Jump to content

Does a running QB make the run game from the backs less effective?


Beck Water

Recommended Posts

I'm breaking this out from the Cowherd thread because I'm hoping to attract some answers from some knowledgeable folks here.  Imma tag a few but anyone who fancies himself savvy about NFL run game please speak up, I'm sure I've forgotten some knowledgeable folks I'd love to hear from (either that or I can't figure out how to spell your screen name and tag ya)  @Buffalo716 @HoofHearted

So in the Cowherd interview of Dion Dawkins, Cowherd goes on at length with his opinion that a running QB makes the conventional run game less effective.  He cites Tennessee with Henry and the 49ers with McCaffrey.  Yes, those teams have effective running games because they have great backs, great run-blocking OLs,and a QB who throws "enough". 

But while Lamar Jackson had the most yards on the Ravens, Dobbins, Drake and Edwards had 1435 yds - pretty effective.  Jalen Hurts is a running QB, but Miles Sanders rushed for 1269 yds, pretty effective.

 

I believe someone posted a stat that the Bills are lowest in rush attempts by an RB.  I think the problem is they just don't try to run the ball enough, or effectively enough when they do try.  But it has nothing to do with Josh extending the play and trying to make shinola from ***** on a pass play by scrambling. 

I don't see the logic there.

 

What are your thoughts?  Does a running QB and improvisation make the conventional run game less effective? 

What Cowherd has to say:
https://youtu.be/djGAQi46d68?t=1014

16:50 in if the above doesn't take you there

 

 

 

Edited by Beck Water
  • Dislike 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Beck Water said:

I'm breaking this out from the Cowherd thread because I'm hoping to attract some answers from some knowledgeable folks here.  Imma tag a few but anyone who fancies himself savvy about NFL run game please speak up, I'm sure I've forgotten some knowledgeable folks I'd love to hear from (either that or I can't figure out how to spell your screen name and tag ya)  @Buffalo716 @HoofHearted

So in the Cowherd interview of Dion Dawkins, Cowherd goes on at length with his opinion that a running QB makes the conventional run game less effective.  He cites Tennessee with Henry and the 49ers with McCaffrey.

 

What are your thoughts?  Does a running QB and improvisation make the conventional run game less effective?  I don't see the logic there.

 

 

 

 

I disagree with Cowherd on this one.  I feel like he was being kind at times during the interview, this being one of the topics.  Ie: he isn't going to have one of our top linemen on the show, then diss the run game.

 

Look no further than the Giants:

1. Comparable offensive philosophies/coaching.  Running QB, albeit Jones is a poor man's Allen

 

2. Biggest differences: Giants have an elite RB and better OL for the run game.

 

It's pretty simple, elite RB/solid OL OR solid RB/elite OL can produce a consistent run game.  I'd put KC in the 2nd bucket, teams like SF and Philly have close to both, Tennessee the 1st option.

 

Dion clearly stated the trenches is where these tough matchups are decided.  McGovern/Torrence/Edwards hopefully propel us into above average/notch below elite.  

 

I think we have the best "group" (OL and Rbs) this season, out of the past few.  Everyone has an opinion if it's enough.  Personally, I could see us being more consistent, and enough to fix our redzone issues from LY.

 

 

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't looked at the numbers, but this strikes me as the dumbest of dumb Cowherd takes.

A running (not scrambling and buying time; I'm talking about actual designed run plays and QB options) QB changes the basic advantage of the defense where you have 11 defenders trying to stop 10 offensive players in the run game. Think about how well we ran the ball with Tyrod at QB. Guys like Karlos Williams and Mike Gillislie were suddenly unstoppable, both getting almost 6 yards per carry in 2015.

The confusion might be that some running QBs are exactly that: runners who play QB, which results in a one-dimensional offense, which allows defenses to stack the box to stop the run. Think Tebow.

But with any running QB who can also throw, the answer is obvious: a running QB makes the run game more effective. Why on earth would it make it less effective?

  • Like (+1) 2
  • Agree 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This has to be one of Cowherd's dumbest least informed takes ever.

Did Tyrod make Shady less effective?

Did Wilson make Beast mode less effective?

Montana and Young were both running QBs at times during their careers and the 49ers also had good rushing attacks.

 

Historically you could make an opposite argument. Shula could be never get a run game going with Marino. Same thing with Fouts in San Diego. 

 

 

 

 

  • Like (+1) 2
  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A very quick statistical example of the type that Cowherd doesn't bother to do:

- 49ers, last full year with Montana starting at QB: 3.8 yards per carry

- 49ers, first full year with Young starting at QB: 4.8 yards per carry

 

OK, so Steve Young himself averaged 7 yards per carry (500+ yards) in that season. So let's take his numbers out of the mix.

- 49ers, first fill year with Young starting at QB, eliminating Young's stats: 4.4 yards per carry.

 

Quick back-of-the-envelope guess: a running QB improves your RB production by about half a yard per carry.

 

(I chose the old Niners because there was a great deal of continuity on offense there, other than at QB. Choose your own example, Cowherd. Or maybe stop trying to get an audience by being "controversial," by which I mean "stupid.")

  • Like (+1) 2
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it depends on how you define "effective".  If you're referring to total yards by RBs, then yes, to some extent, a QB who runs takes yards away from them.  Also, passing also makes them less effective by this definition (when you're doing something else, a RB isn't accumulating yards).  I'll concede there is a limit to this effect, ie if you NEVER pass, the RBs will likely be less productive than if you pass occasionally as the defense will adjust accordingly.

If you define effective as production relative to opportunity (largely akin to yds/carry, though I would contend there are some differences, then no, I don't think a running QB lessens the effectiveness of the RBs run game.  In fact, I would think that it would benefit it to some extent cuz it's just another thing the defense has to be wary of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Buffalo hasn't built a roster capable of running the ball when the defense expects it. They have gone for more "athletic" OL in the past and not the types of people that blow people off the ball. 

 

Even with that as a fact, Buffalo has maintained pretty decent YPC from RBs year in and year out. The issue isn't the ability the issue is the willingness. Why hand the ball directly off to a RB when you can keep it in Allen's hands? I think with the addition of Torrence and the focus on guys that can run between the tackles (Harris and Murray) along with a renewed focus on having Allen rush less on designed plays the narrative that the Bills can't run will die out a bit.

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The O line's ability to open lanes is what determines the effectiveness of a RB or any other runner for that matter. Sure a better than average back will make a mediocre line look better but ultimately it's up to the O line to clear the way and neutralize defenders.

 

A QBs running proficiency has nothing to do with run schemes designed for your backfield unless the play of course is a designed run for the QB.

Edited by billsbackto81
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, The Frankish Reich said:

I haven't looked at the numbers, but this strikes me as the dumbest of dumb Cowherd takes.

A running (not scrambling and buying time; I'm talking about actual designed run plays and QB options) QB changes the basic advantage of the defense where you have 11 defenders trying to stop 10 offensive players in the run game. Think about how well we ran the ball with Tyrod at QB. Guys like Karlos Williams and Mike Gillislie were suddenly unstoppable, both getting almost 6 yards per carry in 2015.

The confusion might be that some running QBs are exactly that: runners who play QB, which results in a one-dimensional offense, which allows defenses to stack the box to stop the run. Think Tebow.

But with any running QB who can also throw, the answer is obvious: a running QB makes the run game more effective. Why on earth would it make it less effective?

 

Agreed.  Motor's fans point out his comparatively high YPC despite playing behind a poor run-blocking line.  Part of Motor's per-carry success was that he was the last weapon defensed.  Defenses played pass first, run second.  And our most feared runner has been Josh Allen.  

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Beck Water said:

I'm breaking this out from the Cowherd thread because I'm hoping to attract some answers from some knowledgeable folks here.  Imma tag a few but anyone who fancies himself savvy about NFL run game please speak up, I'm sure I've forgotten some knowledgeable folks I'd love to hear from (either that or I can't figure out how to spell your screen name and tag ya)  @Buffalo716 @HoofHearted

So in the Cowherd interview of Dion Dawkins, Cowherd goes on at length with his opinion that a running QB makes the conventional run game less effective.  He cites Tennessee with Henry and the 49ers with McCaffrey.  Yes, those teams have effective running games because they have great backs, great run-blocking OLs,and a QB who throws "enough". 

But while Lamar Jackson had the most yards on the Ravens, Dobbins, Drake and Edwards had 1435 yds - pretty effective.  Jalen Hurts is a running QB, but Miles Sanders rushed for 1269 yds, pretty effective.

 

I believe someone posted a stat that the Bills are lowest in rush attempts by an RB.  I think the problem is they just don't try to run the ball enough, or effectively enough when they do try.  But it has nothing to do with Josh extending the play and trying to make shinola from ***** on a pass play by scrambling. 

I don't see the logic there.

 

What are your thoughts?  Does a running QB and improvisation make the conventional run game less effective? 

What Cowherd has to say:
https://youtu.be/djGAQi46d68?t=1014

16:50 in if the above doesn't take you there

 

 

 

I think that’s a loaded question… The bills are in a different spot than 99% of teams in the NFL

 

Most running quarterbacks like Lamar Jackson…. Can’t throw the football like Josh Allen…. So they run run run … play action pass

 

Josh Allen has an elite arm and elite legs …. He’s going to get chunks in the air with his arm

 

And he equally can burn you by taking off from the pocket…

 

So the offense is Josh centric…. We also haven’t had the big boys upfront to create for running backs 

 

I think with this stable of running backs and a beefed up line… Josh won’t have to carry 120 times … cut it to 75-80… while giving it to the backs more 

 

Our running backs weren’t super effective because we don’t run block great and josh is a gifted creator 

 

But Absolutely doesn’t hurt the bills… Because if we can establish a good ground  game this year… It’s only going to help Josh Allen when he pulls it out

 

 

 

 

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is OLD. A NEW topic should be started unless there is a very specific reason to revive this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...