Fixing the run game is not a priority

Fine tuning the pass game should take precedence over improving the run. BYU can win, and has won, without a good run game--even against very good teams.



http://www.bluecougarfootball.com/2011/09/fixing-run-game-is-not-priority-for-byu.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Certainly food for thought and the fact we were still able to put up decent yardage this season without a running game does provide some fodder for the thought.

Not buying this for a second. Totally disagree.



FIrst, back when BYU used to thrpw it all over the place, defenses were built much differently. Safeties were quasi-linebackers that focused on run support first, pass D second. Plus, the BYU offense was new on the scene, so teams struggled to defend it.



Today, defenses are built for speed with corner play being way better, and safety play defending the pass a million times better. A great passing game surely helps, and BYU;s needs to improve, but balance on offense helps teams win.



For reference, see the 2011 Green Bay Packers SB team. Early in the year, they were throw first and had almost no run game. Then, they started playing their 4th string RB who caught fire, ran off multiple 100 yard games, and the Pack became unstoppable. Why? Balance, that's why. You need a run game to win, to get the tough yards, to kill of games, to score in the red zone. You need power running. It is essential. And we are soft.

Lawboy wrote:
Not buying this for a second. Totally disagree.



FIrst, back when BYU used to thrpw it all over the place, defenses were built much differently. Safeties were quasi-linebackers that focused on run support first, pass D second. Plus, the BYU offense was new on the scene, so teams struggled to defend it.



Today, defenses are built for speed with corner play being way better, and safety play defending the pass a million times better. A great passing game surely helps, and BYU;s needs to improve, but balance on offense helps teams win.



For reference, see the 2011 Green Bay Packers SB team. Early in the year, they were throw first and had almost no run game. Then, they started playing their 4th string RB who caught fire, ran off multiple 100 yard games, and the Pack became unstoppable. Why? Balance, that's why. You need a run game to win, to get the tough yards, to kill of games, to score in the red zone. You need power running. It is essential. And we are soft.

This ^^^^^^



Also, moving the ball is not necessarily the problem. Scoring is the problem. As you get closer to the end zone, since we matriculate the ball down the field and don't have a big play offense, running becomes much, much more important. As the field shrinks it becomes much harder to pass the ball.

stuckinbig10country wrote:

Not buying this for a second. Totally disagree.



FIrst, back when BYU used to thrpw it all over the place, defenses were built much differently. Safeties were quasi-linebackers that focused on run support first, pass D second. Plus, the BYU offense was new on the scene, so teams struggled to defend it.



Today, defenses are built for speed with corner play being way better, and safety play defending the pass a million times better. A great passing game surely helps, and BYU;s needs to improve, but balance on offense helps teams win.



For reference, see the 2011 Green Bay Packers SB team. Early in the year, they were throw first and had almost no run game. Then, they started playing their 4th string RB who caught fire, ran off multiple 100 yard games, and the Pack became unstoppable. Why? Balance, that's why. You need a run game to win, to get the tough yards, to kill of games, to score in the red zone. You need power running. It is essential. And we are soft.

This ^^^^^^



Also, moving the ball is not necessarily the problem. Scoring is the problem. As you get closer to the end zone, since we matriculate the ball down the field and don't have a big play offense, running becomes much, much more important. As the field shrinks it becomes much harder to pass the ball.

Agreed. You cannot win in big-time football w/out a run game. Whether that comes from your RB or your QB, it doesn't matter. With no ground game and/or THREAT of a ground game, you cannot win. Even Peyton Manning can't consistently pass into 7 or 8 man coverages - especially on short fields.



No run game = lots of turnovers and FGs....sound familiar anyone?

There is some potential merit to the above comment. First, in the UCLA, OK and Ole Miss games we had 34, 28 and 93 yards respectively and won by scores of 17-16, 14-13 and 14-13. We ran enough to keep them honest but picked them apart with accurate passing and opportunistic scores. We lack accurate and efficient passing which gets us into the end zone when we have chances to do so.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

If you want to score more points you MUST throw the ball more efficiently.

If fixing the run game isn't a priority then neither is going to BCS games or beating elite competition. I can't think of one team that routinely goes to BCS games and has pretty good success against teams that finished ranked that doesn't heavily emphasize the runnning game.

mormonrasta wrote:
If fixing the run game isn't a priority then neither is going to BCS games or beating elite competition. I can't think of one team that routinely goes to BCS games and has pretty good success against teams that finished ranked that doesn't heavily emphasize the runnning game.

I don't know if I'd call BSU a team that heavily emphasizes the running game. But, they have a good running game all the same.

SpiffCoug wrote:
If you want to score more points you MUST throw the ball more efficiently.

Yup, if our WR can out run their safeties, and Corners, then sure PASS, but till then, WE MUST have a run game as well.



I sure wish we had Sete back as Center, and Harvey as a RB.

declocoug wrote:

If fixing the run game isn't a priority then neither is going to BCS games or beating elite competition. I can't think of one team that routinely goes to BCS games and has pretty good success against teams that finished ranked that doesn't heavily emphasize the runnning game.

I don't know if I'd call BSU a team that heavily emphasizes the running game. But, they have a good running game all the same.

BSU has been top 10 in yards per carry in each of the last 2 years. They are generally a top 25 program overall in running the football.

No. Just no.



What that chart shows is that going back to 1980, there have only been a handful of games where BYU was able to win the game without having much success (or perhaps without even attempting to have success) with the running game.



If you look at the offensive stats, the difference between BYU and their opponents is in favor of BYU or negligable in basically every single category-including PER, 3rd down conversion%, first downs, time of possession, etc. The only category where we are behind? Rush yards per attempt--they nearly triple our pathetic average of less than 2 yards a carry. The face that we convert on third downs at the same rate, that we pick up at least as many first downs, that we hold the ball as long, that we have an almost identical PER as our opponents indicates that one of the only differentiating factors between us and them (besides winning) is our rushing game.



I would bet good money (seriously, I really would) that if we rush for 90+ yards a game and average 4+ per carry, not only do we win that game, but we also have a PER above 140 and throw for over 300 yards every single time.

sure, ypc they are great, and I acknowledged that they are a good running team. I just don't think they heavily emphasize the run as you insinuate about all teams that go to the BCS do. They are the exception though. I realize that.

But the point with BSU, or this post for that matter, isn't that you have to focus or emphasize the run game. The point is that you have to be able to run the ball successfully when you need to to have consistent success.

DarthMagnus wrote:
I would bet good money (seriously, I really would) that if we rush for 90+ yards a game and average 4+ per carry, not only do we win that game, but we also have a PER above 140 and throw for over 300 yards every single time.

Some random thoughts on those criteria: (my spreadsheet only goes back to 2003 right now)



BYU is 13-2 since 2003 when meeting each of those criteria, averaging 46.7ppg.



BYU is 2-12 when throwing for 300 yards but failing to reach 140 in PER. They averaged 23.1 ppg.



BYU is 40-6 when rushing for 90 with 4+ypg. They averaged 38.2 ppg.



More thoughts in a bit.

BYU is 44-5 when reaching 140 in PER, averaging 39.8 ppg.



BYU 28-14 when passing for 300 yards, averaging 35.5 ppg.



When BYU only reached the rushing criteria 12-3, averaging 26.7 ppg.



When BYU only reached the passing criteria they were 25-4, averaging 41 ppg (and scored 50, 27, 47, and 28 in their losses).



If you want to win and score, you have to throw the ball effectively. You can do more of both (winning & scoring) with an effective passing game than an effective rushing game. Obviously the balance is great, but if I had to choose, I'll take the effective passing attack.

DarthMagnus wrote:
I would bet good money (seriously, I really would) that if we rush for 90+ yards a game and average 4+ per carry, not only do we win that game, but we also have a PER above 140 and throw for over 300 yards every single time.

To more closely address your post. BYU has had 46 games with 90+ yards and 4+ ypc.



They reached 300 yards passing in just 17 of them. They reached the 140 PER in 29 of them.



Conversely, they had 49 games of 140 PER and reached 90 yards rushing in 42 of them.



The rushing game is more effective with an efficient passing game rather than the other way around. You really do need to use the pass to set up the run.

Spiff I can't argue with your numbers. Props man. Any chance you throw your spreadsheet up on google docs?



I agree with you that the biggest focus is on getting PER up. That, and that alone, is the one indicator that wins us ball games. Throwing for 300 yards doesn't mean anything (ie-the loss to Utah), and my intent wasn't to claim that it did, though I can see how I could have presented it better. Throwing for 300 yards isn't an end in itself, just like more first downs doesn't count on the scoreboard.



I just see, with this team, the run game as being the critical link to our failures on offense. If we were able to run with 4+ per carry, we would be balanced enough to be much more efficient in our passing game as well. There is a reason our PER is so low, and I am inclined to think that it has a lot to do with the fact that we cannot rely on the run game currently.



I also agree: throw to set up the run when possible.

The biggest reason our PER is so low is two fold: just three TD passes and four INTs. High PERs have a high TD% and a low INT%. Right now our INT% is higher than our TD%.

declocoug wrote:
sure, ypc they are great, and I acknowledged that they are a good running team. I just don't think they heavily emphasize the run as you insinuate about all teams that go to the BCS do. They are the exception though. I realize that.

My point is/was that being able to effectively run the ball is an attribute of every consistently great program. My belief is that in order to be top 10 in ypc and a top 25 overall running team then the running game must be heavily emphasized otherwise you won't put up those numbers.