Does anyone else think Dak might have more

[cheewgumm]

Rushing yards given that Shump will be in there a lot and will be blocking for him?

[mstatefan91]

No. We need him to be healthy the entire season. I expect less planned QB runs with the majority of his rushing coming from a broken pocket and green space in front of him.

I tend to think that Dak is more mature and Mullen, hopefully, realizes that Dak is the key to this season. This leads to less planned runs to reduce risk of injury. Dak wants to play next level. He can't do that if he sits half the season due to an injury. Mullen wants to compete for the West. He can't do that (repeat).

Just my thoughts. I could be dead wrong

[Todd4State]

I say no because even the best running QB's typically have fewer yards than the top back on their respective team.

[Beaver]

With Shump in there I'd guess defenses would load the box a bit more. Hopefully Dak/Dan will see that and call short out routes and bubble screens instead of Dak running straight up the middle. Until Shump proves he can get to the outside, I don't think the opponents' front 7 or 8 will be too spread out.

[Todd4State]

No. We need him to be healthy the entire season. I expect less planned QB runs with the majority of his rushing coming from a broken pocket and green space in front of him.

I tend to think that Dak is more mature and Mullen, hopefully, realizes that Dak is the key to this season. This leads to less planned runs to reduce risk of injury. Dak wants to play next level. He can't do that if he sits half the season due to an injury. Mullen wants to compete for the West. He can't do that (repeat).

Just my thoughts. I could be dead wrong

I'm OK with Dak running 9-12 times a game in SEC games simply because that is a big part of his game. That is planned and unplanned QB runs.

[Todd4State]

With Shump in there I'd guess defenses would load the box a bit more. Hopefully Dak/Dan will see that and call short out routes and bubble screens instead of Dak running straight up the middle. Until Shump proves he can get to the outside, I don't think the opponents' front 7 or 8 will be too spread out.

Yes, I want to see more variety with our QB runs. Running Dak up the middle on 3rd and 8 or 4th and 10 is simply arrogant and non-sensical.

[Irondawg]

I just rewatched the Spring game and for all the talk on here about how some folks say our backfield is better than last year i have to say that i don't agree. Depth may be better but to this point i haven't seen a guy that could do the things our past backs could. Shump is going to be ok, Williams and Holloway have some things they do fairly well, but I don't forsee a bunch of special moments out of the group like we had with Dixon, ballard, J-Rob.

I worry this is going to look a lot like Perkins senior year where J-rob was in the doghouse a lot with coaching staff. We weren't bad, but we weren't good at the RB position either. Lee might have something going for him, but need to see a bit more. Dear is a wildcard that could provide some moments and well and I hear good things about Gibson.

I hope I'm wrong and somebody makes a leap, but I'm more concerned about it than most folks seem to be.

On the flip side I think our passing game should be the best it's ever been and we're going to lean on that more.

[mstatefan91]

I just rewatched the Spring game and for all the talk on here about how some folks say our backfield is better than last year i have to say that i don't agree. Depth may be better but to this point i haven't seen a guy that could do the things our past backs could. Shump is going to be ok, Williams and Holloway have some things they do fairly well, but I don't forsee a bunch of special moments out of the group like we had with Dixon, ballard, J-Rob.

I worry this is going to look a lot like Perkins senior year where J-rob was in the doghouse a lot with coaching staff. We weren't bad, but we weren't good at the RB position either. Lee might have something going for him, but need to see a bit more. Dear is a wildcard that could provide some moments and well and I hear good things about Gibson.

I hope I'm wrong and somebody makes a leap, but I'm more concerned about it than most folks seem to be.

On the flip side I think our passing game should be the best it's ever been and we're going to lean on that more.

The problem is that you are basing this all off of the spring game.

I will be concerned if Shump doesn't perform well against the buzzards, but I think people are selling him short. He did all he could to carry the running game for this team at the end of last season and did a damn fine job.

[ScoobaDawg]

If Dak has more rushing yards than our leading running back we have big problems and he is being setup to getting hurt.
Dak is obviously still a huge running threat but Shump has to be a legit running threat.

So No. No chance.

[Coach34]

Only if Shump doesn't keep a firm hold on the starting job. Prescott is going to run the ball 150+ times and have at least 800 yards- so to top that- one of our RB's needs a firm grasp on the starting job.

We we aren't changing our offense- the QB is going to run the football. That's what makes our offense successful

[Dawgheadcheese]

Only if Shump doesn't keep a firm hold on the starting job. Prescott is going to run the ball 150+ times and have at least 800 yards- so to top that- one of our RB's needs a firm grasp on the starting job.

We we aren't changing our offense- the QB is going to run the football. That's what makes our offense successful

Well here is a fact along these lines. The reason we fizzled out at the end of last season is because Mullen ran Prescott too much. The guys was beaten to death by the last few games of the season - and who wouldn't be playing against SEC defenses each week? IF Mullen runs Prescott like this year, we will have the same exact issues this year. it will cost us a couple of those critical games in November.

Mullen should be capable of learning and improving each year - just like the rest of us. Especially at his young age. He should have learned from last year and find a better way to use Prescott's running ability without over doing it. Dak is not like some other successful running QBs - he doesn't have the knack for avoiding heavy contact. He takes a lot of punishing hits when he runs. Mullen has got to play it smart - if he does, 10 or 11 wins are possible.

We'll see.

[spudd21]

Was it just me or did it seem just about every time Dak changed a play at the line it was a keep up the middle?

[Homedawg]

Well here is a fact along these lines. The reason we fizzled out at the end of last season is because Mullen ran Prescott too much. The guys was beaten to death by the last few games of the season - and who wouldn't be playing against SEC defenses each week? IF Mullen runs Prescott like this year, we will have the same exact issues this year. it will cost us a couple of those critical games in November.

Mullen should be capable of learning and improving each year - just like the rest of us. Especially at his young age. He should have learned from last year and find a better way to use Prescott's running ability without over doing it. Dak is not like some other successful running QBs - he doesn't have the knack for avoiding heavy contact. He takes a lot of punishing hits when he runs. Mullen has got to play it smart - if he does, 10 or 11 wins are possible.

We'll see.

I'm sorry I have to disagree. Our best weapon running the ball is dak. By him running, it opens up everything. Everything. The passing game and more opportunities for the backs. I have no issue with our best player and best weapon running it. And doing it often. He's that good.

[HoopsCoach21]

If Dak has more rushing yards than our leading running back we have big problems and he is being setup to getting hurt.
Dak is obviously still a huge running threat but Shump has to be a legit running threat.

So No. No chance.

I think several people are misunderstanding what the original poster was asking so not directing this totally at you Scooba. I don't think he is trying to say that Dak will have more yards rushing than Shump, but that Dak will have an opportunity to get more rushing yards than he did last year because Shumpert is a better blocker. Not sure if I agree or necessarily disagree, just wanted to clear that up.

[SallyStansbury]

I'm sorry I have to disagree. Our best weapon running the ball is dak. By him running, it opens up everything. Everything. The passing game and more opportunities for the backs. I have no issue with our best player and best weapon running it. And doing it often. He's that good.

I agree with the first poster. Dak should not run as much......34 can say all he wants to that we ARE going to do it, I think he is right. Mullen is stubborn and I doubt he will change a damn thing. We had Tyler Russell what did we do, run him up the gut. The issue is clouded because our line was not so great back then nor the receivers, but the point stands. Mullen will run the QB up the gut because that is what he does....it is "part of his plan**"

I see some saying that the talent on our line has improved, the receivers are as good as most SEC squad, if not better than most...guess what, that doesn't make a hill of beans difference. I too worry that Dak will be injured by meaningless runs early in the season.

Imagine this: Bear catches a slant for a gain of 23 yards....team is running down the field, setting up quickly USM is struggling to get set at the line of scrimmage: GUESS WHAT PLAY IS COMING? Dak up the middle for a gain of 4.5 yrds. He takes a lick on the play. That is an unnecessary hit in my opinion. That is my beef. I know it is nit-picky, but aside from being predictable against AL and UNM Dak had taken a season worth of partly unnecessary beatings and he wasn't full speed. We have to adjust little things if we want to take that next step forward. Special teams play, things like this. One the bright side, we seem to have some talented QB's in development and for that we need to give Mullen credit. A+ I hope we don't need them this year, but it is the SEC and I see a lot of runs up the middle in Dak's future.

[Johnson85]

If Dak has more rushing yards than our leading running back we have big problems and he is being setup to getting hurt.
Dak is obviously still a huge running threat but Shump has to be a legit running threat.

So No. No chance.

Dak is going to have more rushing yards than our leading running back. The vast majority of the times the QB runs it, it's going to be Dak. Lots of running backs are going to touch the ball.

Dak is going to run the ball everygame. What we need is to be good enough on offense that we can limit his carries in a lot of games so that in the games we have to have him, he's not beaten to death. At minimum, we need to limit hits on him in OOC. Ideally we'd be able to take care of UK and A&M relying primarily on RBs and passing game. I don't think it's realistic to think we're going to be able to beat anybody else in the West without us optimizing our offense, which means running Dak a lot.

[Ifyouonlyknew]

I agree with the first poster. Dak should not run as much......34 can say all he wants to that we ARE going to do it, I think he is right. Mullen is stubborn and I doubt he will change a damn thing. We had Tyler Russell what did we do, run him up the gut. The issue is clouded because our line was not so great back then nor the receivers, but the point stands. Mullen will run the QB up the gut because that is what he does....it is "part of his plan**"

I see some saying that the talent on our line has improved, the receivers are as good as most SEC squad, if not better than most...guess what, that doesn't make a hill of beans difference. I too worry that Dak will be injured by meaningless runs early in the season.

Imagine this: Bear catches a slant for a gain of 23 yards....team is running down the field, setting up quickly USM is struggling to get set at the line of scrimmage: GUESS WHAT PLAY IS COMING? Dak up the middle for a gain of 4.5 yrds. He takes a lick on the play. That is an unnecessary hit in my opinion. That is my beef. I know it is nit-picky, but aside from being predictable against AL and UNM Dak had taken a season worth of partly unnecessary beatings and he wasn't full speed. We have to adjust little things if we want to take that next step forward. Special teams play, things like this. One the bright side, we seem to have some talented QB's in development and for that we need to give Mullen credit. A+ I hope we don't need them this year, but it is the SEC and I see a lot of runs up the middle in Dak's future.

His long TD run vs LSU was up the middle. TD's against Auburn, A&M, & KY all came up the middle. Do you want to run him up the middle all the time? No but a lot of his best runs last year were up the middle.

[Dawgheadcheese]

I agree with the first poster. Dak should not run as much......34 can say all he wants to that we ARE going to do it, I think he is right. Mullen is stubborn and I doubt he will change a damn thing. We had Tyler Russell what did we do, run him up the gut. The issue is clouded because our line was not so great back then nor the receivers, but the point stands. Mullen will run the QB up the gut because that is what he does....it is "part of his plan**"

I see some saying that the talent on our line has improved, the receivers are as good as most SEC squad, if not better than most...guess what, that doesn't make a hill of beans difference. I too worry that Dak will be injured by meaningless runs early in the season.

Imagine this: Bear catches a slant for a gain of 23 yards....team is running down the field, setting up quickly USM is struggling to get set at the line of scrimmage: GUESS WHAT PLAY IS COMING? Dak up the middle for a gain of 4.5 yrds. He takes a lick on the play. That is an unnecessary hit in my opinion. That is my beef. I know it is nit-picky, but aside from being predictable against AL and UNM Dak had taken a season worth of partly unnecessary beatings and he wasn't full speed. We have to adjust little things if we want to take that next step forward. Special teams play, things like this. One the bright side, we seem to have some talented QB's in development and for that we need to give Mullen credit. A+ I hope we don't need them this year, but it is the SEC and I see a lot of runs up the middle in Dak's future.

Well said Sally - you hit it square on the head.

[rem101]

I agree with the first poster. Dak should not run as much......34 can say all he wants to that we ARE going to do it, I think he is right. Mullen is stubborn and I doubt he will change a damn thing. We had Tyler Russell what did we do, run him up the gut. The issue is clouded because our line was not so great back then nor the receivers, but the point stands. Mullen will run the QB up the gut because that is what he does....it is "part of his plan**"

I see some saying that the talent on our line has improved, the receivers are as good as most SEC squad, if not better than most...guess what, that doesn't make a hill of beans difference. I too worry that Dak will be injured by meaningless runs early in the season.

Imagine this: Bear catches a slant for a gain of 23 yards....team is running down the field, setting up quickly USM is struggling to get set at the line of scrimmage: GUESS WHAT PLAY IS COMING? Dak up the middle for a gain of 4.5 yrds. He takes a lick on the play. That is an unnecessary hit in my opinion. That is my beef. I know it is nit-picky, but aside from being predictable against AL and UNM Dak had taken a season worth of partly unnecessary beatings and he wasn't full speed. We have to adjust little things if we want to take that next step forward. Special teams play, things like this. One the bright side, we seem to have some talented QB's in development and for that we need to give Mullen credit. A+ I hope we don't need them this year, but it is the SEC and I see a lot of runs up the middle in Dak's future.

I have no problem running dak when we need to. I don't think we need to in non-conference games though. I would like to see him avoid hits in those games to stay healthy.

[Dawgheadcheese]

His long TD run vs LSU was up the middle. TD's against Auburn, A&M, & KY all came up the middle. Do you want to run him up the middle all the time? No but a lot of his best runs last year were up the middle.

Not questioning his success running up the middle. It is running Dak excessively knowing that he doesn't have a knack for avoiding the hard hits. The key in my mind is monitoring / limiting the number of runs / hits he is taking each game and understand that he cannot make it through 12 games in the SEC running as much as he did last year. It is not practical. We need to be smarter at getting the benefits of his running the ball - but also utilizing our wealth of other offensive weapons so that he can come out fresh each week - especially those critical last 3 or 4 games.

[Ifyouonlyknew]

Not questioning his success running up the middle. It is running Dak excessively knowing that he doesn't have a knack for avoiding the hard hits. The key in my mind is monitoring / limiting the number of runs / hits he is taking each game and understand that he cannot make it through 12 games in the SEC running as much as he did last year. It is not practical. We need to be smarter at getting the benefits of his running the ball - but also utilizing our wealth of other offensive weapons so that he can come out fresh each week - especially those critical last 3 or 4 games.

I understand what you're saying but those last 3-4 games won't be important if we don't handle business the 1st 5 games. He has to come out of the gate being ready to carry the load. We can do a better job of monitoring carries but Dak running is what makes him & our offense special.

[bulldawg28]

No team will be able to stack the box with the WR'S we have no matter the down or yardage. Dak will be able to do what he wants.

[archdog]

Correct me if I am wrong, but most of the qb runs were off the option and the back is not lead blocking for Dak. So the original question, I would say no. Our running backs are used to force a decision on the defensive end on the majority of all option plays. RB goes up the middle, Dak pulls and runs behind the crashing de. RB runs off tackle or sweep, Qb pulls to go up the middle. Either scenario, dak is running without a lead blocker to take an initial hit.

Dak will probably average slightly less runs than last year. He will still have to do the typical run into the pile and fall down options just to keep the defense honest on accounting for him, but games like our OOC, Kentucky, aTm and Missouri we should limit his contact as much as possible. We need him with fresh legs for Alabama and UNM. The optimal situation is that Dak does not run a single time against our OOC opponents, unless its a scramble and he protects himself instead of taking the hit. Johnny manzeil made a living off of running when the play broke down. Heck it won him the heisman. Plus its easier to protect yourself when you are running to daylight and you don't have 7 guys taking shots at you as you fight to fall forward instead of backwards. I believe we can beat anyone with that strategy. Only run when your internal clock tells you to pull the icons down and go. I bet he would have more rushing yards as well.

All of that to say, less designed runs for Dak. Option at 30% keeper adjusted for defensive end decisions and talent. Most games should look for him to get the bulk of his yards after the play breaks down. I would rather see him run 10 times on broken plays than 5 times on designed runs.

[archdog]

No team will be able to stack the box with the WR'S we have no matter the down or yardage. Dak will be able to do what he wants.

Boom.

[LC Dawg]

If Dak runs the ball and gets hurt then we lose ball games.
If Dak doesn't run the ball then we lose ball games.
The qb is going to take some hits in our offense. I think its pointless to try to analyze how many time Dak runs. If he never runs the ball up the middle then he never will score the multiple touchdowns he scores up the middle.
Our offense is going to be phenomenal. I'm looking forward to just sitting back and enjoying it.

[SallyStansbury]

Not questioning his success running up the middle. It is running Dak excessively knowing that he doesn't have a knack for avoiding the hard hits. The key in my mind is monitoring / limiting the number of runs / hits he is taking each game and understand that he cannot make it through 12 games in the SEC running as much as he did last year. It is not practical. We need to be smarter at getting the benefits of his running the ball - but also utilizing our wealth of other offensive weapons so that he can come out fresh each week - especially those critical last 3 or 4 games.

I am really starting to think Ifyouonlyknew is actually Dan Mullen messing with us, because when he continues to defend that practice and restates, "That is what makes the offense go...didn't you see those examples of Dak scoring?" Until we are ineffective with Shump/Lee/Williams taking those runs instead of Dak (especially against bullshit teams early in our schedule) or us alternatively using screens like C34 suggested, to run Dak repeatedly up the middle is BONEHEADED. Just to clarify....a coach who wins 10 games for MSU gets to be as boneheaded as he chooses, but to get Dak hurt early in the year doing dumb shit limits our chances of a special season.

[Ifyouonlyknew]

I am really starting to think Ifyouonlyknew is actually Dan Mullen messing with us, because when he continues to defend that practice and restates, "That is what makes the offense go...didn't you see those examples of Dak scoring?" Until we are ineffective with Shump/Lee/Williams taking those runs instead of Dak (especially against bullshit teams early in our schedule) or us alternatively using screens like C34 suggested, to run Dak repeatedly up the middle is BONEHEADED. Just to clarify....a coach who wins 10 games for MSU gets to be as boneheaded as he chooses, but to get Dak hurt early in the year doing dumb shit limits our chances of a special season.

Dak is a power runner who's not going to outrun a lot of people so running between the tackles or up the middle is where he's going to be most effective. Asking Dak to get to the perimeter like say a Nick Marshall won't be as successful because he doesn't have the speed. Him slimming up may change that some. My point was that you're not going to see a big change in 1 of the most prolific offenses in SEC history. We didn't lose to Bama or OM because Dak was run down & physically limited IMO. He shouldn't run as much against the non conference opponents but we're not about to abandon what has worked for us.

[SallyStansbury]

Dak is a power runner who's not going to outrun a lot of people so running between the tackles or up the middle is where he's going to be most effective. Asking Dak to get to the perimeter like say a Nick Marshall won't be as successful because he doesn't have the speed. Him slimming up may change that some. My point was that you're not going to see a big change in 1 of the most prolific offenses in SEC history. We didn't lose to Bama or OM because Dak was run down & physically limited IMO. He shouldn't run as much against the non conference opponents but we're not about to abandon what has worked for us.

Dude, you are missing it AGAIN........

1. nobody suggests Dak isn't going to score up the middle, what you say is true, he is good at that. We are suggesting to only do it when needed. Like not against USM or other terrible teams like I and others suggested.

2. nobody is suggesting running Dak off the perimeter. That is stupid for the reasons you mentioned, but again, nobody is suggesting that.

3. I love you and you get to coach here as long as you want however you want....but I reserve the right to complain about boneheaded shit you do if you don't make smart adjustments. I think you CAN do it. The difference between our 10 wins last year and 11-12 wins is a small tweak, make that tweak, pretty please.

[Ifyouonlyknew]

Dude, you are missing it AGAIN........

1. nobody suggests Dak isn't going to score up the middle, what you say is true, he is good at that. We are suggesting to only do it when needed. Like not against USM or other terrible teams like I and others suggested.

2. nobody is suggesting running Dak off the perimeter. That is stupid for the reasons you mentioned, but again, nobody is suggesting that.

3. I love you and you get to coach here as long as you want however you want....but I reserve the right to complain about boneheaded shit you do if you don't make smart adjustments. I think you CAN do it. The difference between our 10 wins last year and 11-12 wins is a small tweak, make that tweak, pretty please.

How am I missing it when I just said at the end of my post that he shouldn't run as much against the non conference opponents?

[mstatefan91]

Sally, Ifyouonlyknew is not Dan... lol

I believe that he or she is someone connected to our athletics department but certainly not our head coach..

[Homedawg]

His long TD run vs LSU was up the middle. TD's against Auburn, A&M, & KY all came up the middle. Do you want to run him up the middle all the time? No but a lot of his best runs last year were up the middle.

Yea but those were great play calls because they worked! That's the logic here. If it works good call. If it doesn't, all we do is run up the middle!!

[SallyStansbury]

How am I missing it when I just said at the end of my post that he shouldn't run as much against the non conference opponents?

Just wanted to be sure you were not rationalizing running Dak up the middle with #2 I listed above.

-I appreciate your acknowledgement of what we are saying.

now if next year we can pull in 1 or two highly talented, can't miss O-linemen, work on kickoff return strategy and personnel usage, get with a statistican to evaluate play calling tendencies(ours) late in the season, incorporate some risk into play calling at key times and go for it, and leave the field goal kickers alone, we will be in business. Baby steps....I am pleased with not overworking Dak against crap teams, that is a start.

[SallyStansbury]

Sally, Ifyouonlyknew is not Dan... lol

I believe that he or she is someone connected to our athletics department but certainly not our head coach..

dude, I totally know that. I am just joking. I appreciate the perspective this poster provides, he is sharp as shit and has legit info I respect. I am just giving him a hard time. All good.

[MSUDawg99]

Sally, Ifyouonlyknew is not Dan... lol

I believe that he or she is someone connected to our athletics department but certainly not our head coach..

Agreed

[Really Clark?]

I am really starting to think Ifyouonlyknew is actually Dan Mullen messing with us, because when he continues to defend that practice and restates, "That is what makes the offense go...didn't you see those examples of Dak scoring?" Until we are ineffective with Shump/Lee/Williams taking those runs instead of Dak (especially against bullshit teams early in our schedule) or us alternatively using screens like C34 suggested, to run Dak repeatedly up the middle is BONEHEADED. Just to clarify....a coach who wins 10 games for MSU gets to be as boneheaded as he chooses, but to get Dak hurt early in the year doing dumb shit limits our chances of a special season.

You do understand that when people say that the QB runs is what makes this offense go they are not just talking about Mullen and State. This is the offense that he and Urban have had for years and has won multiple national titles at two different schools. And every QB, when this offense is at its best, has rushed for over 170+ times a season.

And to clear up some things Dak's rushes, he had 6 runs against Tenn-Martin and Vanderbilt and 8 runs against USM. Limited his running while still able to run the offense effectively against weak compitetion. Not many people had problems with his 22, 23, and 21 rushes against LSU, A & M, and Auburn in back to back to back games on our way to #1 and him becoming a Heisman candidate. His Alabama and UM rushing numbers 22 and 24. Same as those wins. And the running too much at the end of the year? 67 rushes in the last 4 games (22, 6, 24, 15) vs his first 4 games of 62 against 3 OOC and LSU. We only rushed him 13 times in a tough game against a defensively tough Arkansas team. Now that is concerning the number of rushes that several have alluded to not the play calling. But he will have runs in the middle.

Also concerning the idea of 3rd down runs of 4+ yards, he ran the ball 36 times all year and picked up 14 first downs in those rushes. Close the same percentage when throwing the ball and converting the first down. 60 att and 26 first downs. On 4th down he ran for 3 first downs on just 5 att all year.

What sticks in everybody's mind really boils down to the last 2 games and some play calling that seemed predictable. Even in the Alabama game it really wasn't his rushing it was his bad first half throwing the ball and our defense collapsing in the second half.

[Ifyouonlyknew]

Just wanted to be sure you were not rationalizing running Dak up the middle with #2 I listed above.

-I appreciate your acknowledgement of what we are saying.

now if next year we can pull in 1 or two highly talented, can't miss O-linemen, work on kickoff return strategy and personnel usage, get with a statistican to evaluate play calling tendencies(ours) late in the season, incorporate some risk into play calling at key times and go for it, and leave the field goal kickers alone, we will be in business. Baby steps....I am pleased with not overworking Dak against crap teams, that is a start.

Yea I understand totally what you're saying & don't disagree with a lot of it. I was just saying you're not going to change what got us to this point. Should we tweek & add new wrinkles of course but I'm not doing much different. We were a few bad throws from Dak in Tuscaloosa & some 2nd half defensive collapses in Oxford from being undefeated. I don't want the coaches going overboard with changes.

[Pollodawg]

Yea I understand totally what you're saying & don't disagree with a lot of it. I was just saying you're not going to change what got us to this point. Should we tweek & add new wrinkles of course but I'm not doing much different. We were a few bad throws from Dak in Tuscaloosa & some 2nd half defensive collapses in Oxford from being undefeated. I don't want the coaches going overboard with changes.

Exactly. We were a bad second half in Oxford and a shaky Dak on the road in Tuscaloosa from finishing the season the best team in college football. You don't go tweaking stuff that there is nothing wrong with.

[War Machine Dawg]

Only if Shump doesn't keep a firm hold on the starting job. Prescott is going to run the ball 150+ times and have at least 800 yards- so to top that- one of our RB's needs a firm grasp on the starting job.

We aren't changing our offense- the QB is going to run the football. That's what makes our offense successful

I don't know how many more times you will have to post this before it sinks in, but I'm guessing at least one more. Don't know why some of our fans can't grasp or refuse to grasp this fact. This offense is pretty shitty when the QB doesn't/can't run the football - look at the Tyler Russell years.

[Really Clark?]

I don't know how many more times you will have to post this before it sinks in, but I'm guessing at least one more. Don't know why some of our fans can't grasp or refuse to grasp this fact. This offense is pretty shitty when the QB doesn't/can't run the football - look at the Tyler Russell years.

Some must have an agenda or trolling. Of course they are right, you can't possible win a national title running the QB that many times a game. I mean look at OSU last year. Jones ran the ball 17 and 22 times in the playoff games and that's why they got beat. Right?*** Its the offense we run and did it at an historic SEC level last year. But our coach is too dumb to see it wont work. I mean it didn't work at Utah...well Florida...uh well our offense was horrible last...I mean OSU could not be effective running the QB that much. It works, yes there is a definite risk and we would all hate to see Dak hurt. But of all these QB's that Mullen and Urban have had, isn't JT Barrette the only one really injured running the ball during the game. I guess you could say Dak the year before last as well but he wasn't injured last year.

[Homedawg]

Some must have an agenda or trolling. Of course they are right, you can't possible win a national title running the QB that many times a game. I mean look at OSU last year. Jones ran the ball 17 and 22 times in the playoff games and that's why they got beat. Right?*** Its the offense we run and did it at an historic SEC level last year. But our coach is too dumb to see it wont work. I mean it didn't work at Utah...well Florida...uh well our offense was horrible last...I mean OSU could not be effective running the QB that much. It works, yes there is a definite risk and we would all hate to see Dak hurt. But of all these QB's that Mullen and Urban have had, isn't JT Barrette the only one really injured running the ball during the game. I guess you could say Dak the year before last as well but he wasn't injured last year.

So true. Could he get hurt running the football? Sure. But it's way more likely he has a season ending injury getting plastered into the ground when we miss a pass block. I never understand why he is so likely to get hurt running it more so than a back? He's 230 freaking pounds. I understand we can't afford to lose him part, that's easy to see. But if he can't and doesn't run, his value is half of what it is when we do run him. He's a mobile quarterback, THAT is what makes us hard to defend. It isn't hard to figure out.

[ScoobaDawg]

I think several people are misunderstanding what the original poster was asking so not directing this totally at you Scooba. I don't think he is trying to say that Dak will have more yards rushing than Shump, but that Dak will have an opportunity to get more rushing yards than he did last year because Shumpert is a better blocker. Not sure if I agree or necessarily disagree, just wanted to clear that up.

After rereading the post thats exactly what he was saying and i misread. Yes. Shumpert is a better lead blocker and yes that will give Dak more yards in that instance.

[ScoobaDawg]

Only if Shump doesn't keep a firm hold on the starting job. Prescott is going to run the ball 150+ times and have at least 800 yards- so to top that- one of our RB's needs a firm grasp on the starting job.

We we aren't changing our offense- the QB is going to run the football. That's what makes our offense successful

I'll agree with that because I'm expecting Shump to put up a 1000 yard season. If Shump can't hold on to the position firmly and we play 2-3 equally. Dak will have more yards than each individually.

[dawgwood]

With Shump in there I'd guess defenses would load the box a bit more. Hopefully Dak/Dan will see that and call short out routes and bubble screens instead of Dak running straight up the middle. Until Shump proves he can get to the outside, I don't think the opponents' front 7 or 8 will be too spread out.


Yes, I want to see more variety with our QB runs. Running Dak up the middle on 3rd and 8 or 4th and 10 is simply arrogant and non-sensical.


I'll agree with that because I'm expecting Shump to put up a 1000 yard season. If Shump can't hold on to the position firmly and we play 2-3 equally. Dak will have more yards than each individually.
I think the offense is more potent,with Mixon and Dear some how on the field. Assuming they don't red shirt.

[Schultzy]

Our improved passing game will make life easier for Dak running the ball so I think he could end up with more long runs this year.

We will be flat out difficult to defend.

Dak will have more yards than our best back but fewer than our running backs combined.