Which is not all that helpful if the majority of your passing game is compressed (suppressed) to that box (because your passing game is poor) and you do not run play-action. In modern football, you have to be sufficient in passing. In reality, the lack of a passing game has just taken something we should be good at, and made it mediocre.
STEELE!!!
- Thread starter ShankinPATs
- Start date
Which is not all that helpful if the majority of your passing game is compressed (suppressed) to that box (because your passing game is poor) and you do not run play-action. In modern football, you have to be sufficient in passing. In reality, the lack of a passing game has just taken something we should be good at, and made it mediocre.
While true...you need a better than avg passing game to open up the run in that manner (i.e. elite offense) and even then it doesn't always work. It works much better to be able to run the ball and open up the secondary from establishing the ground game first. It allows for much more diversity in the offense. It is MUCH more difficult to do it the other way around.
TTech threw the ball all over the place with Leach yet their running game was poor. You'd think they would have averaged 6-7-8 yds a carry, but not the case...why??
Yea and steele struggled hardcore for 3 quarters vs UNI and threw 3 picks on 4 attempts vs a bad uconn team. The qbs are awfully equal right now.
Another thing, rewatch the Iowa game. A healthy Steele is just as good of a runner as JB.
I'm not really advocating for either one though.
I think we can win with either, or both.
I'm not really advocating for either one though.
I think we can win with either, or both.
His running backs consistently averaged around 6 yards per carry. You fail again. They always averaged 5.2 or higher, The best year was Baron Batch in 2008 when he averaged 6.7.
Plus, TT was setting historical marks for offense and made how many bowl games in a row? Hardly a contention to the argument improvement in the passing offense at the expense of the run game is welcome.
Would TT's run game would have been better without such a potent passing game? No.
Would TT's passing game have been better with a better running game? Maybe, but clearly it was not needed for them to have success passing.
Don't think I failed at anything. Here are the cumulative rushing averages for Mike Leach's time at TTech:
2000 - 2.6yds/carry
2001 - 3.5 yds/carry
2002 - 3.6 yds/carry
2003 - 4.5 yds/carry
2004 - 3.8 yds/carry
2005 - 4.2 yds/carry
2006 - 4/6 yds/carry
2007 - 3.1 yds/carry
2008 - 4.8 yds/carry
2009 - 3.4 yds/carry
Looks to me like the trend was avg to below avg rather than above avg as you are suggesting a dominant passing game promotes.
Again...not impossible for the passing game to open up the run but MUCH harder to do vs. establishing a run first and then follow with the pass.
I cannot seem to find the forest with all these trees in the way...
TT may have had the best decade long run on offense in history without a great run game- talk about marginalizing your contention.
Clearly there is synergy, with both run and pass impacting the other. Given what we have seen from ISU the past couple of years, it is obvious the passing game is limiting the running game, offense, and team.
That includes quarterback sacks. Look at the running backs average yards. Yes, you fail.
The argument was that a potent pass first offense opens up the run game. I posted Tech's rushing averages to show that isn't necessarily the case. They had as potent of a passing offense during Leach's time as anyone in the country yet their rushing was avg to below avg when they did run the ball.
I guess I'm old school and prefer a run first offense. I think that is ISU's best chance for success on the field with ball control, run first mentality. I also think that opens up our limited passing game if we can establish that ground game.
I don't necessarily believe that we will ever be able to come out and throw the ball all over the place to improve our running attack. I do believe we can run to improve the chance of success through the air though.
It's all about managing the game and mix of run/pass. Success in one benefits the other for sure, but my argument is more teams find success using the run to set up the pass instead of vice versa.
No point in beating this horse any further though.
Bottom line is neither QB is very good. I don't really care who starts, I know CPR will put the right guy out there. I just don't think that "right guy" will be very good.
Their combined stats from last year are:
2720 yards, 16 TD, 17 INT, 248/479 = 51.8%
Not to mention the fumbles that each QB had that played huge parts in our games.
Bottom line, niether are very good, and I didn't see much of an improvement in the spring game from last year.
Their combined stats from last year are:
2720 yards, 16 TD, 17 INT, 248/479 = 51.8%
Not to mention the fumbles that each QB had that played huge parts in our games.
Bottom line, niether are very good, and I didn't see much of an improvement in the spring game from last year.
Our run game has been average in spite of our passing game being very poor. Would a dominant run game improve the passing game and offense? Sure, but not as much as having a good passing game would. Do you blame a loss on the unit that played average instead of the ones that played poorly?
If we had a good passing attack, but sucked at running the ball and on offense as a whole, I would agree with your stance. I should save this for another thread, but I agree with you thoughts on our offense not being optimal- would love to see a passing attack that better complemented the run.
You better tell Mike Leach right away. He needs your help even though he has lead the most prolific passing offenses with basically no run game and talent pretty similar to what we had outside of Tim Couch.
I'm just going to weigh in quick on the QB thing. I don't care who wins it. I have defended all three guys at some point so I don't have a bias. I just know that the play needs to get better.
Barnett-Physically, he is at a disadvantage. He isn't very big. He doesn't have great arm strength. There is a misconseption that he is "smarter." No. IMO, he was luckier last year. There were dropped picks and we somehow regained a lot of his fumbles. He does lead the team well, though, and he does run the run game better. He is better on the zone read and IMO, he is better runner in tight space. He isn't incredibly fast but I would have more faith in him in the run game. In the pass game, he looked like a freshman.
Steele-He has all the tools to succeed. He doesn't have the absolute cannon that everyone thinks but he certainly has a stronger arm. When he is accurate/makes the right decisions, he can be very very good. The issue is that sometimes he forces things and we pay for it. His accuracy has to improve as well. In the running game he isn't very good at making the right read. That may have been because he hadn't done it much but only time will tell whether that's resolved. He is, as we have seen, very good at improvising. He gives us a better chance at the big play but last year the big plays went both ways.
Sam-Looks to be the best thrower already. He is still a little giddy and he wasn't thrown in against the 1s but he does make good throws. Who knows on the running game. I just really hesitate to say he couldn't be the guy because we have heard about his smarts and he was making the throws so I think he has a chance. A small one, but a chance.
Ultimately, this will come down tot he next three months. Who does the work and who improves on their faults will be the deciding factor. Steele will be the guy if he eliminates mistakes. It's really that simple.
I hoped to see no picks, but I thought SJ looked better this Spring.
Really, did we want to see the QB's pick our defense apart? I did not.
Largely, I thought the poor decisions from SJ were reduced and accuracy okay. Still too many drops/missed check-offs, and a bad scheme imo. We are going to be a dink, dump, and scramble offense.
I understand what you are saying, but there were some passes where they just missed.
I tell you what, this crow will taste awesome if one of them comes out next season and plays really well.
I will maybe even make an ***official crow eating thread*** if that happens! :yes:
How many practices, errr games, have you watched were some passes were not missed?
I am not suggesting SJ is the an upper-level Big 12 QB, or even the starter, but he looked better in this year's Spring Game than last year's.
I just love the morons who think it's rare for a QB to play smarter and cut down their INT number their second year.
I also love the only Barnett argument is the same one they used for Tiller the year before, he beat Nebraska!!!1!11!!
I also love the only Barnett argument is the same one they used for Tiller the year before, he beat Nebraska!!!1!11!!
Take the Iowa game away from Steele and take the OSU game away from Barnett and you get two guys who are both pretty equal. I would say Steele's highs are a little higher but his lows are much lower than Barnett's.
Honestly, the biggest argument for Steele is he beat Iowa so I don't understand your Tiller comparison.