensive production to decline.
Sincerely,

2003

[stoops the eternal pimp]

As we continue to morph into Texas Tech, maybe the RB isn't going to contribute that much anyway..Maybe why the RBs are wanting out

[picasso]

I'm hoping we continue to try to develop a run game. This isn't 1999 when folks were scratching their heads on how to stop the spread but, Texas Tech? Do we not have two dual threat QB's waiting in line right now?

[IBleedCrimson]

As we continue to morph into Texas Tech, maybe the RB isn't going to contribute that much anyway..Maybe why the RBs are wanting out

This post made me really, really, sad.

[mojorisen2014]

I have big hopes for Alex Ross. Hopefully Danzel Williams can contribute as well next year. I'm not going to bust out the tired "we'll be fine" response, but there is some room for optimism.
I think ross will be a stud

[stoops the eternal pimp]

Guys, I didn't watch the game, but I saw that at one point in the OSU game, OU had 38 pass plays and 10 run plays...before the half if I'm correct..

Now, what team does this sound like? We'll see If Bob changes that direction, but that's the way we've been going since the 09 season.

[stoopified]

Not the least bit worried,I trust Bob and his staff.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

Guys, I didn't watch the game, but I saw that at one point in the OSU game, OU had 38 pass plays and 10 run plays...before the half if I'm correct..

Now, what team does this sound like? We'll see If Bob changes that direction, but that's the way we've been going since the 09 season.

So this year as far as Run/Pass balance is the worst it has been since 1999.

Year/% of plays that were passes
1999 63.4%
2000 52.3%
2001 56.3%
2002 41.5%
2003 47.1%
2004 41.8%
2005 39.0%
2006 37.9%
2007 41.1%
2008 46.7%
2009 51.7%
2010 52.3%
2011 56.4%

Please note that we have passed more than ran all 3 years Landry has been the starter

[Dan Thompson]

Every time I watched Finch try and block some monster coming in off the corner, I felt sorry for him. Probably gave away 75 pounds sometimes. Would it be a bad idea to move Finch to WR?

[sooneredaco]

As we continue to morph into Texas Tech, maybe the RB isn't going to contribute that much anyway..Maybe why the RBs are wanting out

Not saying your wrong... but, ughhh this made me wanna puke. The truth hurts I suppose. Something need to change in a hurry

[SoonerNutt]

I have big hopes for Alex Ross. Hopefully Danzel Williams can contribute as well next year. I'm not going to bust out the tired "we'll be fine" response, but there is some room for optimism.

I agree on Alex Ross. I've seen him play a few times, and he just has this knack for making it look effortless. His quickness in getting to the outside and making LBs take bad angles is remarkable. Of course, who knows if that translates to the next level, but I think he could do alot of good for us.

[rock on sooner]

So this year as far as Run/Pass balance is the worst it has been since 1999.

Year/% of plays that were passes
1999 63.4%
2000 52.3%
2001 56.3%
2002 41.5%
2003 47.1%
2004 41.8%
2005 39.0%
2006 37.9%
2007 41.1%
2008 46.7%
2009 51.7%
2010 52.3%
2011 56.4%

Please note that we have passed more than ran all 3 years Landry has been the starter A 55/45 pass/run
split isn't so bad, IF the runs can get 4.5 to 5.5 yards a carry....it's the 3-3.5 a pop that kills us or so sez Capt. Obvious!

[BoulderSooner79]

I agree on Alex Ross. I've seen him play a few times, and he just has this knack for making it look effortless. His quickness in getting to the outside and making LBs take bad angles is remarkable. Of course, who knows if that translates to the next level, but I think he could do alot of good for us.

I seem to recall that Ross is an academic eligibility risk? Regardless, there will always be these great HS players moving up and we'll get our share. Won't help a bit if they don't stick around and become productive or at least provide backup depth.

[Sooner_Tuf]

Concerns? We're not allowed to have concerns, not if you're a real fan. If you're a real fan you just blindly trust in our coaching staff.

As a fan all you can do is watch what happens. Unless you are part of the staff or administration you can have all the concerns you want. What exactly are you going to do about them?

I guess you can post thousands of times to fire someone. Not sure why you would want to do that unless you just want show everyone exactly how impotent you are.

David being a poke is hardly news to anyone here. Well anyone with any cognitive skills that is.

Bob Stoops is a sharp guy. He is the one tasked with making things work. I'll bet he's on it if he wasn't I'm sure he will be now because of your and David's alarmist thoughts.

Sarcasism can only cover up so much idiocy.

[BoulderSooner79]

As a fan all you can do is watch what happens. Unless you are part of the staff or administration you can have all the concerns you want. What exactly are you going to do about them?

I guess you can post thousands of times to fire someone. Not sure why you would want to do that unless you just want show everyone exactly how impotent you are.

David being a poke is hardly news to anyone here. Well anyone with any cognitive skills that is.

Bob Stoops is a sharp guy. He is the one tasked with making things work. I'll bet he's on it if he wasn't I'm sure he will be now because of your and David's alarmist thoughts.

Sarcasism can only cover up so much idiocy.

This is a fan board for discussing the team. People who care about the future of the program are obviously concerned. I can't speak for others, but I'm just hoping to get a little information from this board. I'm not diluted enough to think I can evoke action nor am I calling for any. But I won't be shy about a discussion.

[Sabanball]

You guys need a bruiser, downhill runner-type fb that can pound the rock between the tackles. Finch is good but I see him as more of a slot receiver than a true rb.

[BoulderSooner79]

You guys need a bruiser, downhill runner-type fb that can pound the rock between the tackles. Finch is good but I see him as more of a slot receiver than a true rb.

Can you send over a couple of your spares who are not happy with their PT? ;)

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

A 55/45 pass/run
split isn't so bad, IF the runs can get 4.5 to 5.5 yards a carry....it's the 3-3.5 a pop that kills us or so sez Capt. Obvious!

The major difference is that teams that get to those kind of splits suck in the red zone. That is because the run requires dedication unless you are only using it to stop the pass rush.

[Augusta_Sooner]

A 55/45 pass/run
split isn't so bad, IF the runs can get 4.5 to 5.5 yards a carry....it's the 3-3.5 a pop that kills us or so sez Capt. Obvious!

RBs with 4.5 to 5.5 yards a carry can be a little misleading when they're unable to finish drives. It would be nice to hand the ball to one of those RBs instead of resorting to using our back up QB when near the goal line. I would like to see OU switch to a pro-style offense and take some pressure off of the defense. When the spread is hitting on all cyclinders, it's great. But when the timing is off or the offense becomes one dimensional, they use less of the play clock and put the defense back out on the field too soon. Glad to see OU get a bigger RB in Alex Ross.

[KantoSooner]

You guys need a bruiser, downhill runner-type fb that can pound the rock between the tackles. Finch is good but I see him as more of a slot receiver than a true rb.

We've got one in Millard. But even Lydell Carr needed somebody to block for him.

[SoonerDood]

As we continue to morph into Texas Tech, maybe the RB isn't going to contribute that much anyway..Maybe why the RBs are wanting out

Isn't that what the "fans" have been wanting?! Gah, they've been wanting Mike Leach to come back for 10 years now! Guess what, we are now Texas Tech!

[rock on sooner]

The major difference is that teams that get to those kind of splits suck in the red zone. That is because the run requires dedication unless you are only using it to stop the pass rush. It seems to me that a 90 play game with 40 of those plays being runs would probably qualify as being dedicated...
190 to 200 yds a game rushing from those 40 plays surely some of those are in the red zone and would "finish"
the drive.

[Augusta_Sooner]

You guys need a bruiser, downhill runner-type fb that can pound the rock between the tackles. Finch is good but I see him as more of a slot receiver than a true rb.

Probably gonna be hard to consistently recruit bruiser-type RBs with this offense, especially with the emphasis on throwing more than running. Most teams run to set up the pass, OU passes to set up the run....

[oudavid1]

Sincerely,

2003

Sooooo....second coming?
http://www.profantasy-football.com/images/Adrian_Peterson_Pictures/adrian-peterson-ok-2.gif

So down for that.

[oudavid1]

Yep, the sky is falling no doubt about it.

I don't know what to tell you that you haven't already been told a million times. Might be a good time to register the name OSUPete1 while it's still available.

Dude we get it, you dont like me. Its obviously some personal thing you have against me. I could tell you straight facts (not say I did) and you still would just try to undermine me. Just ignore me. This thread is not about me, so dont make it about me.

[SoonerBorn85]

I think ross will be a stud
I know he was injured this season, but do you know what his injury was?

[StoopTroup]

Yeah. It's gonna be hard. The other two NCAA Div 1A teams are getting them all.

All the Coaching Staff here needs is to go after one and he'd be here. I'm not sure what you or anyone that watched DeMarco Murray thought you were seeing but it's not gonna be as hard as you think. Plus like some have already said, Millard and IMO Whaley are those type of guys. I'm not sure when folks on this board are going to accept that we lost tons of guys to injury and some to wanting to leave for other reasons.

We recruit just fine.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

It seems to me that a 90 play game with 40 of those plays being runs would probably qualify as being dedicated...
190 to 200 yds a game rushing from those 40 plays surely some of those are in the red zone and would "finish"
the drive.

Coach, why do we have to practice this play a 1000 times? Because 999 isn't enough.

Run blocking is much more difficult to get good execution as a unit on than pass blocking (although pass blocking is more difficult individually). The reasoning is simple in that you know where the guy you are blocking is going to so there aren't any surprises. In Run blocking you have only a general idea of where the ball is going and when its going to get there. It is why it takes so many more reps than pass blocking to get good at.

[SoonerMom2]

Yeah. It's gonna be hard. The other two NCAA Div 1A teams are getting them all.

All the Coaching Staff here needs is to go after one and he'd be here. I'm not sure what you or anyone that watched DeMarco Murray thought you were seeing but it's not gonna be as hard as you think. Plus like some have already said, Millard and IMO Whaley are those type of guys. I'm not sure when folks on this board are going to accept that we lost tons of guys to injury and some to wanting to leave for other reasons.

We recruit just fine.

Some sanity on this board for a change after all the negatism I am seeing today. You would think it was the end of the world. They obviously didn't sit through the Blake years. Many schools would love to be 9-3. The injury bug hit -- it is a fact. Texas is losing players to other schools, but some of these posters make it sound like it is only OU that it happens. Funny how quick some jumped off the bandwagon once we lost to Tech and now they say we are like Tech? Give me a break! With that scenario we wouldn't be going to a bowl game.

Thank you for your common sense post!

[stoops the eternal pimp]

Funny how quick some jumped off the bandwagon once we lost to Tech and now they say we are like Tech? Give me a break! With that scenario we wouldn't be going to a bowl game.

Thank you for your common sense post!

I don't think you understand the becoming like TT reference...

[picasso]

Sooooo....second coming?
http://www.profantasy-football.com/images/Adrian_Peterson_Pictures/adrian-peterson-ok-2.gif

So down for that.
Nope, I'm talking about at the end of the '02 season we were hearing how we could never replace Q, Hybl, Trent Smith and may starters at WR.

[BoulderSooner79]

Nope, I'm talking about at the end of the '02 season we were hearing how we could never replace Q, Hybl, Trent Smith and may starters at WR.

Replacing seniors is a fact of life and there is a pipeline of recruiting that is designed for just that task. The angst behind this and recent threads is the pipeline itself evaporating via transfers and whether or not it's a trend. Time will tell.

BTW, we were not able to replace Q in '03 or else we would already have #8 ;)

[picasso]

That's debatable. He certainly would have helped.

[Blue]

This is a fan board for discussing the team. People who care about the future of the program are obviously concerned. I can't speak for others, but I'm just hoping to get a little information from this board. I'm not diluted enough to think I can evoke action nor am I calling for any. But I won't be shy about a discussion.

Quoted for truth.

Yes you would think people would be able to discuss opinions, disappointments, and such on an OU message board. Sadly there are those here that spend 20 hours a day policing posts and posting nonsense.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

Quoted for truth.

Yes you would think people would be able to discuss opinions, disappointments, and such on an OU message board. Sadly there are those here that spend 20 hours a day policing posts and posting nonsense.

Well Yes. Do you expect me to work?

[BoulderSooner79]

That's debatable. He certainly would have helped.

Thus the winkie. But a solid RB was a hole in an otherwise stacked '03 team. If only we had kept Q's redshirt or AD would have gotten there 1 year earlier....

[jmillerfan]

Probably gonna be hard to consistently recruit bruiser-type RBs with this offense, especially with the emphasis on throwing more than running. Most teams run to set up the pass, OU passes to set up the run....

^this....most running backs like that are what I like to call 'rhythm' runners that get stronger as the game goes...we are looking for flash and dash players more like Harvin and there is nothing wrong with that.

[Curly Bill]

As a fan all you can do is watch what happens. Unless you are part of the staff or administration you can have all the concerns you want. What exactly are you going to do about them?

I guess you can post thousands of times to fire someone. Not sure why you would want to do that unless you just want show everyone exactly how impotent you are.

David being a poke is hardly news to anyone here. Well anyone with any cognitive skills that is.

Bob Stoops is a sharp guy. He is the one tasked with making things work. I'll bet he's on it if he wasn't I'm sure he will be now because of your and David's alarmist thoughts.

Sarcasism can only cover up so much idiocy.

That's it? That's your lame attempt at chastisement? WEAK...I hardly feel chastised at all. You should try harder.

[Augusta_Sooner]

Coach, why do we have to practice this play a 1000 times? Because 999 isn't enough.

Run blocking is much more difficult to get good execution as a unit on than pass blocking (although pass blocking is more difficult individually). The reasoning is simple in that you know where the guy you are blocking is going to so there aren't any surprises. In Run blocking you have only a general idea of where the ball is going and when its going to get there. It is why it takes so many more reps than pass blocking to get good at.

You have this backwards....run blocking is easier becasue the OL know who to block since they are trying to open a hole (usually involves just 2 key blockers) or a pulling guard. Run plays are isolated to a few blockers and require less technical skill and footwork unlike pass protection. Pass protection requires that all blockers perform their assignment since it only takes on pass rusher to break through to blow up the pass play. In pass protection, OL have to call out blocking assignments. You ever hear OL call out blocking assignments on run plays?

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

You have this backwards....run blocking is easier becasue the OL know who to block since they are trying to open a hole (usually involves just 2 key blockers) or a pulling guard. Run plays are isolated to a few blockers and require less technical skill and footwork unlike pass protection. Pass protection requires that all blockers perform their assignment since it only takes on pass rusher to break through to blow up the pass play. In pass protection, OL have to call out blocking assignments. You ever hear OL call out blocking assignments on run plays?

You have to think about sequencing in order to understand what I'm talking about. The reason that run blocking is more difficult AS A UNIT is that you have no knowledge of where the ball is at any one point even if you are currently responsible for the "key" block. Since run blocking tends to be a sequence of critical blocks it is also possible for 6 of the 7 blockers to execute their blocks and the 1 bust to drop the play for a 5 yard loss even if they aren't one of the "key" blocks at the hole. Thus earlier in the play, you have critical blocks that allow the running back to get to the place where the hole is to develop. In the middle, you have the "key" blocks that are designed to open the running lane at the LOS. Late you have downfield blocks that are designed to get the running back to the second level where it is then a free for all to get as many yards as possible.

Pass blocking is different in that you KNOW where the defender is going because you know what kind of drop the QB is taking. At that point, it becomes simply a battle to make sure no one gets to that point. As I said above, individually it is more difficult, but not as a team except in cases where they send more defenders than you have blockers (because all run plays fall into this category, this is the same use case).

As for calling out blocking schemes, The reason that you do it in pass pro is to make sure everyone is accounted for (point at your man ;) ). In a hat on hat scheme you'd better bet that you have to divvy up responsibilities especially if you are going to have to stunt to get to your assigned man. This doesn't even include things like mismatches that you have to account for by doubling/chipping to help your buddy out.

[stoops the eternal pimp]

That is bs. We "morphed" because of the transfers and injuries. If Whaley is uninjured, we run the ball quit a bit more. You aren't going to run the ball 30+ times with a 170 lb scat back and a fumbling freshman.

Really...Look at the passing numbers since Jones took over..This isn't a this year type thing..It's been heading this way since 09

[NormanPride]

I bet it changes when Landry is gone. We don't have a pure passer on the roster like him anymore. Allen is the closest thing, and we've run some QB run plays with him in as well.

[SouthFortySooner]

As a fan all you can do is watch what happens. Unless you are part of the staff or administration you can have all the concerns you want. What exactly are you going to do about them?

I guess you can post thousands of times to fire someone. Not sure why you would want to do that unless you just want show everyone exactly how impotent you are.

David being a poke is hardly news to anyone here. Well anyone with any cognitive skills that is.

Bob Stoops is a sharp guy. He is the one tasked with making things work. I'll bet he's on it if he wasn't I'm sure he will be now because of your and David's alarmist thoughts.

Sarcasism can only cover up so much idiocy.

Me thinks you underestimate the band and cheerleaders.

[Augusta_Sooner]

You have to think about sequencing in order to understand what I'm talking about. The reason that run blocking is more difficult AS A UNIT is that you have no knowledge of where the ball is at any one point even if you are currently responsible for the "key" block. Since run blocking tends to be a sequence of critical blocks it is also possible for 6 of the 7 blockers to execute their blocks and the 1 bust to drop the play for a 5 yard loss even if they aren't one of the "key" blocks at the hole. Thus earlier in the play, you have critical blocks that allow the running back to get to the place where the hole is to develop. In the middle, you have the "key" blocks that are designed to open the running lane at the LOS. Late you have downfield blocks that are designed to get the running back to the second level where it is then a free for all to get as many yards as possible.

Pass blocking is different in that you KNOW where the defender is going because you know what kind of drop the QB is taking. At that point, it becomes simply a battle to make sure no one gets to that point. As I said above, individually it is more difficult, but not as a team except in cases where they send more defenders than you have blockers (because all run plays fall into this category, this is the same use case).

As for calling out blocking schemes, The reason that you do it in pass pro is to make sure everyone is accounted for (point at your man ;) ). In a hat on hat scheme you'd better bet that you have to divvy up responsibilities especially if you are going to have to stunt to get to your assigned man. This doesn't even include things like mismatches that you have to account for by doubling/chipping to help your buddy out.

The OL, individually and as a unit are asked to pass protect for 3 - 5 seconds on average. Run blocking requires blocking for maybe 3 seconds. By then the ball carrier has passed the line of scrimmage. Pass protection as a unit is much more difficult since the OL have to identify who to block, who is blitzing, the defensive front, where an opponent's best pass rusher is lined up....all before the ball is snapped. Then, they have to hold their pass protection as a unit for 3 -5 seconds on average. If an OL has no one to block, he has to recognize where to help out during the play. If just one OL misses their block, the QB pays for it. Both OTs must get out of their stance quickly in order to protect against pass rushers. That's why pass protection is much more difficult as a unit than run blocking due the amount of choreographing that takes place before and during the play. If an OL misses their run block at the point of attack, the play is dead. But, that is an individual play. Since we're talking about unit blocking, ask any current or former OL and they'll tell you they prefer to run block as a unit than pass protect. Have you ever played football? If so, you would know this. It's not even debatable.

[Sooner_Tuf]

That's it? That's your lame attempt at chastisement? WEAK...I hardly feel chastised at all. You should try harder.

Because message boards are real life? I guess for some they are. How's that working out for you?

[Curly Bill]

Because message boards are real life? I guess for some they are. How's that working out for you?

You're the one that put a lot of work into a post to try and chastise others. Me..I just look at it as an amusing little sidebar.

So...I guess you can tell me?

[NormanPride]

Then why are so many teams good at pass blocking and terrible at run blocking?

[Curly Bill]

Then why are so many teams good at pass blocking and terrible at run blocking?

Pass blocking is easier - essentially get between a guy and your QB and stay there. Run blocking is about moving and angles, and moving people where you want them to go - more moving parts to go wrong. And with guys that big moving is not always a strength.

[OUmillenium]

Ross fought severe ankle sprain most of season and collar bone issue late. He would be a tremendous helpon offense but I will be totally shocked if he qualifies. TOTALLY SHOCKED

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

The OL, individually and as a unit are asked to pass protect for 3 - 5 seconds on average. Run blocking requires blocking for maybe 3 seconds. By then the ball carrier has passed the line of scrimmage

A good running play will vary between 6 to 8 yards not no gain. I'm not really sure what measuring stick you are using here, but it seems like you are thinking any gain on a running play is good. This typically takes 3-5 seconds.


Pass protection as a unit is much more difficult since the OL have to identify who to block, who is blitzing, the defensive front, where an opponent's best pass rusher is lined up....all before the ball is snapped.

This is no different than a running play. Both Pass and Run blocking have general mapped out blocking assignments that are adjusted with the snap. Or are you saying that in a run blocking scheme that if you are responsible for a linebacker who flairs to the opposite of the formation on a blitz that you are going to run over and block him? Also this argument goes back to the individual because you have to recognize who you are responsible for, once that is set, you fall back into a one on one situation.


Then, they have to hold their pass protection as a unit for 3 -5 seconds on average.

We dealt with this statement above


If an OL has no one to block, he has to recognize where to help out during the play.

So in run blocking they just stand around?


If just one OL misses their block, the QB pays for it.

This isn't true every time (specifically when the opponent rushes fewer defenders than blockers). In such cases, Pass protection is a layered defense. This layered defense can manifest itself as a running back helping with the missed block. It can also manifest itself by the running back releasing as a safety valve to force the defense to account for him. In cases where the defenders are rushing equal or more defenders than blockers, this layered defense is morphed to the back taking most dangerous threat. This in particular makes pass blocking more effective than run blocking because you have a blocker who is not assigned a specific responsibility and can extend the time to get the ball off.


Both OTs must get out of their stance quickly in order to protect against pass rushers.

So we are back to individual arguments to justify unit difficulty


That's why pass protection is much more difficult as a unit than run blocking due the amount of choreographing that takes place before and during the play. If an OL misses their run block at the point of attack, the play is dead. But, that is an individual play.

Yet your argument above is that if a pass blocker misses a block its the end of the world. If just one OL misses their block, the QB pays for it..

Like I said above, a successful running play is between 6 and 8 yards (8 is the measuring stick that Switzer used). There are some exceptions as some plays like the QB sneak are designed to get less yards than 5 (unless they are being run against a Gibbs defense) so you would pull these attempts out. On the other hand, a successful passing play ends with a completion for X positive yards (X because different offenses are going to have different barometers - leach might be at 5 yards whereas a WCO might be at 8 whereas a deep bomb offense might be at 15). However, in this debate even that number isn't accurate as you'd have to subtract out all incompletions where the QB was untouched AND all sacks where the ball was held past your 3-5 second time limit.

When you look at these numbers you will begin to see that as a percentage of total plays that there are far more unsuccessful run plays than pass plays.


Since we're talking about unit blocking, ask any current or former OL and they'll tell you they prefer to run block as a unit than pass protect.

Preference doesn't equal difficulty.


Have you ever played football? If so, you would know this. It's not even debatable.

Yes I did and I can assure you that the number of unsuccessful running plays (IE <5 yards) far outnumbers the number of unsuccessful pass plays. I actually noticed this phenomenon when I was in junior high. I was playing fullback and we had one guy that would not even try to block if the running play was not to his side or if it was a pass play. On the pass play, I could adjust fairly easily and stonewall his man and get a decent shove on any outside blitzer to throw them wide. However, on a non toss sweep run play I was screwed. Do you take the backside guy who is going to drop your guy for a big loss or do you pick him up and not take your assigned guy and end up with a minor loss or no gain.

And therein lies the difference in the types of blocking schemes and why run blocking as a unit is more difficult than pass blocking. In pass blocking you have flexibility because everything is on a timer. In run blocking every block has to be executed and held for a specific time within a sequential window with any miss increasing the odds of an unsuccessful play. I understand the stance you are taking because its conventional wisdom (and fact) that pass blocking is harder than run blocking. However, when you expand your criteria for a successful play beyond gaining 1 inch of positive ground, you begin to see that conventional wisdom breaks down. Run heavy teams will be more effective at running the ball than pass heavy teams will be effective at passing the ball, because run blocking is much harder and requires more repetitions to get right.

Now, lets look at the stats and see if my premise is correct

http://web1.ncaa.org/mfb/natlRank.jsp?year=2011&div=B&rpt=IA_teamrush&site=org

Hmm, the top 10 are all teams that average over 5 ypc, the only team not in the top 10 that stands out is alabama and they are kind of weird in that they are in the bottom 20 of all teams in total plays ran.

http://web1.ncaa.org/mfb/natlRank.jsp?year=2011&div=B&rpt=IA_teampass&site=org
and
http://web1.ncaa.org/mfb/natlRank.jsp?year=2011&div=B&rpt=IA_teampasseff&site=org
and
http://web1.ncaa.org/mfb/natlRank.jsp?year=2011&div=B&rpt=IA_teamsacksallowed&site=org

hmm, you begin to see that more attempts doesn't equal more success. The problem here is that we don't have the numbers that we truly need (IE Incompletions + Sacks - NonHurried throws for incompletions) to determine effectiveness of the OL.

[SoonerTerry]

good lawd man... so...many....words

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

good lawd man... so...many....words

Conference calls bring out the Tolstoy in me

[Sooner_Tuf]

You're the one that put a lot of work into a post to try and chastise others. Me..I just look at it as an amusing little sidebar.

So...I guess you can tell me?

That's a lot of work to you? Well that says quite a bit right there.

[SoonerorLater]

We don't need any more running backs apparently. We can't run the ball, we can't run block, we can't defend the pass and we can't tackle. But we have about 4 more new receiver recruits and are courting some more. I say we forget about recruiting O linemen and running backs and go with 10 receivers and the QB. We can rotate them around to have various receivers eligible each play and run the up-up tempo offense. remember you heard it here first.

[NormanPride]

Conference calls bring out the Tolstoy in me

They bring out the zombie in me. Ugh.

[Curly Bill]

That's a lot of work to you? Well that says quite a bit right there.

I guess? And I also guess that means you win the internet! Good job! ;)

[Jason Alexander]

Triple option

Millard reminds me of Johnathan Dwyer when he was at Georgia Tech.