"we should have run it more"

[Rabbuk]

We ran the ball 38 times to TCU's 41. neither team really got the run going.

 

[CyInDFW]

As I see the box score, ISU had 38 run plays which averaged 3 yds/play, and 38 pass plays which averaged 9.1 yds per play. So why would you run more? More 4th-and-shorts so the punter can practice his fakes and pooch kicks?

Warren looks like a nice back, but he's racked up his yards against a non-P5 team and two P5 teams with rushing defenses ranked in the triple digits. TCU neutralized him quite well, and their secondary was dinged-up/inexperienced. Seems like passing was the right decision. But apparently not...

Just so you know...That non P5 team has the #7 ranked rush defense in the country. If you stop running the ball then the defense doesn't have to take it into consideration. Running opens up play action passing and play action passing helps the running game. We don't have the athletes to compete in a shootout with TCU, Tech or Baylor...or pretty much the rest of the conference.

 

[khardbored]

I haven't really even seen us run the zone read when SR is in the game. We run delayed hand offs but it's not a read.

2 seasons ago we ran it all the time (remember how he got banged up and missed the last 2 games of the season?). Last year ran it some, but less.

 

[ThatllDoCy]

I don't know. They were not letting us run. It would have been nice to be able to run on them, but we couldn't.

If more running means the zone read, then I am in total opposition.

 

[CYEATHAWK]

Someone correct me..........but when #30 was disqualified for targeting, wasn't their entire secondary freshman? You have one of the best WR corps in the conference going against an opponent who cannot defend them......and CPR says they should have ran it more?

One more thing, a little off subject.......but why does SR need to be on the field when Lanning is QB? Don't we have four capable recievers?