So what?

[barrett]

Originally Posted by kravix

Many of our big plays come off play action, and completely abandoning the run makes the team one dimensional, which will usually get your QB hit alot more from all out blitzing and pass rushes. It is a integral part of our Off, and I think Schaub does a great job in bootlegs as long as the DL bites and doesnt chase him down. The problem is he cannot scramble for yards from a bootleg when there is good coverage, but when the play works we usually get decent yardage out of it and it keeps our play calling unpredictable.

And that is the key, unpredictable. If you know a team is never going to bootleg, run from the I, pass from the I, run up the middle, screen, etc; then you never have to plan for it. Making it alot easier on def. Just becuase we are not running the ball well from the I does not mean it is not doing what it is intended for: Play Action.

Now I would like to see some more inspirational run calling, out of different formations, and I think we saw a few yesterday. I also think that had Brown gotten the load of carries it is possible he would have had a 100 yard game. Becuase he seems to be hitting the holes and lanes faster and and with more power than Slaton, I just dont ever see him knocking out 30+ yard runs. I would settle for 4-5 YPC all game though over break away runs.

So we should get in the I so other teams have to plan for our weakest personnel package? Hopefully the Colts will take that advice before we play them and they will decide to run out of the I a bunch to make future opponents prepare for it.

As for Play action, that is my point. We are using our terrible running game to help our great passing game simply because that is what Kubiak knows best. It is our running game that needs help. So instead of calling passes that look like runs (or in addition to), how about we start calling some runs designed to look like passes.

The bottom line is that even if it means a more varied prep, Defensive Coordinators would pay Houston to get in the I and take one of our play makers off the field. They'd also pay us to hand the ball to Chris Brown, because it means AJ, Slaton, Daniels, Walter, JJ, Anderson, and Davis (all better players) are not getting it.

Indisputable facts
1. The I is a weak package for us personnel wise. It takes a good player off the field for one who has little impact.
2. Our OL is fast and blocks screens well. They would likely do well with draws as well since opposing DLs are flying upfield to rush the passer against us. They are undersized and terrible at traditional run blocking.
3. Schaub is at his best going through his progressions and using his accuracy/desicion making. He is average when coming out on the bootleg. The defense does not even honor it and simply tackles the RB first and then goes after schaub if he kept. We could get the same play action benefits without running the boot and without making Schaub turn his back on the defense or throw on the run (not strengths of his).

If Kubiak wanted to be Denver then he should have assembled Denver personnel. But he has struggled to put together a good OL and has never had a tough inside runner. But he has done a great job of finding WRs and a pass catching TE. He needs to play to the team's strengths and use them.