cdm says the run game

[Coach007]

Says the run game is his fault for not putting them in good situations ...



:confused:


Why are we not putting them in good situations ?

[NCDawg]

Might consider putting Shumpert at FB and giving our 2 freshmen TB's a chance. May not work, however, because I'm not sure our OL can block well enough to open holes for the RB's.

[msstate7]

I wonder if our 2 games vs bama and OM last year made Mullen change his philosophy some. We had much better success passing than running in those games

[Coach007]

I'm watching the game now. Great success in the run game early. Great blocking in the hollaway for 11, great blocking for dear on the edge. And the play designs... Shump tried to bounce outside rather than hit the lane.

That's the first drive.… and its scripted.

[TUSK]

I wonder if our 2 games vs bama and OM last year made Mullen change his philosophy some. We had much better success passing than running in those games

I think it's an issue of "physicality"...

[puts on flame retardant suit]

[Bubb Rubb]

I wonder if our 2 games vs bama and OM last year made Mullen change his philosophy some. We had much better success passing than running in those games

We had better success passing because those defenses gameplanned to stop the run.

We have to run the ball at some point.

[Interpolation_Dawg_EX]

May not work, however, because I'm not sure our OL can block well enough to open holes for the RB's.
I think they can open holes and it showed as Coach highlighted, but I don't think they can do it on a consistent basis. There wasn't much room for any of them to run during some of the game.

[civildawg]

Holloway is doing fine running the ball with our OL. It is all Shumpert.

[Interpolation_Dawg_EX]

If it really is all on Shump, the coaches are the ones who need to be ridiculed for continuing to put him and the running game in a bad spot. The hate fest for Shump needs to stop. We know he is limited, but he brings a lot to the table and always plays with 100%. He doesn't decide who sits or who starts.

[AROB44]

I think it's an issue of "physicality"...

[puts on flame retardant suit]


I agree with you on this one, Tusk. We just aren't as physical as we traditionally have been.

[Really Clark?]

It's not all on Shump, Hollaway has been dropped for a loss or no to little yards this year as well. And they missed some blocks this weekend. Not that Shump is running well but it's not just him. Dak isn't running but when he does he is not getting good yards either. Some of this is opposing defenses as well and how they are spying us. It is a concern though

[Coach007]

Shump is not hitting the holes. On the first drive, he did not hit the hole for the 3 to 4 yards. He triedmto bounce out to the left and lost 4. A swing of 8.

Its great to see the OK doing better. It goes with the whole peaking at the right time....

[EAVdog]

Mullen doesn't throw players under the bus. He always blames himself or the coaches. He's basically said that they are more successful throwing short passes than running. In essence he's admitted that it is a problem but he can overcome it with allowing Dak to spread the ball around.

It's obvious that our OL and RB's aren't as physical as last year. I think a lot of that has to do with them being new and thinking about their assignments and not just executing.

[HancockCountyDog]

One thing we are missing is Dak taking the read up the gut. He has rushed for 120 yards .......THIS SEASON

And that is including a long run against USM.

Everyone that was concerned that we were changing the offense so Dak could run less, and that as a result our offense would be a little less explosive was kinda right. At least 4 games in.

[Dawg-gone-dawgs]

I think it's an issue of "physicality"...

[puts on flame retardant suit].

[Liverpooldawg]

When Dak has taken the read up the gut it has pretty much been stuffed. Part of it is defenses setting out their stall to stop that FIRST. Part of it is the blocking. I really have no problem with the short passing game because it's what defenses are giving us and it is something we can do. With this line until defenses back off of the stop Dak running mentality it's what we have to do.

[BB30]

If Dak continues to throw the ball like he is the run game will open up at some point. It's kind of a pick your poison if you spy him we will throw the ball on you and have the guys to do that, If you don't the run game will show back up.

[starkvegasdawg]

I'm not as concerned with the lack of called runs for Dak. I just want him to run more on plays that breakdown or maybe call some rollouts with a run/pass option. Just don't have a lineman 109" downfield because that will get called on us. Speaking of which...I still think the best part of this past weekend was Alabama getting called for that the week after Saban griped about it.

[TrapGame]

And there will be that one SEC defense where Dak stiff arms the spy a few times for some nice gains. Arkansas or Mizzou is my guess.

[Political Hack]

We're just trying to trick Bama into thinking we're a pass happy team before we lay down the gauntlet and run for 250 yards against that front 7.

[TUSK]

We're just trying to trick Bama into thinking we're a pass happy team before we lay down the gauntlet and run for 250 yards against that front 7.

Oh yeah?!?!?!?!

Well, well... we're just lulling yall with our anemic passing game before we bench our 4 Five Star RBs and unleash our Playstation-Like Passing Game with our true FR QB, Blake Barnett!!!!

[TUSK]

I'm not as concerned with the lack of called runs for Dak. I just want him to run more on plays that breakdown or maybe call some rollouts with a run/pass option. Just don't have a lineman 109" downfield because that will get called on us. Speaking of which...I still think the best part of this past weekend was Alabama getting called for that the week after Saban griped about it.

I started cackling when I saw that flag, thinking of what was about to happen on the sidelines...

I immediately stopped when I saw My Dark Lord look directly into my eyes through the TV...

[War Machine Dawg]

Might consider putting Shumpert at FB and giving our 2 freshmen TB's a chance. May not work, however, because I'm not sure our OL can block well enough to open holes for the RB's.

Holloway and Dak are finding holes. Dear and Myles find holes. There's only one person in our running game not finding holes. Tell me how that has to do with the OL's run blocking.

[Dawgology]

Holloway and Dak are finding holes. Dear and Myles find holes. There's only one person in our running game not finding holes. Tell me how that has to do with the OL's run blocking.

That's what no one wants to think about.

[Coach007]

We're just trying to trick Bama into thinking we're a pass happy team before we lay down the gauntlet and run for 250 yards against that front 7.

Chess Master at work

[Really Clark?]

Holloway and Dak are finding holes. Dear and Myles find holes. There's only one person in our running game not finding holes. Tell me how that has to do with the OL's run blocking.

Myles didn't this weekend. 2 for 1 yard. Dak was 6 for 14 with an 8 yard long. So that becomes 5 for 6 yards on his other runs. That seems real close to Shump's numbers this weekend. Granted Shump is not helping himself and the rushing has to be addressed going forward. But everybody is not finding holes.

[Todd4State]

Holloway and Dak are finding holes. Dear and Myles find holes. There's only one person in our running game not finding holes. Tell me how that has to do with the OL's run blocking.

Thank you. I'm sure it's not 100% Shumpert's fault, but it is without a doubt at least 85% of his fault.

[Todd4State]

Myles didn't this weekend. 2 for 1 yard. Dak was 6 for 14 with an 8 yard long. So that becomes 5 for 6 yards on his other runs. That seems real close to Shump's numbers this weekend. Granted Shump is not helping himself and the rushing has to be addressed going forward. But everybody is not finding holes.

It's because we have zero inside running threat when Shumpert is in the game meaning they can key in on Dak or whomever else is in the game and focus on setting the edge. Not to mention on one of Myles carries he tripped on the turf and got banged up.

For our run game to work, we need whomever the running back is to be effective. There is a reason why it's called the option- as in more than one choice to run the ball.

[Todd4State]

Says the run game is his fault for not putting them in good situations ...



:confused:


Why are we not putting them in good situations ?

That comment by Dan gives me hope that he will change some things. We'll see if it happens, but it at least tells me that he is aware that our running game isn't working.

[Dawgology]

Myles didn't this weekend. 2 for 1 yard. Dak was 6 for 14 with an 8 yard long. So that becomes 5 for 6 yards on his other runs. That seems real close to Shump's numbers this weekend. Granted Shump is not helping himself and the rushing has to be addressed going forward. But everybody is not finding holes.

When Holloway and Dear are getting touches they are getting yardage. But they are getting fewer touches than Shump. I ran some excel wizardy and got the following season YPC average:

Shump: 4.4 YPC (32 carries)
Holloway: 7.4 YPC (18 carries)
Dear: 9.5 YPC (2 carries)
Lee: 10.5 YPC (6 carries)

This is based on the official stats from the State athletic site.

Just throwing this out there for conversation.

Dear has had several big plays called back due to penalties. Shumps biggest game was against Northwestern where he gained 55 yards and 9 carries....Holloway got 1 carry that game.

[Really Clark?]

It's because we have zero inside running threat when Shumpert is in the game meaning they can key in on Dak or whomever else is in the game and focus on setting the edge. Not to mention on one of Myles carries he tripped on the turf and got banged up.

For our run game to work, we need whomever the running back is to be effective. There is a reason why it's called the option- as in more than one choice to run the ball.

Because this, because that...it's more than just one thing or one RB. Interior of line has to block better as well. And if they are keeping a LB in for Dak once they realize he doesn't have the ball they are getting in on the backs as well. Holloway has that extra speed that helps him get through or to the outside before the defense can react. Dak not Shump have that. It's more than just Shump. Shump is not helping and I think he has heard enough talk that it's making him think instead of just hit the lane and go. That is how he would be effective but he is not doing that either.

[Really Clark?]

When Holloway and Dear are getting touches they are getting yardage. But they are getting fewer touches than Shump. I ran some excel wizardy and got the following season YPC average:

Shump: 4.4 YPC (32 carries)
Holloway: 7.4 YPC (18 carries)
Dear: 9.5 YPC (2 carries)
Lee: 10.5 YPC (6 carries)

This is based on the official stats from the State athletic site.

Just throwing this out there for conversation.

Dear has had several big plays called back due to penalties. Shumps biggest game was against Northwestern where he gained 55 yards and 9 carries....Holloway got 1 carry that game.


And you conventiently left off Dak. And I was pointing out this past weekend not charting out the whole season and including our OOC opponents. And I said Shuml has issues. But so does our interior line. It's not just him. Dak can't run inside either.

[BankerDog]

I believe part of running problem is the fact that it seems like (to me) there are times when Dak hands the ball off instead of tucking it and running to the outside on our zone read plays. I have noticed it a lot of times last and a few times this year. With that said, Shump is a great Bulldog. Has done everything right, but he simply isn't going to get it done. We need Dear, Lee, A-Train, Holloway getting the carries. They are all different in their own ways; but they all have good vision and seem to set up their blocks well.

I also don't have a problem with us throwing it this much. This is the deepest group of WRs we have ever had. If we were running 50 times a game, people would be griping because we weren't getting our WRs the ball enough. Whatever is getting us Ws, I'll support it. We could be running the Ga Tech, triple option as long as it results in Ws. Because at the end of the day, the Ws are what is looked at the end of the day.

[NCDawg]

I believe part of running problem is the fact that it seems like (to me) there are times when Dak hands the ball off instead of tucking it and running to the outside on our zone read plays. I have noticed it a lot of times last and a few times this year. With that said, Shump is a great Bulldog. Has done everything right, but he simply isn't going to get it done. We need Dear, Lee, A-Train, Holloway getting the carries. They are all different in their own ways; but they all have good vision and seem to set up their blocks well.

I also don't have a problem with us throwing it this much. This is the deepest group of WRs we have ever had. If we were running 50 times a game, people would be griping because we weren't getting our WRs the ball enough. Whatever is getting us Ws, I'll support it. We could be running the Ga Tech, triple option as long as it results in Ws. Because at the end of the day, the Ws are what is looked at the end of the day.

I think you are correct about Dak handing the ball off on zone read plays when he should keep it. At least it appeared to me that way in the LSU game. Specifically, we had a 1st down on LSU's 9 yard line and he handed off to Shumpert 2 straight times for little or no gain. It appeared to me he could have gained a lot of yardage if he kept the ball on the second down. Third down was an incomplete pass in the corner of the endzone, so we had to settle for the FG.

[Dawgology]

And you conventiently left off Dak. And I was pointing out this past weekend not charting out the whole season and including our OOC opponents. And I said Shuml has issues. But so does our interior line. It's not just him. Dak can't run inside either.

Sorry:
Dak 4.03 YPC (30 carries)

Thought we were talking about RB's

[Really Clark?]

Sorry:
Dak 4.03 YPC (30 carries)

Thought we were talking about RB's

16 for -5 in conference games for Dak. 15 for 35 Shump. 10 for 79 Holloway far and away the best. Myles 2 for 1 yard. Williams 1 for -5. Holloway is the only one who has done anything in conference play and even then he has had times he couldn't get through the holes in the middle to run. Granted Dak could have had more against LSU in just scrambles and the sacks skews his number. But a guy who ran for nearly 1,000 yards last year and Shump who ran for 4.65 yards per carry in conference games are not the only reason running has been bad. That is my only point. Shump is struggling but so is the line. They are pass blocking really well but are not run blocking that well. It seems to be getting a little better and the edge looks to be there more for us right now. But the middle has not been good. Holloway is the only one fast enough to get through a seam before it is plugged and even he has had negative runs in the middle as well.

[War Machine Dawg]

16 for -5 in conference games for Dak. 15 for 35 Shump. 10 for 79 Holloway far and away the best. Myles 2 for 1 yard. Williams 1 for -5. Holloway is the only one who has done anything in conference play and even then he has had times he couldn't get through the holes in the middle to run. Granted Dak could have had more against LSU in just scrambles and the sacks skews his number. But a guy who ran for nearly 1,000 yards last year and Shump who ran for 4.65 yards per carry in conference games are not the only reason running has been bad. That is my only point. Shump is struggling but so is the line. They are pass blocking really well but are not run blocking that well. It seems to be getting a little better and the edge looks to be there more for us right now. But the middle has not been good. Holloway is the only one fast enough to get through a seam before it is plugged and even he has had negative runs in the middle as well.

You're including sack yardage in Dak's numbers. Gotta subtract that out to get an accurate picture. He was -19 against LSU because of sacks. I distinctly remember talking about that in the LSU AC QB.

[Really Clark?]

A
You're including sack yardage in Dak's numbers. Gotta subtract that out to get an accurate picture. He was -19 against LSU because of sacks. I distinctly remember talking about that in the LSU AC QB.

I said that in the post. I didn't have time to look at all of the stats. I think it's 13 rushes for 23 yards in conference when you take out the sacks. 1.77 yards per carry. Still very weak.

[Todd4State]

16 for -5 in conference games for Dak. 15 for 35 Shump. 10 for 79 Holloway far and away the best. Myles 2 for 1 yard. Williams 1 for -5. Holloway is the only one who has done anything in conference play and even then he has had times he couldn't get through the holes in the middle to run. Granted Dak could have had more against LSU in just scrambles and the sacks skews his number. But a guy who ran for nearly 1,000 yards last year and Shump who ran for 4.65 yards per carry in conference games are not the only reason running has been bad. That is my only point. Shump is struggling but so is the line. They are pass blocking really well but are not run blocking that well. It seems to be getting a little better and the edge looks to be there more for us right now. But the middle has not been good. Holloway is the only one fast enough to get through a seam before it is plugged and even he has had negative runs in the middle as well.

Actually, Holloway has not been tackled for a loss this year. He has only been stopped at the LOS TWICE- both against USM. So, in other words he has been getting gains- and actually statistically appears to be getting better- as the year goes along.

If Lee and Williams don't "earn the coaches trust"- whatever BS that is- then I fully expect Holloway to start. Very possibly as soon as this week considering how Holloway looked against them last year.

[Todd4State]

You're including sack yardage in Dak's numbers. Gotta subtract that out to get an accurate picture. He was -19 against LSU because of sacks. I distinctly remember talking about that in the LSU AC QB.

And less than a week after trying to call me out for special teams tackles- even though it didn't really change the end result when you took them out regarding Gray and Green.

[Really Clark?]

Actually, Holloway has not been tackled for a loss this year. He has only been stopped at the LOS TWICE- both against USM. So, in other words he has been getting gains- and actually statistically appears to be getting better- as the year goes along.

If Lee and Williams don't "earn the coaches trust"- whatever BS that is- then I fully expect Holloway to start. Very possibly as soon as this week considering how Holloway looked against them last year.

I said negative runs in the middle but wasn't really meaning being dropped for a loss. He has had some nice runs up the gut but even with his speed the holes close up quickly for him at times as well. What would look like an easy 5-8 yards it is struggle to get 3. Should have phrased it better. And like I said earlier it looked better this weekend but overall even then and for the season in conference (granted small sample and LSU may end up being a good defense) we have had trouble but it wasn't just one back or QB or WR.

[Really Clark?]

O
And less than a week after trying to call me out for special teams tackles- even though it didn't really change the end result when you took them out regarding Gray and Green.


Read the original post. I qualified the statement that it was skewed because of that. I wasn't where I could look at all of the numbers right then. Unlike you who still argued that your skewed numbers were not skewed. Comprehend what I wrote before jumping in trying to be smart about it. I stated it before anyone had to call me out about that number. Can't help you didn't read or comprehend that.

[Todd4State]

O


Read the original post. I qualified the statement that it was skewed because of that. I wasn't where I could look at all of the numbers right then. Unlike you who still argued that your skewed numbers were not skewed. Comprehend what I wrote before jumping in trying to be smart about it. I stated it before anyone had to call me out about that number. Can't help you didn't read or comprehend that.

No- YOU tried to call me out even after I took out the special teams tackles. You tried to make it sound like Gray and Green were getting all of their tackles on special teams when the research showed it was roughly around 25% for both of them.

Any way you cut it, for two of our back-up LB's to have almost as many tackles as our starting OLB does not speak well for Zach Jackson when the back-ups were playing only about 25% of the total time.

[Todd4State]

I said negative runs in the middle but wasn't really meaning being dropped for a loss. He has had some nice runs up the gut but even with his speed the holes close up quickly for him at times as well. What would look like an easy 5-8 yards it is struggle to get 3. Should have phrased it better. And like I said earlier it looked better this weekend but overall even then and for the season in conference (granted small sample and LSU may end up being a good defense) we have had trouble but it wasn't just one back or QB or WR.

Please.

Holloway vs. Auburn had carries that went for: 11, 6, 16, 5, and 14

Holloway vs. NWS: 4

Holloway vs. LSU: 11, 9, 7, 7, 3

Holloway vs. USM: 35, 0, 1, 9, 4, 2, 0

The only time he even had any remotely negative plays was against USM. Aside from maybe one carry against LSU where he got three yards.

[Really Clark?]

No- YOU tried to call me out even after I took out the special teams tackles. You tried to make it sound like Gray and Green were getting all of their tackles on special teams when the research showed it was roughly around 25% for both of them.

Any way you cut it, for two of our back-up LB's to have almost as many tackles as our starting OLB does not speak well for Zach Jackson when the back-ups were playing only about 25% of the total time.

Yeah you took it out after posts arguing that the numbers were not skewed. We already hashed that out and it's done. You tried being a butt and call me out when I already qualified what I posted originally that it was skewed. Don't get your panties in a bunch over an old debate trying the flip it back to that because I told you to read and comprehend what I posted in this thread.

[Really Clark?]

Please.

Holloway vs. Auburn had carries that went for: 11, 6, 16, 5, and 14

Holloway vs. NWS: 4

Holloway vs. LSU: 11, 9, 7, 7, 3

Holloway vs. USM: 35, 0, 1, 9, 4, 2, 0

The only time he even had any remotely negative plays was against USM. Aside from maybe one carry against LSU where he got three yards.

So 5 of his 18 carries were for 3 yards or less. Granted I don't think all of those were in the middle. But that's 27.7%. So I wasn't wrong overall just the conference games it was only once. But it is still only Shump having issues right? That is what was originally posted about. That was my point earlier. It hasn't just been Shump. Dak and even Holloway at times have had issues getting yards especially in the middle. Please tell me were I am wrong with that orginal point.