Not impressed with the RBs “at all?”
We must not have been watching the same game.
We must not have been watching the same game.
Why did we run so much?
- Thread starter Sirkruser
- Start date
I thought the RB’s were fine I just think our Offensive line didn’t execute as well as we wanted them too. And that’s why I am happy for this week 2 bye week so we can re work our line.
That’s very close to saying a dominating, near-perfect game was required to avoid OT game with UNI, which screams inefficiency. Conservative football is built on being efficient.
We had the material to have success at many things, particularly against UNI, but were more limited than we were conservative. UNI’s DC was more or less calling our offense yesterday.
Like you said, with the run game working we passed 41 times, including on 3rd and 1 and 4th and 1 at midfield right before half, when ball-control, field position doctrine nearly mandates running. No surprise UNI was all over it, by their formation and ours, passing to the TE was a probable outcome.
Last edited:
The thing I’m most disappointed with is that we had 3 times where we had 1st and Goal where a TD wins the game and we didn’t score. And I think all 3 we started with 2 straight runs up the middle.
Also, it’s not Purdy hanging in the pocket on pass plays that limits the offense- it’s the ZERO designed QB runs.
Also, it’s not Purdy hanging in the pocket on pass plays that limits the offense- it’s the ZERO designed QB runs.
That wasn’t directed at you, but I do agree with the sentiment. OL did a good job opening up holes, but also didn’t get that same push on a couple of critical runs. Pass blocking needs work.
The good news is if it’s obvious to us message board yahoos, you bet the coaches will make it a point of emphasis before Iowa.
They were playing a I-AA team with the safeties playing deep. Any running back in Division 1 could have averaged 4 ypc against that defense. Im just telling you, the drop off is pretty significant from Montgomery to that trio at it will be evident in a couple weeks against Iowa.
You dont understand what the word "probably" means? In any case, I honestly dont care that much about football, so my point still stands. I thought the offensive line, running backs, and play calling were extremely poor yesterday.
"dumb ****"
The dumb rating was for future dumb **** you would post. You're not disappointing so far this football season.
First of all that's not how you spell offense. CMC's offense while being a spread is still a power run based offense. Take Butler's big play ability out of the equation last season and this is what a Power Spread Offense looks like. We will run alot of R.P.O style plays this season, we will have a bunch of 3 TE sets, and we run the ball alot. We have a good stable of backs that will get the job done. This is and never was going to be a pass the ball 60 times a game and score 50+ points. The defense is elite and will stop teams. All the offense has to do is score enough to win. It was ugly but that's exactly what they did yesterday.
Kene averaged over 7 yds/carry. Imagine had he NOT been hurt. I thought ALL our RBs looked very good. I honestly think Kene may have been the primary back had he not gotten dinged up in practice. He was Q-U-I-C-K (hence the effectiveness on the edges). Had we been ABLE to play him more, I think that it could have opened up a few more down-field/vertical passes. Overall, I'm not as mad about the team's performance than I was yesterday in the stands. We moved the ball at will & our defense was ELITE! Ill-timed penalties and dropped passes (and the one horrendous offensive TO) is what made this a close game. Don't know if we would have blown them out, but could easily have seen us winning something like 20-3 or 24-6.
RB's were solid especially when put in an position to succeed by our play callers.
I know Jay has written about this before but the staff's refusal to consistently call designed runs that go outside the tackles is extremely confusing. Kene had a couple really nice carries that were designed to go outside but they were few and far between after that. We tend to block for these much better than our inside runs and our running backs showed yesterday they can be really good in space.
The Purdy turning into a statue thing is confusing too. I totally understand in quarters 1-3 not having him run much but at least get him moving and playing to his strengths. This is especially true because our pass blocking was only average again. I hope this was the coaches being unbelievably conservative for one game and not an indication that Purdy is hurt or we are trying to change who he is as a QB.
I know Jay has written about this before but the staff's refusal to consistently call designed runs that go outside the tackles is extremely confusing. Kene had a couple really nice carries that were designed to go outside but they were few and far between after that. We tend to block for these much better than our inside runs and our running backs showed yesterday they can be really good in space.
The Purdy turning into a statue thing is confusing too. I totally understand in quarters 1-3 not having him run much but at least get him moving and playing to his strengths. This is especially true because our pass blocking was only average again. I hope this was the coaches being unbelievably conservative for one game and not an indication that Purdy is hurt or we are trying to change who he is as a QB.
They ran the ball well yesterday. It was the timing of the play calls that was bad. We passed when we should have just run it several times, and vice versa. It was just baffling and frustrating to watch.
Even the ESPN summary noted the questionable playcalling.
Even the ESPN summary noted the questionable playcalling.
The summary that appears on ESPN.com isn't written by anyone at ESPN. It's the story from the Des Moines-based AP writer.
Still, most post game write ups don't focus on things like that unless there's specific plays that come up. Similar to how writers almost never comment on blown calls unless they're monumentally bad.
It's too bad that Meredith gets to be the national wire "voice" as the local AP writer, because he's generally terrible at what he does. Not just specifically this recap, either. I think he's in a contest with Uncle Randy to see who hates their job more and can check out the quickest.
UNI's defense is very similar to ours. Don't give up big plays, and make the other team drive the length of the field in 4-6 yard chunks hoping they make a mistake that kills the drive. We moved the ball well every drive we had, but 6 ended with drive-killing mistakes. Two drives ended with dropped passes. Two drives were killed with the personal foul penalties. One drive ended on a whiffed block that led to Purdy's "fumble, and one drive ended on a missed chip-shot field goal. It was a good game plan by UNI knowing its the first game of the year and mistakes are going to be common.
So playing “conservatively” against said defense and taking what’s there still resulted in too many errors to avoid OT and just 13 points in regulation...And too many errors constitutes 4.5 ypc, 75% completion %, two sacks, just 5 penalties, and just one turnover?
Talk about a self-manufactured thin margin for error. It was another bad offensive outing, but some rather think we need a near perfect game against UNI to avoid a 3OT pillow fight with UNI.
What results in a thin margin for error against UNI quickly becomes losses of the nature of TCU and Iowa a year ago when playing non-FCS teams.
