re: The running game was not vanilla

quote:

---

It was our second highest yards per carry game of the entire season against the P5

---

Alabama gives up more rushing ypg than any other P5 team we’ve played this year.

quote:

---

Well then go take away our best runs in all the other games as well

---

Sure. Yards per rush by the RB’s + Zaivion Thomas, excluding the longest run of each game:

South Carolina - 4.7 ypc
Arkansas - 4.0 ypc
UCLA - 3.1 ypc
USC - 3.1 ypc
Alabama - 3.0 ypc
Ole Miss - 2.6 ypc
A&M - 1.5 ypc

And again, Alabama is giving up more rushing ypg than any other P5 team we’ve played to this point.

On top of that, the one long run by Durham wasn’t anything exotic. It was a stretch zone. And it’s not the first time we’ve run it. If it had been blown up in the backfield or at the LOS, tRant would have been bitching uninspired playcalling and lack of creativity. It’s just that Durham found a lane this time and made a play.

This isn’t the first time we’ve run gadget plays. It’s not the first time we’ve run stretch zone. It’s not the first time we’ve run Zaivion Thomas (though I do think we should have done more of this throughout the year). The problem has never been a vanilla run scheme or a lack of creativity, despite tRant’s constant assertions otherwise.

In fact, I think part of the issue might be that we are trying to do too much instead of doing a couple of things really well. Regardless, the problem is certainly not that we need to do more.

Offensive line gets physically pushed around ! Very weak but decent pass protection ? Go figure.

quote:

---

But taking Durham out after the long run to the red zone in the 1st series was a real head scratcher.

---

He has to still be hurting more than they're letting on. That's the only way it makes sense.

quote:

---

I don't think it's been vanilla all year to be honest. There seems to be no flow to the run game. It's like ...let's try this now, let's try this now, let's try this now.

---

Yeah that’s what it feels like to me as well.

I remember hearing some comments from Sloan early in the year, maybe even before the opener, where he talked about how our playbook is wide open. I’m paraphrasing, but it was something along the lines of “our system is set up so that we can run just about any combination of formation and play.”

At the time it sounded like a good thing. In hindsight, I can’t help but wonder if that’s part of the problem in the running game. Even within a single rushing concept, there are going to be a lot of nuances to the blocking assignments based on formation and defensive alignment. This is especially true in the power rushing game where you have pulling linemen and a TE who may be on the line, in the slot/wing, or in motion at the snap.

Is it a case where our guys are thinking too much? Sometimes it’s better to be good at a couple of things than be meh at a lot of things. Jack of all trades, master of none so to speak.

I’m speculating but it wouldn’t surprise me if this were part of the issue. Particularly for a young OC who maybe hasn’t learned how to be pragmatic about the playbook yet.