The running game.

[BHusky]

First of all, only 43 teams have kept their opponents to under 4 yards per carry (ironically, we are one of them). So you're flat out wrong.

http://www.teamrankings.com/college-football/stat/opponent-yards-per-rush-attempt

Secondly, taking out the goal-line stand rushes are not the same as the longest rush, because the longest rush doesn't happen with 11 in the box and almost no pass threat.

Enjoy...

I have no idea what your point is. Ave ypc as it pertains to a teams rushing defense is an average for the season and I'm not sure how it would prove a specific teams ave ypc. So 1/3 of FBS teams let up more than 4 ypc, but how are those numbers calculated? If 40 teams played the same team #1 with a 2 ypc and team #2 with 6 ypc ave then of course they would all be at 4 ypc with rushing defense, but team #1 would still have a 2 ypc ave regarldess of what a teams gross ypc rush defense is.

And what goalline stand rushes are you talking about? Not once did they line up in a tight jumbo formation inside the 5 yard line which means there was never a "11 man in the box" opportunity for Temple. In fact there was just one play inside the 10 in which they had less than 2 WR's split out and they threw the ball. So maybe in theory your argument would make sense, but as it pertains to UConn and their game versus Temple it does not.

 

[UConnDan97]

I have no idea what your point is. Ave ypc as it pertains to a teams rushing defense is an average for the season and I'm not sure how it would prove a specific teams ave ypc. So 1/3 of FBS teams let up more than 4 ypc, but how are those numbers calculated? If 40 teams played the same team #1 with a 2 ypc and team #2 with 6 ypc ave then of course they would all be at 4 ypc with rushing defense, but team #1 would still have a 2 ypc ave regarldess of what a teams gross ypc rush defense is.

And what goalline stand rushes are you talking about? Not once did they line up in a tight jumbo formation inside the 5 yard line which means there was never a "11 man in the box" opportunity for Temple. In fact there was just one play inside the 10 in which they had less than 2 WR's split out and they threw the ball. So maybe in theory your argument would make sense, but as it pertains to UConn and their game versus Temple it does not.

If you want to say that there were 2 men in receiver formation and 9 in the box, then so be it. That doesn't eliminate my point; it helps make it. Also, I remember one of the plays where we brought Walsh in as the fullback for McCombs, I could have sworn there were even more than 9. Be that as it may, the goal line stands change the average yards per carry. And a team that averages 4 yards per carry on the ground gets a first down after three runs. Very easy math to comprehend...

 

[BHusky]

If you want to say that there were 2 men in receiver formation and 9 in the box, then so be it. That doesn't eliminate my point; it helps make it. Also, I remember one of the plays where we brought Walsh in as the fullback for McCombs, I could have sworn there were even more than 9. Be that as it may, the goal line stands change the average yards per carry. And a team that averages 4 yards per carry on the ground gets a first down after three runs. Very easy math to comprehend...

Ok, whatever. If they are on the 4 or 5 yard line and in the spread offense, if they only get 2 yards it is no different than if they are on the 30. This is not "goal line" offense in this formation. I made my point because you said there were 5-6 goal line rushes and there were not. If you cannot get 1 yard running a 2-3 wide formation than it just reiterates that the rush offense is lacking and those rushes should not be excluded.

And again your 4 yard rush and first down after 3 carriers, what?? I am trying to interpret your posts because they are not clear, but my interpretation is that 4 yards is good because 3 rushes of 4 yards equals a first down. Your right, basic math but it is not a real world example. Are you familiar with any team that says lets run the ball for 4 yards a carry and every 3rd run will be a 1st down?? It doesn't work that way if that was the point you were trying to make.

Although 4 yards seems good (would be ok in NFL) it is not that good in College. It puts us in the bottom half of FBS and that 4 yards was excluding sack yards which in comparison would put us even lower. Good for the coaches that they have improved rushing after PP left, but going from awful to average is not worthy of kudos to the coaching staff. It might be a glass half empty view, but it is reality and good for those who can find a silver lining in this season.

 

[Stinger92860]

I could be wrong but when he says goal line rushes he means the 5-6 plays we ran inside the 5. Make sense now?

 

[sdhusky]

Nah. The problem was the OL schemes. No one was going to be effective running the ball until the two old guys left.

If you want to say that there were 2 men in receiver formation and 9 in the box, then so be it. That doesn't eliminate my point; it helps make it. Also, I remember one of the plays where we brought Walsh in as the fullback for McCombs, I could have sworn there were even more than 9. Be that as it may, the goal line stands change the average yards per carry. And a team that averages 4 yards per carry on the ground gets a first down after three runs. Very easy math to comprehend...

I think if it takes 7 tries to get in from 1 yard, you can use that as judgement of the running game.

It's fair to include that in average.

A great running team would have gotten it in less than 7 tries.

 

[Kgun7]

So what? They are much better now and still not good enough. Of course P and GDL did damage. We've been watching like a sinking ship for over two years. This isn't news. If you want to give out participation trophies or attaboy stickers because we finally won a game, go ahead.

I'd rather not sugarcoat this anymore than is required to stomach the rest of the season. I'd rather put expectations back where they belong. To reach them, the running game needs to be better, among other things.

Why must it be an either/or??? Why can't the coaching staff do both? Couldn't they praise AND motivate???

 

[nelsonmuntz]

I think if it takes 7 tries to get in from 1 yard, you can use that as judgement of the running game.

It's fair to include that in average.

A great running team would have gotten it in less than 7 tries.

Good point. If every play is not a touchdown, the team must suck. Got it.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Deleone is epically awful as a coach. Changing an OL coach in midstream and getting this kind of production is amazing. I think Foley deserves a lot of credit, but I also think the fact that Deleone is no longer the OL coach was worth 25-30 ypg of rushing by itself.

Putting Delorenzo in was so painfully obvious that Pasqualoni should have been fired for that alone.

Finally, McCombs was badly misused prior to the coaching change. Pasqualoni was still calling line dives straight up the middle. Basically, we were throwing bodies into a pile and hoping that we could move 1,200 pounds of defensive linemen that knew exactly where we were going. No one calls those kind of plays anymore, and certainly not with a 160 pound back. Look at NFL plays. Even up the middle plays are draws or traps with a fake or misdirection of some kind. Not Pasqualoni. We had no chance of success with the plays Pasqualoni was calling for McCombs.

Finally, the post-Pasqualoni rushing numbers are even more impressive considering that 3 of the 4 best teams we played were right after the coaching change. I expect to see 2 more big games on the ground.

 

[businesslawyer]

Deleone is epically awful as a coach. Changing an OL coach in midstream and getting this kind of production is amazing. I think Foley deserves a lot of credit, but I also think the fact that Deleone is no longer the OL coach was worth 25-30 ypg of rushing by itself.

Putting Delorenzo in was so painfully obvious that Pasqualoni should have been fired for that alone.

Finally, McCombs was badly misused prior to the coaching change. Pasqualoni was still calling line dives straight up the middle. Basically, we were throwing bodies into a pile and hoping that we could move 1,200 pounds of defensive linemen that knew exactly where we were going. No one calls those kind of plays anymore, and certainly not with a 160 pound back. Look at NFL plays. Even up the middle plays are draws or traps with a fake or misdirection of some kind. Not Pasqualoni. We had no chance of success with the plays Pasqualoni was calling for McCombs.

Finally, the post-Pasqualoni rushing numbers are even more impressive considering that 3 of the 4 best teams we played were right after the coaching change. I expect to see 2 more big games on the ground.

This is how I see it. Are we a great, or even very good, rushing team now? Nope. But I'm surprised that we could get the improvement we did while the season was going on (and with injuries to two starters).

 

[BHusky]

I could be wrong but when he says goal line rushes he means the 5-6 plays we ran inside the 5. Make sense now?

Read the previous posts, that is not what we were debating. It was specific to runs with "11 men in the box" that should be excluded because those are short yardage "goal line" plays that skew the ypc negatively. Generally speaking in football that would make sense, but specific to our back and forth and the Temple game, that formation never happened once.

 

[uconndogs]

I'll say it again, P should have won 8-9 games last season with that defense and against that schedule. All he had to do was get the running game to average. He had two NFL caliber TEs to assist in that effort and to work play action off the run (not to mention a slot receiver who now wears an NFL jersey). He let that duck*ing mad scientist loose and put this program on its ear and it cost him his job.

I can only conclude that GDL has photos of P in bed with two goats and a sheep with P wearing a negligee. It's the only thing that makes any sense, because only a complete and utter idiot would fail to realize the damage GDL inflicted.

 

[sdhusky]

If every play is not a touchdown, the team must suck. Got it.

Try reading it again. This line in particular:

"I think if it takes 7 tries to get in from 1 yard, you can use that as judgement of the running game."

Did you miss the 7? Did you think 7 means every?

or were you just making stuff up?

 

[sdhusky]

This is how I see it. Are we a great, or even very good, rushing team now? Nope. But I'm surprised that we could get the improvement we did while the season was going on (and with injuries to two starters).

The improve came immediately after GDL was replaced by Foley. Like next game (with a bye) immediately.

I never expected to see it that fast.

 

[sdhusky]

I'll say it again, P should have won 8-9 games last season with that defense and against that schedule. All he had to do was get the running game to average. He had two NFL caliber TEs to assist in that effort and to work play action off the run (not to mention a slot receiver who now wears an NFL jersey). He let that f* *ing mad scientist loose and put this program on its ear and it cost him his job.

I can only conclude that GDL has photos of P in bed with two goats and a sheep with P wearing a negligee. It's the only thing that makes any sense, because only a complete and utter idiot would fail to realize the damage GDL inflicted.

Edsall would have won 8 or 9 games with that defense and that schedule & an adequate running game.