Lack of a Running Game: Are We Suffering From the Side Effects of Success?

[JeffGollin]

We are 7-1 when we have ran the ball 19 times or more.
I agree with the gist of the post and hate to nitpick, but Pro Football Outsiders (whom I respect a lot) cautions that the reason why teams seem to win when they run the ball a lot is less because "because they ran the ball they won" and more because they protected the lead they built up earlier (via the pass, run or both) by running the ball later in the game.

I only partly agree with the speculation - that the reason Wiz & Co might have decided to abandon the running game because we lacked RB talent. Just a subjective opinion, but I believe, that by sticking with the power running game, we could have consistently cranked out 80 yards or more per game with Edge carrying most of the load.

The only problem was - Relying on this "80 yards a game" strategy, could we still win enough games to get us into the playoffs?

Perhaps this is was the issue Wiz and Haley were wrestling with.

Or not.

 

[JeffGollin]

What's so heartbreaking is how long we've been working on this same problem.

We haven't had a great o line since the 1970's, it seems to be a glaring curse for this team.

Step one is to hire someone who knows what they heck they are doing in evaluating O line talent.

Seems we whiffed again on that front.

Therein lies the problem:

You can't add top talent everywhere all at once.

In order for a GM to wave a magic wand and turn around a team in one, two or even three years, he's got to be both (a) a genius and (b) very very lucky. (Consider the "bad luck" the Dolphs had during the past few years and their incredible turnaround under Parcells (who - whatever the heck he does and wherever he goes - is able to keep walking on water).

Priorities have to be set. I think Rod G & Co. have tried to shore up every roster position, but have met with uneven results.

For whatever reason (either intended or unintended) we find ourselves with upgraded talent at QB, WR, a DT, some edge rushers, a couple of LB's, one CB and a S.

But - despite drafting Patrick and Pope - we continue to suck at TE. Our D-line (at least of late) hasn't been getting the job done. And what you'd think would be a pretty decent secondary of A-Dub, Rolle, Hood and DRC has been at best uneven later in the year.

And all along - while improvements have been made elsewhere on the roster - our O-line (with perhaps the addition of Levi, Lutui and Elton) has been neglected and pretty much continues a patchwork deal.

Adding one promising lineman a year may seem like a lot, but so far it hasn't been enough to significantly change the critical mass.

At least from my perspective, the one single characteristic of a really good NFL O-line is the presence of at least one dominant player. Seattle had it when they drafted Steve Hutchison (and never was that good after he left for Detroit). Check out the Jets (who drafted Brick and Mangold, added Woody and signed Faneca).

Who are our dominating offensive lineman? Gandy? Reggie? Lyle? Deuce? Levi? (The hope had been that Lutui and L Brown become dominators, but so far it hasn't happened).

The logical answer is for the Cardinals to gang-bang the O-line position and bring in some proven O-line talent via free agency and the draft. But if we were to do so, could we still afford to extend or re-sign all the other talented players on our football team? (This is not an easy decision. Would we be willing to sacrifice a Dansby and/or a Boldin in order to "maybe" make our O-line competitive? Perhaps. Perhaps not. Guts ball).

To get where we need to go quickly, three things will have to happen: (1) Dollar-wise, the Bidwills will have to start acting more like Jerry Jones. (2) Tough roster decisions will have to be made and (3) Our front office will have to be both "good" and also "lucky."

Seems like a daunting task. It always is, and more than one GM or Coach's head has been placed on the chopping block because - regardless of luck, skill or lack thereof, the job didn't get done. But, in order to advance to the next level, we still have to try (and then hope we're good and also lucky).

No guts; no glory.

 

[daytripper]

At least from my perspective, the one single characteristic of a really good NFL O-line is the presence of at least one dominant player. Seattle had it when they drafted Steve Hutchison (and never was that good after he left for Detroit). Check out the Jets (who drafted Brick and Mangold, added Woody and signed Faneca).
At the risk of being pilloried on Christmas I'm going to drag up the buried dead horse and beat it somemore.
We had a dominant run blocking guard we let get away through FA. Mr. Davis is doing well at his natural position of guard and thats where he should still be plying for us.
Let the beating begin!

 

[EndZone]

At least from my perspective, the one single characteristic of a really good NFL O-line is the presence of at least one dominant player. Seattle had it when they drafted Steve Hutchison (and never was that good after he left for Detroit). Check out the Jets (who drafted Brick and Mangold, added Woody and signed Faneca).
At the risk of being pilloried on Christmas I'm going to drag up the buried dead horse and beat it somemore.
We had a dominant run blocking guard we let get away through FA. Mr. Davis is doing well at his natural position of guard and thats where he should still be plying for us.
Let the beating begin!

lol

So Jeff what do you think the mandate will be going into this offseason. I dont think there is anyway that Jacobs will see the free market.

My hope would be to keep Q, get some speed/lightening either via FA draft or from our team (i.e. maybe JJ) and upgrade at least 2 of the OL and TE.

 

[slanidrac16]

We are 7-1 when we have ran the ball 19 times or more.
I agree with the gist of the post and hate to nitpick, but Pro Football Outsiders (whom I respect a lot) cautions that the reason why teams seem to win when they run the ball a lot is less because "because they ran the ball they won" and more because they protected the lead they built up earlier (via the pass, run or both) by running the ball later in the game.

I only partly agree with the speculation - that the reason Wiz & Co might have decided to abandon the running game because we lacked RB talent. Just a subjective opinion, but I believe, that by sticking with the power running game, we could have consistently cranked out 80 yards or more per game with Edge carrying most of the load.

The only problem was - Relying on this "80 yards a game" strategy, could we still win enough games to get us into the playoffs?

Perhaps this is was the issue Wiz and Haley were wrestling with.

Or not.

Jeff , if you look at those games where we ran 19 times or more there were games we averaged less than 3 yards a carry. It wasn't a situation where we ran the ball the last 8 plays of our posessions to run out the clock and win the game. We ran the ball just enough to keep the defense off balance.

 

[Cheesebeef]

Let's say you're Coach Wiz or Rod G, you've got the schedule and you're sizing up the 2008 season.

Your immediate goals (of the type mandatory for your survival) have to be: (1) improve over last year's 8 & 8 record and (2) make the playoffs.

You see relatively easy pickings among 6 inter-division games plus probably Miami and Buffalo. Not so easy pickings against the four teams in the NFC East or New England and 50-50 against Carolina, Minnesota and the Jets.

The smart thing to do (at least from a survival standpoint) is to lock up those 8 winnable games and then hope to steal one more from either Carolina, Minnesota or the Jets.

(Note - nothing is rock solid: We beat Team Felon and got creamed by the Jets - but we still came out 8 or 9 and 7 or 8).)

You know your passing attack matches up well against all the beatable teams you play, so why take chances? Why not pick up an "easy 8" by throwing the ball a lot. Why risk losing any of these gimmes by insisting on running the ball (even though in the long range, you'll need a robust running attack to win late in the year or in the playoffs).

So what you do is configure your O-line to pass block better than it run blocks (although lately....well...) and install the better pass-catcher (Hightower) instead of Edge at tailback.

This strategy didn't figure to get us to 10 & 6 or even 11 & 5, but it could be expected to guarantee we'd make the playoffs (which we did).

So - for discussion - Whaddya think? Is this what Wiz and Rod may have been thinking coming into this season?

no. The Seahags were 10-6 last season and most had them winning the division again so I'm pretty sure Rod and Wiz weren't looking at the 5 time defending champs as "easy wins".

 

[Renz]

no. The Seahags were 10-6 last season and most had them winning the division again so I'm pretty sure Rod and Wiz weren't looking at the 5 time defending champs as "easy wins".

We also lost twice to SF last season. I doubt the Cards had those two games penciled in as wins either.

 

[slanidrac16]

Going into this season our division opponents were overmatched by our wr's. In fact, the 49er's signed Clements with the Cardinals in mind. We'd be nuts not to take advantage of those mismatches.
The problem is we have just about abandoned the running game AND more importantly the running game formations. Hell, 80 % of the time we are in shotgun with only 1 running option, our now famous delayed handoff.

If we are going to get back to who we were we need to at least APPEAR more dedicated to running the ball because right now we have virtually NO play/action with this offense.

 

[RugbyMuffin]

We also lost twice to SF last season. I doubt the Cards had those two games penciled in as wins either.

I don't care if the talking head call the NDC West the worse division in football. Division games are division games, and when two teams meet from the same division then you can throw the records out every single time.

Going 6-0 in our division, no matter how weak is an accomplishment.

Que, the "we are the worse team of all time" tribe in 3,2,1........

 

[Crazy Canuck]

First, I'll say that this needs to start happening after the season, because right now we is who we is. That being said, yes, I think we need to force-feed ourselves a running game. Great passing attacks alone do not and have never won championships. Even the greatest show on turf had an explosive running game to complement the passing game. The run-and-shoot never won titles. In order to achieve ultimate success, we must be able to run. In order to run, I think we must utilize more traditional sets more often. We can still pass out of those sets with great effectiveness, which leads me into my next point.

I think we need to go with Matt Leinart next season. I know it isn't popular with a lot of people, and it could certainly backfire, but here's my reasoning. As I laid out above, we need to get that running game back, and I believe we should go back to using more traditional I-type sets more often. I think Leinart is better suited to running such an offense. No, I don't think Kurt is hideous at it, nor do I think he's an awful QB, but I think Leinart would be better suited to it and that Warner is too specific a gunslinger. Favre was always a gunslinger, but not to the detriment of the run game. Of course, I don't think the lack of a run game is nearly all Kurt's fault, but I do believe he plays a factor in that.

To follow up on that point, Leinart would clearly cost less. With Leinart, we'd have to look for a 2nd/3rd string QB, which would be extremely cost effective. With Warner, we'd still be paying Leinart and we'd be shelling out 5-10 more million next season. I'd rather take the money we'd give Warner and throw it at Suggs. That way we could still resign some of our out-of-contract players (only some--Green should be gone), and still go after some 2nd-tier and depth-type free agents. That way we wouldn't have to draft purely for need, which I think really benefited us in this last draft.

Okay, there ya go. Rip into it, Warner fans.

This offence, it seems, is neither Whis nor Haley designed.

It is largely inspired by Warner's wants and strengths, and was solidified as the way to proceed because of the success in the latter half of last season and most of the wins this year.

We seem to be constantly in shotgun, and running these slow developing draw plays that call on O-lineman to first pass block and then attempt to run block; no easy task. Without a conventional run game, our play action passing (if and when) has fooled no one.

I am with you, almost word for word, thought for thought. It is rather pointless to indict any of the decision-makers; it is what it is.

I'd like us (next season) to get a bit more traditional, and I would venture to say, that our O-line may not be as bad at run blocking as some of the resident experts think, when they are asked to either do one (pass block) or the other (run block), not both, on a given play.

 

[JeffGollin]

Seattle and the Playoffs - a word of caution...

More important than "running the ball more" is how we run more.

If Haley decides to open up every new possession with a running play, we become too predictable and then - if they stop us - we're consistently put in 2nd or 3rd & long and are then forced to pass the ball.

What's needed, I think, is mixing in 10 - 15 more runs per game in order to (a) surprise the defense and (b) keep pass rushers from teeing off on Warner.

On a typical 3 down series this might sometimes mean going with a mixture of (a) Run-Pass-Pass; (b) Run-Run-Pass; (c) Long Bomb-Draw-Pass; (d) Pass-Pass-Draw; (e)Pass-Pass-Pass or (f) even conceivably Run-Run-Run.

My point - Avoid predictability. Passing on first down and running the draw on second down is - if used consistently - just as predictable as Run-Run-Pass.

But we do need to run more.

 

[Skkorpion]

Run more. Yes, and vary the plays.

On the podcast, Darren Urban left no doubt that Edge will not be used much. The Whisenhunt -- James split is permanent and terminal.

 

[slanidrac16]

Run more. Yes, and vary the plays.

On the podcast, Darren Urban left no doubt that Edge will not be used much. The Whisenhunt -- James split is permanent and terminal.

I've been saying I don't care who the running back is, he will not enjoy any success until change the Offensive sets and give more of a run look. And when we do run we have to hit it straight ahead and downhill. If this offense could consistanty get 3.5 yards a carry they would be unstopable. We need to get our threat of play action back and the only way to do that is slamming the ball between the tackles.

 

[lobo]

Jeff my take is much more simple. We do not have . This is why rookie RB's can make an immediate impact while a OL needs time to learn.

....oh so true albeit not so 100% of the time BUT if you don't see "something" in a RB from the get go you can pretty much write 'em off and don't waste your time....for some reason we had two studs that got tangled up in our system and were far better when they left...gotta' figure out how they fell into the black hole. C might actually be the most difficult position to master as it is far more than just blocking...they call the signals on the line....at 15 I'd take a shot at the kid from Cal and throw my money after both Sproles and Ward.