- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Knowshon Moreno examples
Posted on 3/13/09 at 11:51 am to eyeran
Posted on 3/13/09 at 11:51 am to eyeran
quote:
I'm so tired of people thinking we HAVE to have a dominant running game to win a Superbowl
um... have you payed attention to previous SB winners? Show me one without a great run game.
quote:
All you have to do is look at Superbowl history,including this year, to see we dont need a huge power back to win
you're correct, we don't need a power back; however, that is different from a dominant run game. you DO need a great run game, but not necessarily a "power back". LT, Terrell Davis, Emmet Smith, etc... these are not power backs, but rather all purpose RB's. They were/are GREAT runners, but they aren't the "Big" ones.
quote:
We need a defense that doesnt give up 30 points a game
Now you are getting it right! The key to a SB team is a Defense and Running game. Without those two, good luck. There are probably a few anomalies that will buck that rule, but I can't think of them off the top of my head.
Anyway, with all that said, I don't think we need to waste our 1st rd on a RB. I am confident in PT, and I think Bush, though overrated and virtually non-productive his first 3 years, has shown improvement and will hopefully be a good player this year (if he stays healthy).
Today's NFL has proven that finding RB's in the 3rd and beyond is commonplace, so why waste a #1 on one? Remember, WE NEED DEFENSE!
1
Posted on 3/13/09 at 11:54 am to Midget Death Squad
quote:
um... have you payed attention to previous SB winners? Show me one without a great run game.
Pittsburgh this year. Their opponent blew at running the ball too.
Posted on 3/13/09 at 12:01 pm to LSUtigahs28
quote:
Pittsburgh this year. Their opponent blew at running the ball too.
you're right, but PITT still consistently ran the ball, even though they weren't as effective as years past. Plus, their DEF was ridiculously great this year.
Like I said, there are the rare anomalies that are exceptions to the rule, but history has shown that you need at least a good running game and defense to win it all.
Posted on 3/13/09 at 12:34 pm to Midget Death Squad
quote:
Pittsburgh this year. Their opponent blew at running the ball too.
You can also add ALL the Patriots recent SB teams. Also Indy, Tampa.
This isnt the 90s anymore. Offenses are a lot different.
You cant just spout out the old "run the ball and stop the run" phrase that coaches and announcers repeat over and over. No doubt defense is THE key, but you just need an adeqaute run game if you can pass the ball like we do.
This post was edited on 3/13/09 at 1:30 pm
Posted on 3/13/09 at 12:37 pm to Midget Death Squad
quote:
Like I said, there are the rare anomalies that are exceptions to the rule, but history has shown that you need at least a good running game and defense to win it all.
True but our O currently is a bit of an anomalie. I think if we can have a good enough running game to salt out games we'll be more than fine on O.
Posted on 3/13/09 at 1:24 pm to ctalati32
LINK
LINK
Here is a list of recent SB winners and where they ranked in the league dring the regular season running the ball:
Pitt 23
Giants 1
Colts 18
Pitt 5
Pats 7
Pats 27
Bucs 27
Pats 13
Ravens 5
Rams 5
Broncs 2
Broncs 4
Pack 11
Boys 2
49ers 6
Boys 2
Boys 5
Skins 7
Giants 8
Of the 4 low ranked rushing teams, here is how they ranked in the post season:
Pitt 4/12
Colts 2/12
Pats 7/12
Bucs 5/12
Outside of the Pats, history shows us you need to be able to run the football.
quote:
-The team that has finished the game with the most rushing attempts has won over 70 percent of the time
LINK
Here is a list of recent SB winners and where they ranked in the league dring the regular season running the ball:
Pitt 23
Giants 1
Colts 18
Pitt 5
Pats 7
Pats 27
Bucs 27
Pats 13
Ravens 5
Rams 5
Broncs 2
Broncs 4
Pack 11
Boys 2
49ers 6
Boys 2
Boys 5
Skins 7
Giants 8
Of the 4 low ranked rushing teams, here is how they ranked in the post season:
Pitt 4/12
Colts 2/12
Pats 7/12
Bucs 5/12
Outside of the Pats, history shows us you need to be able to run the football.
Posted on 3/13/09 at 1:28 pm to eyeran
quote:
You cant just spout out the old "run the ball and stop the run" phrase that coaches and announcers repeat over and over. No doubt defense is THEY key, but you just need an adeqaute run game if you can pass the ball like we do.
+1
Posted on 3/13/09 at 1:29 pm to ctalati32
quote:
um... have you payed attention to previous SB winners? Show me one without a great run game.
Not true anymore..3 of 4 teams who made it to the Championship games had poor Running games and the Eagles and Cardinals passed 60% of the time..the Saints can win if they fix their defensive problems
quote:
you're correct, we don't need a power back; however, that is different from a dominant run game. you DO need a great run game, but not necessarily a "power back". LT, Terrell Davis, Emmet Smith, etc... these are not power backs, but rather all purpose RB's. They were/are GREAT runners, but they aren't the "Big" ones.
You build your running game with your offensive lineman..ive said it before the RB position is the most overated position is sports...Terrell Davis and Emmet Smith both had the best offensive line when they were playing at their primes(not trying to take away from their skills but it was a fact)..An Elite offensive line can make subpar runner look good and if a elite runner doesnt have a good offensive lineman he can look subpar
Posted on 3/13/09 at 1:37 pm to CM84
quote:
The team that has finished the game with the most rushing attempts has won over 70 percent of the time
Obviously, usually when your winning your Running the ball more to kill the clock and when your losing in the 4th quarter your passing more--Its a manipulated stat
quote:
Here is a list of recent SB winners and where they ranked in the league dring the regular season running the ball:
Pitt 23
Giants 1
Colts 18
Pitt 5
Pats 7
Pats 27
Bucs 27
Pats 13
The games different now...Rushing attacks by Super Bowl winners since 2003 is about 50/50...3 in the 20s or below (23,27,27 rank)..3 in the top 10(1,5,7)..and Avg (13, 18)..so none of these arguments give a distinct advantage to saying u have to have a dominant running game to win superbowls
This post was edited on 3/13/09 at 1:39 pm
Posted on 3/13/09 at 1:40 pm to CM84
quote:Not disagreeing with your premise here about those Olines, but explain Barry Sanders or AP's instant success ( or if you want to get into grayer areas, Matt Forte's season )? Those Olines all suck, yet those RBs made instant impacts to their offenses.
Terrell Davis and Emmet Smith both had the best offensive line when they were playing at their primes(not trying to take away from their skills but it was a fact)..An Elite offensive line can make subpar runner look good and if a elite runner doesnt have a good offensive lineman he can look subpar
Yes, you need a good Oline, but you also need a good back - one that can read the defense, see the hole / lane, hit it, make a few moves, and go. Its crazy...folks go on & on about Deuce, how important he was, how sucessful he was pre-injuries, and now folks are jumping on the 'we don't need a good RB' bandwagon.
Posted on 3/13/09 at 1:43 pm to RelocatedPelican
quote:
Not disagreeing with your premise here about those Olines, but explain Barry Sanders or AP's instant success ( or if you want to get into grayer areas, Matt Forte's season )? Those Olines all suck, yet those RBs made instant impacts to their offenses.
If by "suck", you mean really good, then yes those o-lines suck.
And Moreno couldnt carry the case Peterson puts his jock in.
This post was edited on 3/13/09 at 1:44 pm
Posted on 3/13/09 at 1:52 pm to RelocatedPelican
quote:
but explain Barry Sanders or AP's instant success
Seriously??? AP has one of the best o-Lines in the league (so really good call)--Birk(one of the best centers), Hutchinson(prob. the best run blocking guard), and Bryant McKinnie(a brick wall tackle).
Now, I dont remeber how good Barry Sanders line was..I remeber him playing on some shitty teams but i dont remeber enough to address his line issues..I do remeber he didnt have the line Emmitt had but Sanders isnt a good measuring stick because he is what u call a rare talent and are u goin to go on the limb and say u believe Knoshon is a rare talent? (i dont think u want to put him in that category)
And for Forte..Im not goin to comment on how good their run blocking was because I only seen a couple of Bears games this year ..but I do kno the Bears had a good running game with Forte and a solid defense and they werent succesful this year
This post was edited on 3/13/09 at 1:57 pm
Posted on 3/13/09 at 1:56 pm to CM84
quote:
and now folks are jumping on the 'we don't need a good RB' bandwagon.
No...I believe we need to address defense and OL before improving our RB
Also, I believe the best way to improve a running attack is by getting good run blocking lineman..Sean Payton has geared this offensive line to be a great pass blocking line. We lack Run blockers.
My philosphy is to have a good balanced offense, so that way your not one-dimensional..We all kno Sean abandons the run way to early and we can never get into a rythm with the running game
We need to improve our defense to a good or great D.. Drafting a RB at #14 is a reach (it would b nice to improve our RB position but is not a necessity or as much of need as other positions)
This post was edited on 3/13/09 at 2:20 pm
Posted on 3/13/09 at 2:48 pm to RelocatedPelican
quote:
Not disagreeing with your premise here about those Olines, but explain Barry Sanders or AP's instant success ( or if you want to get into grayer areas, Matt Forte's season )? Those Olines all suck, yet those RBs made instant impacts to their offenses.
Did you just say Minn's OLine sucks?
I introduce you to the guy that should be getting all of Saun Alexander's salary since he was the key to that great season
Mr. Steve Hutchinson, The best run blocker in the NFL today.
Posted on 3/13/09 at 3:14 pm to eyeran
quote:
You can also add ALL the Patriots recent SB teams. Also Indy, Tampa.
No, you're correct. I am amending my statement to a "good" running game, not great, as long as you have the defense to complement it. When looking at the teams you mentioned, they all had good to great running teams.
Indy was 18th that year with 110 r-yds/game (good not great)
NE 2005 - 7th in league with 133 yds/game (great)
NE 2004 - 27th in league with 100 yds/game(not good)
TB 2003- 27th in league with 97 yds/game (not good)
NE 2002 - 13th in league with 112 yds/game (good)
So I believe a better parameter is not the effectiveness of a running game, which is still important, but rather a team's commitment to it. Here are the rankings of the past few SB winners based on their RUNNING ATTEMPTS.
Pitt 2008 - 7th with 460
NYG 2007 - 8th with 469
Indi 2006 - 18th with 439
NE 2005 - 18th with 439
NE 2004 - 5th with 524
TB 2003 - 22nd with 421
NE 2002 - 28th with 395
Now look at when NE beat STL. They weren't a running team all season long, but the SB they ran the ball 25 times and threw it 27. That's balance, and that is what wins games along with a great defense.
Last year, we were 26th in the league with 398 rushing attempts, but first with 636. We had almost twice as many passes as runs, and that there is our problem. Running the ball consistently accomplishes 2 things in particular:
1. minimize turnovers... statistically, fumbles per carry occur much less frequently than interceptions per throw
2. keep defense fresh... by controlling the clock more and having longer drives time wise, the defense remains fresher and it also gives the other team less time to score points
Whew, ok, i realize that was long. Sorry, but I was trying to use some research here to find some truth in both of our statements.
Either way, we need to run the ball more consistently, and I believe we shall be fine with PT doing it!
Posted on 3/13/09 at 3:19 pm to CM84
quote:
You build your running game with your offensive lineman..ive said it before the RB position is the most overated position is sports...Terrell Davis and Emmet Smith both had the best offensive line when they were playing at their primes(not trying to take away from their skills but it was a fact)..An Elite offensive line can make subpar runner look good and if a elite runner doesnt have a good offensive lineman he can look subpar
I agree with you 90%; however, I was addressing the contention that we only need "big" rb's. To me, size is overrated compared to running ability.
Now, the 10% that I disagree with is that the RB position is the most overrated. While any RB needs a good O-Line, a great RB can make an average O-Line look good, just as a great O-Line can make an average RB look good.
You still need to be skillful in order to be great though. Take the Bears example being floated around. 2 seasons ago, their run game was non existent with Boatparty Benson; last year they added Forte, and he was awesome. Same O-Line both years (I believe, but am not certain)
This post was edited on 3/13/09 at 3:23 pm
Posted on 3/13/09 at 3:31 pm to Midget Death Squad
I think we basically agree with each other.
You need a good,or better, running game. And, a plus defense to win a superbowl.
I think the main argument in this thread was that somehow Moreno was essential for the Saints to contend which is ridiculous.
Also that, based on purely on college performance, Moreno was head and shoulders better than Bush. Also ridiculous.
You need a good,or better, running game. And, a plus defense to win a superbowl.
I think the main argument in this thread was that somehow Moreno was essential for the Saints to contend which is ridiculous.
Also that, based on purely on college performance, Moreno was head and shoulders better than Bush. Also ridiculous.
Posted on 3/13/09 at 3:44 pm to eyeran
quote:
I think the main argument in this thread was that somehow Moreno was essential for the Saints to contend which is ridiculous
Agreed here. If we didn't have a good RB, I would MAYBE agree with this idea, but probably not. Good RB's are found throughout the draft nowadays, so there's no need to waste a 1st on one. I remember NFL network talking last year about the two positions that are the highest rate of failure for players not drafted in the first round, and those are LT and DT. For some reason, the talent level is drastically different from top to middle with these positions, and they are so technically complex that it is imperative to have players with the athletic skills as well as the smarts to succeed there.
This is why I would love for a Raji to fall, but we all know that is NOT going to happen. So, I would be happy with either a LT (no Smith though!) or Defense.
Posted on 3/13/09 at 3:45 pm to eyeran
quote:
eyeran
Oh yeah, LOVE your new image!
Posted on 3/13/09 at 3:59 pm to Midget Death Squad
quote:
I am amending my statement to a "good" running game, not great, as long as you have the defense to complement it.
Agree
quote:
So I believe a better parameter is not the effectiveness of a running game, which is still important, but rather a team's commitment to it.
Agree- and i wish Payton would try and get a rythm in the running game and stick with it, instead of abandoning it early
quote:
Now look at when NE beat STL. They weren't a running team all season long, but the SB they ran the ball 25 times and threw it 27. That's balance, and that is what wins games along with a great defense.
Made this argument earlier..U need a good/great defense and u need to stay balance on offense because u cant become one-dimensional
quote:
Either way, we need to run the ball more consistently, and I believe we shall be fine with PT doing it!
Agree.. and we dont need to waste our draft on a RB (they are a dime a dozen)
Page 3 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News