What a solid running back would do for us right now.....

[defiantdog]

We have the least amount of attempts among all SEC teams in rushing. We still haven't had a 100 yard rusher this year. We can't stop our RB's from fumbling. And none of our RB's are getting more than 10 carries per game.

We will not beat Alabama without any existence of a running game. We may get through Kentucky and Mizzou by throwing the out passes to receivers, but we won't win the big ones without a serious force in the backfield.

D. Lee may be our best option right now (3 carries for 21 yards yesterday), but it seems he's not going to get more than a few carries each game. Holloway is now our featured back (8 carries for 14 yards yesterday). Holloway may be fast, but he's not a viable option for a successful SEC team.

Yes, Alabama beat A&M because of their defense yesterday (Allen looked like deer lost in headlights all game). But Henry also ran for 236 yards. Dak is our leading rusher with 254 yards rushing. Henry almost ran for more yards than our leading rusher has for the entire season. That's embarrassing.

I don't know what happened to our running game, but we're supposed to have talent back there. We aren't showing it, and we aren't going to win any big games without a solid running back.

[ShotgunDawg]

I disagree in regards to Bama. Nobody runs the ball on Bama and you don't beat Bama by running the ball.

The only way to beat Bama is to have big plays in the passing game and create turnovers. Attempting to run against Bama is a bad game plan and a waste of snaps IMO.

As for Ole Miss, you certainly needed to run to beat them last year, but this year I think they can be beat in a number of different ways.

A better running game is certainly something we need and could use, but I think we can win out by throwing the ball and having an average running game in the redzone.

[CadaverDawg]

I disagree in regards to Bama. Nobody runs the ball on Bama and you don't beat Bama by running the ball.

The only way to beat Bama is to have big plays in the passing game and create turnovers. Attempting to run against Bama is a bad game plan and a waste of snaps IMO.

As for Ole Miss, you certainly needed to run to beat them last year, but this year I think they can be beat in a number of different ways.

A better running game is certainly something we need and could use, but I think we can win out by throwing the ball and having an average running game in the redzone.

No offense, but I couldn't disagree more. You don't run the ball against Bama to gain big yardage....you run the ball so that you aren't one-dimensional where their D-Line can pin their ears back and kill Dak, and so their secondary can't just sit back and look for passes to pick instead of ever having to worry about run support.

Too many of our fans are not thinking things through when they say "abandon the run since we can't do it anyway". It doesn't work that way. Alabama would LOVE for us to never run it against them...they would not only kill us, they may kill Dak in the process.

We have good receivers, but we don't have great enough receivers to beat Bama's secondary for 4 quarters.

[ShotgunDawg]

No offense, but I couldn't disagree more. You don't run the ball against Bama to gain big yardage....you run the ball so that you aren't one-dimensional where their D-Line can pin their ears back and kill Dak, and so their secondary can't just sit back and look for passes to pick instead of ever having to worry about run support.

Too many of our fans are not thinking things through when they say "abandon the run since we can't do it anyway". It doesn't work that way. Alabama would LOVE for us to never run it against them...they would not only kill us, they may kill Dak in the process.

We have good receivers, but we don't have great enough receivers to beat Bama's secondary for 4 quarters.

Fair enough. But you seem to be talking more about attempts than actual running success. Can we have the attempts with the current running game we have?

[defiantdog]

No offense, but I couldn't disagree more. You don't run the ball against Bama to gain big yardage....you run the ball so that you aren't one-dimensional where their D-Line can pin their ears back and kill Dak, and so their secondary can't just sit back and look for passes to pick instead of ever having to worry about run support.

Too many of our fans are not thinking things through when they say "abandon the run since we can't do it anyway". It doesn't work that way. Alabama would LOVE for us to never run it against them...they would not only kill us, they may kill Dak in the process.

We have good receivers, but we don't have great enough receivers to beat Bama's secondary for 4 quarters.

This is exactly what I'm talking about..... A&M was one dimensional against Bama, and look what happened to Kyle Allen. Bama put on a pass rush every down. If we don't figure out a way for Bama to respect our run game then they will just repeat what they did yesterday against us. And our OL can't handle a steady stream of Robinson, Reed and Allen.

[GreenheadDawg]

No offense, but I couldn't disagree more. You don't run the ball against Bama to gain big yardage....you run the ball so that you aren't one-dimensional where their D-Line can pin their ears back and kill Dak, and so their secondary can't just sit back and look for passes to pick instead of ever having to worry about run support.

Too many of our fans are not thinking things through when they say "abandon the run since we can't do it anyway". It doesn't work that way. Alabama would LOVE for us to never run it against them...they would not only kill us, they may kill Dak in the process.

We have good receivers, but we don't have great enough receivers to beat Bama's secondary for 4 quarters.

Best post I've seen in a while. Bottom line is you can't be one-dimensional and beat good teams. Dan has to figure out a way to develop a decent running game. Doesn't have to great but Bama has to know you are gonna attempt to run it or Dak will leave on a stretcher. He's gonna be running for his life anyway but they will really be drooling if they can bull rush Dak every play because we have just conceded to pass every play

[Todd4State]

Best post I've seen in a while. Bottom line is you can't be one-dimensional and beat good teams. Dan has to figure out a way to develop a decent running game. Doesn't have to great but Bama has to know you are gonna attempt to run it or Dak will leave on a stretcher. He's gonna be running for his life anyway but they will really be drooling if they can bull rush Dak every play because we have just conceded to pass every play

How about actually playing the most productive backs on the team?

[shoeless joe]

We have 2 backs that I feel could/should be the feature backs. We have 2 backs that are role players and should be used as such. When each begins to be used to their strengths it will strengthen the run game and the whole offense.

We have the players. We need them to grow up and step up...and of course get the opportunity in games.

[maroonmania]

How about actually playing the most productive backs on the team?

Well I hate for any kid to be dinged up and unavailable BUT our run game looked MUCH more fluid yesterday with Williams, Lee and Holloway getting ALL the carries. And that was a pretty salty rush D we played yesterday (nationally #23 rush defense). And we may have had some fumbling issues with the new guys but we've had fumbling issues with our entire team this year. And for those saying Shump should play for pass blocking you can be quiet now. Shump's blocking was not available at all yesterday and Dak had one his best days ever passing with very little pass rush on him.

[GreenheadDawg]

How about actually playing the most productive backs on the team?

Totally agree but this is Dan Mullen we are talking about. We have a 150lb kid as our feature back.

[defiantdog]

Totally agree but this is Dan Mullen we are talking about. We have a 150lb kid as our feature back.

Mullen probably thought he could make him the next Jeff Demps / LaMichael James..... that ship has sailed.

[Taog Redloh]

I wouldn't mind seeing Holloway used like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=byPjkmgUcWg

Namely, with another back in the backfield.

[GreenheadDawg]

Mullen probably thought he could make him the next Jeff Demps / LaMichael James..... that ship has sailed.

You're probably right. I like holloway, I think he is a tough SOB that does what he is asked to do. But a guy that is build like a high school cheerleader, even though he is fast, shouldn't be getting runs up the damn middle against guys that weigh twice as much. How many times have you seen someone bump him and he goes flying. Mullen is gonna get the poor kid killed

[defiantdog]

I wouldn't mind seeing Holloway used like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=byPjkmgUcWg

Namely, with another back in the backfield.

Joe Adams might have been small, but he could break tackles. Holloway simply cannot.

[Taog Redloh]

Joe Adams might have been small, but he could break tackles. Holloway simply cannot.
Honestly, I'm not sure Holloway is consistently fast enough either. He amazes me sometimes, and others it seems like his feel are in concrete.

[defiantdog]

Honestly, I'm not sure Holloway is consistently fast enough either. He amazes me sometimes, and others it seems like his feel are in concrete.

That's probably the reason we all like Dear, because he can get up field fast

[Todd4State]

Well I hate for any kid to be dinged up and unavailable BUT our run game looked MUCH more fluid yesterday with Williams, Lee and Holloway getting ALL the carries. And that was a pretty salty rush D we played yesterday (nationally #23 rush defense). And we may have had some fumbling issues with the new guys but we've had fumbling issues with our entire team this year. And for those saying Shump should play for pass blocking you can be quiet now. Shump's blocking was not available at all yesterday and Dak had one his best days ever passing with very little pass rush on him.

Lee has only fumbled once- on a reception and Aeris has only fumbled once. We only lost one of those. And I do think that the whole team has had fumbling issues- which tells me that we need to look at how we are coaching our guys to carry the ball.

At any rate, I'm at the point where I would trade a fumble for overall production. Especially if we recover 50% of them.

[ScottH]

At this point I don't care if Lee is sexting Meagan.

For us to go 9-3, Lee (and Williams) needs the carries.

Hell Lee's ypc is twice the next highest RB other than Dear.

I realize it's a little apples to oranges but for comparison:
Lee 8.0 YPC
Fournette 8.01 YPC
Chubb 8.12 YPC

It's obvious to everyone on the face of the earth.

[War Machine Dawg]

At this point I don't care if Lee is sexting Meagan.

For us to go 9-3, Lee (and Williams) needs the carries.

Hell Lee's ypc is twice the next highest RB other than Dear.

I realize it's a little apples to oranges but for comparison:
Lee 8.0 YPC
Fournette 8.01 YPC
Chubb 8.12 YPC

It's obvious to everyone on the face of the earth.

One of my buddies thinks it's all the OL. Forest. Trees. Chicken. Egg.

[Really Clark?]

Lee has only fumbled once- on a reception and Aeris has only fumbled once. We only lost one of those. And I do think that the whole team has had fumbling issues- which tells me that we need to look at how we are coaching our guys to carry the ball.

At any rate, I'm at the point where I would trade a fumble for overall production. Especially if we recover 50% of them.

From 2010-2013 we lead the league or was at the top of the league for the least number of fumbles and fumbles lost. Knox is the same coach. And this was over some extremely heavy run offenses. We have problems the last two years but we have had several of these fumbles happen on special teams. But I don't think when you have a 4 year stretch of being the best then it's a coaching problem. Different personnel and/or personnel not taking to coaching, maybe that's the issue.