Priorities for 2017
Comments
-
Thank for showing @Tequilla that HE sucks at this analysis thingy. Fucking Christ he is dense.HoustonHusky said:Gaskin for 17
Gaskin for 1
Gaskin for 2
Gaskin for 11
Gaskin for 6
Gaskin for 53
Gaskin for 1 (TD)
Gaskin for 6
Gaskin for -1
Gaskin for 4
Gaskin for -2
Gaskin for 0
His first half was aok...take out the 53 yard run (and 1 yd TD run) and he still averaged 4.4 YPC
-
Take out the 3 double digit runs and he was 9 for 17. In the 2nd half the trend continued.
Point being that the running game was not an effective source of ball movement in the game with the exception of the instances when Gaskin was able to break one ... which ended basically at the start of the 2nd quarter.
Some of you fucktards will argue anything to try to get one up on me ... but this isn't the argument. -
Take out the 3 runs that didn't get positive yardage and he was 9 for 101.Tequilla said:Take out the 3 double digit runs and he was 9 for 17. In the 2nd half the trend continued.
Point being that the running game was not an effective source of ball movement in the game with the exception of the instances when Gaskin was able to break one ... which ended basically at the start of the 2nd quarter.
Some of you fucktards will argue anything to try to get one up on me ... but this isn't the argument.
Taking out 25% of the runs on either end to suit your narrative is FS. -
Absolutely disagree.
Relying on your running game to me means that you're able to consistently rely on it and move the chains. If you're going heavy in the running game, then it means to me that you're valuing the 4-6 yards per carry way more than you are the chunk carries.
With respect to Gaskin and the ASU game, what the chunk yardage tells me is that he's obviously explosive and there are opportunities to find ways to get him in positions to make big gains. When you take out the chunk yardage though, it tells me that the running game wasn't being sustainable when it comes to moving the chains and lengthy drives.
Let me ask you the following from that game:
Was there anything in the ASU game that would have indicated to you that you would have expected say a 13 play, 80 yard drive where 9 of the 13 plays were running plays?
If you can't answer yes to that question, then you probably aren't working with a sustainable running game. -
...and ignoring 75% of the runs to suit your narrative may be even more FS.dnc said:
Take out the 3 runs that didn't get positive yardage and he was 9 for 101.Tequilla said:Take out the 3 double digit runs and he was 9 for 17. In the 2nd half the trend continued.
Point being that the running game was not an effective source of ball movement in the game with the exception of the instances when Gaskin was able to break one ... which ended basically at the start of the 2nd quarter.
Some of you fucktards will argue anything to try to get one up on me ... but this isn't the argument.
Taking out 25% of the runs on either end to suit your narrative is FS. -
Sticking to the run game is about a lot more than the yardage. It keeps the opponents pass rushers and safeties honest if we consistently run the ball, even if it isn't 100% successful. It opens up play action and more opportunities in the pass game.
-
Who's ignoring 75% of them? Of those 12 runs, you could call 5 of them disappointments (the three that didn't gain positive yards, plus the non scoring 1 yard and the 2 yarder, assuming neither of them gained first downs). Maybe the 4 was disappointing, depending on down and distance, though it's unlikely. That leaves 6 runs, or half that were good or better. A touchdown, 2 6 yarders and three in double digits.HuskyInAZ said:
...and ignoring 75% of the runs to suit your narrative may be even more FS.dnc said:
Take out the 3 runs that didn't get positive yardage and he was 9 for 101.Tequilla said:Take out the 3 double digit runs and he was 9 for 17. In the 2nd half the trend continued.
Point being that the running game was not an effective source of ball movement in the game with the exception of the instances when Gaskin was able to break one ... which ended basically at the start of the 2nd quarter.
Some of you fucktards will argue anything to try to get one up on me ... but this isn't the argument.
Taking out 25% of the runs on either end to suit your narrative is FS.
You can't ignore the three long runs just like you can't ignore the three stuffs. They're both part of the story. But there's no sane way to look at that collection of rushing totals and conclude the rushing game was not sustainable.
And that's if you just look at the numbers. When you add in that it was Myles Gaskin running the ball and Jake Browning throwing the ball it should be plainly obvious we? should have ran the ball more. -
Browning first half dropbacks
Mickens for 21
Lenius for 5
Incomplete
Incomplete (3rd down failure)
Jake run for 3 (assuming this was called a pass)
Lenius for 3 (3rd down conversion)
Renfro for 13
Incomplete
Hall for 19
Incomplete
Incomplete (3rd down failure)
Daniels for 12
Incomplete
Jake run for 7 (assuming this was called a pass) (3rd down conversion)
Mickens for 17
Incomplete (3rd down failure)
Incomplete (4th down failure)
Daniels for 12
Perkins for 11
Incomplete
Renfro for 6
Gaskin for 3 (3rd down failure)
Daniels 29/TD
Lenius 5
Incomplete (3rd down failure)
Pettis 7
Incomplete (3rd down failure)
Incomplete
So Browning dropped back 28 times in the first half versus 12 Gaskin runs. If we take out the best 25% of those dropbacks you get 21 dropbacks for 50 yards. This seems like a great way to judge how well the passing game was working. -
I agree with that 100%.NEsnake12 said:Sticking to the run game is about a lot more than the yardage. It keeps the opponents pass rushers and safeties honest if we consistently run the ball, even if it isn't 100% successful. It opens up play action and more opportunities in the pass game.
But at the same time, when you look at what ASU does in how they blitz, they pretty much make most between the tackle running plays ineffective. Everything they do on defense is all about consistent blitzing and forcing the QB to have to make throws under pressure while getting hit early and often. They don't want to sit back and get picked apart. Instead, they want to go after 3 and outs and turnovers at the expense of giving up big plays.
Where you can hurt their defense is with quick throws behind the blitz where your receivers cleanly win the 1 on 1 game as well as finding ways to get your RBs into space 1 on 1 against LBs or Safeties.
In the running game, you're not going to change what they are going to defensively. Instead, what you can get out of the running game is some opportunities to break some plays if you can get them overrunning the run play, get a play call away from their blitz, etc.
-
And 14 of those passes were either (incompletions, 3rd down non conversions or the short Browning scramble). So the passing game was just as frequently disappointing as the running game if not moreso.
