Will The Dolphins Recommit To The Ground Game?

Ray R

Finheaven VIP
Joined
May 19, 2017
Messages
2,076
Reaction score
2,851
Age
73
Location
High Point, NC
It seems odd to think that a new coaching staff can "re-commit" to anything since they have not yet established anything; at least not yet in a game. I feel you need to give them at least 6-8 games before you even know what they have going for them and against them. Then you might be able to recommend they go back and try something i.e. "re-commit".
 

j-off-her-doll

Finheaven VIP
Joined
Apr 29, 2009
Messages
17,707
Reaction score
5,548
Location
Dream Songs


It's important to run well on short-yardage situations, where running is the best option. On base downs, until something changes dramatically, passing is the best option by a wide margin, and running should be used as a counterpunch.

If you do want to run - which, again, is not ideal - it's best to do it out of 3 and 4-WR sets, because it removes defenders from the box. This is something the Rams did very well the last two years.
 

djphinfan

Perennial All-Pro
Joined
Apr 19, 2006
Messages
4,265
Reaction score
1,102
We have to run the ball more, part of the reason Rosen was so bad last year from what I've read probably had a lot to do with their 32 ranked rushing attack.

Running the ball protects the QB in SOOOO many ways, if they wanna keep Rosen alive to see his 23rd birthday (keep eating that cake Fitz) with our offensive line we better run the damn ball a lot more than Gase wanted to.

Just me 2 cents, if I ever coached football I would tell my team we will run the ball 100% of the time unless the defense has something to say about it :punch
Gase was not a good playcaller relative to situation imo, Travis from locked on reporting some situation run stats that were disturbing last year..

We would pass the ball more than any other team on 2nd and short, and run the ball more than any other team on 2nd and long..

They were more detailed then that but you get the jist.

That guy is a joke of a head coach.
 

Rowdy1972

Second String
Joined
Sep 16, 2018
Messages
1,589
Reaction score
1,257
Age
31
Location
Missouri
The whole point of running the ball is to protect your defense. If our defense is suspect, then they need all the help they can get and that doesn't include 3 and outs because we decided to throw 2-3 times where we throw the defense right back out on to the field.

You keep talking about how we don't have a good Oline, but I might also remind you that we don't have a good QB either so I don't know why you're for throwing it all over the place. You're placing a lot of blame on the Oline for not being able to run, but it's not just them. The TEs we had couldn't block, we didn't play with a fullback, and our genius playcaller loved to throw on short yardage situations so at least this year we won't have that going against us.

This trend of passing offenses is going to circle around just like most trends in sports. Teams are building their defenses with smaller, faster linebackers and safeties to protect against the pass. Well... what are they going to do against a large, ground and pound offense? Teams literally don't have the personnel to stop it consistently these days which is why I think you'll see fullbacks trickle back into the league once people start realizing what is going on.

Agree with everything here. Im not saying we should come out 5 wide throwing it all over the place. I dont think we have the personnel at running back or oline to come in and pound people into submission. We also dont have a threat at QB to take advantage of read option stuff either. We will have to run the ball but we aren't gonna be the 2018 ravens where we can solely rely on it and a good defense.

The "playmakers" we have on this team are at the WR position. We have to play through them. Even drake is more of a threat as a receiver out of the backfield. If drake gets banged up carrying the ball 20 times a game, Im sure as hell not relying on ballage's vision to lead a running attack.
 

AdamD13

Finheaven VIP
Joined
Aug 24, 2009
Messages
4,193
Reaction score
2,318
In the past 5 seasons, the only SB participant that passed more than 55%, during the regular season were the Broncos 59% pass. The falcons were exactly 55% pass. The others were all under that, and Carolina actually ran more than they passed by a small margin.

Where are you seeing all these pass happy SB teams?
First of all, I am not saying teams aren't or can't be balanced running and passing to be effective. Of course it can be very effective in keeping the defense honest, wearing out the defense, setting up the play-action, etc... However, teams can and do succeed being pass happy. Particularly in 2004 when refs starting enforcing the don't touch the WRs beyond 5 yards past the line of scrimmage and rules, play design and QBs coming into the league are so much more advanced than they used to be.

The numbers you are using are skewed and ignoring situational football. The main reason teams that win games look like they are more balanced in pass/rush is because teams with the lead in the 4th quarter tend to run the ball to run out the clock and teams that are losing in the 4th quarter (and much earlier if they fall behind significantly) is to try move the ball down the field in chunks and score more quickly. So to take the final numbers of the season and simply come up with a pass/run ratio and conclude that teams making the playoffs because they have a better pass/run ratio is misleading. Teams that make the playoffs may have a better pass/run ratio because they are more often than not leading in the 4th quarter and relying heavily on the run to wind down the clock whereas teams that don't make the playoffs are more often trailing in the 4th quarter and rely heavily on the pass to make big plays and conserve time on the clock.

For example, looking at the defending SB champion Patriots last year in their 5 losses they passed the ball 193 times (attempts + sacked) and rushed the ball 111 times for a 63.5%-36.5% pass/rush ratio. However that ratio includes the Patriots passing the ball 44 times and rushing the ball 16 times (the last 5 plays against the Titans the Pats rushed the ball all 5 times conceding the game to the Titans trailing 34-10) when trailing in the 4th quarter. That is a pass/run ratio of 73.3%-26.7% and if subtracting the 5 rushes against the Titans that ratio would be 80%-20%.

The 11 regular season games the Patriots won they passed the ball 394 times and rushed the ball 367 times for a 51.8%-48.2% pass/rush ratio. However in the 11 games they won in the 4th quarter the Patriots passed the ball 72 times and rushed the ball 123 times for a 36.9%-63.1% pass/rush ratio. Not a single game of the 11 wins did the Patriots throw the ball more than they rushed it.

Keep in mind teams with sizable leads at halftime will often rely heavier on the run to begin the 2nd half.

Some in game examples of how numbers are skewed...in the "Miami Miracle" game the Patriots passed the ball 6 times and rushed the ball 2 times when trailing in 4th quarter for a 75%-25% pass/rush ratio and when the Patriots had the lead in the 4th quarter they passed the ball 4 times and rushed the ball 7 times for a 36.4%-63.6% pass/rush ratio.

In the Steelers game in which the Steelers won 17-10 and led the entire 4th quarter against the Patriots the pass/rush stats heading into the 4th quarter for both teams....Patriots passed 20 times and rushed 16 times for a 55.5%-44.6% pass/rush ratio whereas the Steelers passes 30 times and rushed 14 times for a 68.1%-31.9% pass/rush ratio. In the 4th quarter as the Patriots attempted a comeback their pass/rush was 17/3 and the Steelers trying to run out the clock had a pass/rush of 6/11. The outcome of the game was Patriots had 37 pass and 19 rush for a 66.1%-33.9% pass/rush ratio and Steelers ended the game 36 passes and 25 rushes for a 59%-41% pass/rush ratio. Clearly in this game the Patriots had the more balanced play heading into the 4th quarter. However, because the Patriots were trailing the numbers at the end of the game look like the Steelers clearly had the more balanced play throughout the game which is absolutely not true.

Your example of the past 5 years conveniently included the Patriots who were 40% of the Super Bowl participants and Brady's game management and Patriots are exceptional at both pass and run. As far as being able to run the ball effectively the Super Bowl teams are all over the place over the past 20 or so years.

Since 2001

Where Super Bowl winners ranked in Yards Per Game (YPG) since 2001 respectively (13, 27, 27, 7, 5, 18, 4, 23, 6, 24, 32, 11, 4, 18, 17, 7, 3, 5)
Where Super Bowl winners ranked in Yards Per Rush (YPR) since 2001 respectively (23, 26, 30, 17, 12, 16, 3, 29, 5, 25, 32, 12, 12, 22, 13, 25, 4, 20)

Where Super Bowl losers ranked in Yards Per Game since 2001 respectively (5, 18, 7, 24, 3, 15, 13, 32, 32, 11, 20, 4, 15, 1, 2, 5, 10, 3)
Where Super Bowl loser ranked in Yards Per Rush since 2001 respectively (1, 11, 16, 8, 2, 23, 11, 31, 30, 17, 21, 3, 20, 1, 10, 5, 12, 3)

* Prior to 2001 between 1970 (merger of leagues) and 2000 (31 years) only 4 times did the Super Bowl winner finish out of the top 10 in YPG (70 Colts = 23rd; 78 Steelers = 14th; 81 Niners = 19th; 96 Packers = 11th). The game has changed.
 

DolfanDuBbZ~

Avoid the 'Noid
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
8,135
Reaction score
1,267
Lets run it with a lack of an oline so we can get off the field and let our 25th - 32nd ranked defense handle the heavy lifting. We are gonna have to score some points to be remotely successful because this defense is gonna be a cesspool. I dont care how good the coaching is. The pats defense last year was 21st in total defense. They played well in the playoffs but it wasnt some world beating defense. They just had an offense that averaged 27 points per game to get them through the regular season.

Our offense cant be some ball control conservative offense is what I'm saying. Our defense isnt built for that.
No, it's about the ability, the threat.

FYI, currently this roster is no better than last years.

Year 1 should be seen as development and foundation building. Dependent on not a single person. But by a new culture.
 

DolfanDuBbZ~

Avoid the 'Noid
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
8,135
Reaction score
1,267
This is my favorite post you have ever made. :)
At my core, minus the noise, has always been this fundamental reasoning. We have seen glimpses of possible success this past decade, but never fully realized.

Thank you for the compliment. But this is all I have ever advocated at its core since I joined this board.

Just give me something, fundamental, to believe in. We all know it when we see it. Stats and charts, have zero to do with how you feel after a loss. We all want a winner.
 

Crump

Finheaven VIP
Joined
Mar 13, 2004
Messages
3,773
Reaction score
6,642
Location
nc
I'm with the we just have to be better at the situational aspect of it. I said multiple times during Gase's tenure, we is a good play DESIGNER but a ****ty play caller. There isnt a person that has been a fins fan for more than 10 years that doesnt miss short yardage runs being automatic (BOTH CALLED AND CARRIED OUT) from back in Polite's days. I'm sure O'Leary or something could've easily lined up in the backfield in front of one of our backs (prob Gore) on 3rd/4th and short and created a hole big enough for Gore to get a yard instead of us lining up in shotgun and throwing behind the LOS. I dont think any of us want to see the fins run 40 times a game. Hell even when Dan was here it seemed the running game design was ****, it seems like i always remember the long stretch running plays and hand offs that were so easy for the defense to diagnose. The sad part is, we had great blockers like Paige and Byers with Marino too. So yeah just give me a reason not to get up and go for another beer and take a leak when we break huddle on 3rd and 2, so i'll be back in time to watch to see what we do on D.
 

Fin Fan in Cali

Joanne Shaw Taylor
Super Donator
Finheaven VIP
Joined
Sep 8, 2004
Messages
38,800
Reaction score
14,346
Age
55
Location
So Cal
I think that is why Coach Flores brought in a full back. I think we will have more backs contributing to mix it up.
 

hoops

exited stage left
Joined
Jul 18, 2008
Messages
61,663
Reaction score
11,271
Location
richmond va
You will spin your wheels with Kenyan not willing to run the ball inside drake as your lead back trying to do this

He either gets back to his 2017 mindset as a ball carrier or you dump him and get someone else it’s that simple

Or you field a top shelf o line to mask his deficiencies same for ballage who lacks vision and the more workload you give him tbe more obvious I think that will become. Something Miami can never seem to do. Field a quality o line
 
Last edited:

dougb123

Bench Warmer
Finheaven VIP
Joined
Sep 5, 2011
Messages
1,370
Reaction score
2,773
The 2 good blocking tight ends we picked up right away when free agency started would confirm there commitment to running the ball.

Dwayne Allen and Clive Walford

Along with drafting a full back Chandler Cox
 

Highzenga

Second String
Joined
Mar 13, 2012
Messages
1,172
Reaction score
513
Location
Fort Lauderdale
You must be able to run the football effectively in order to be successful. It’s not flashy but it’s a fundamental part of the game. These high scoring pass happy offenses rarely succeed once the weather turns.
 

Russ57

Scout Team
Joined
Apr 16, 2017
Messages
216
Reaction score
190
Most teams run the majority of their plays out of the 11 personal group. The Pats used the two RB's one TE group a lot more than most teams. They are very good at passing in that formation. They are also very good running in that formation.

They tend to murder you with passing to the middle of field, get you to bring in more DB's, then go no huddle and run several times in a row.

Flores has come out and said teams don't know how to play defense against two backs. We drafted a FB for a reason.

Drake and Ballage are both capable pass catchers with good size and speed. Cox is supposed to be good as well and is supposed to be good at pass protection.

What we lack is the TE that is equally feared as a blocker and a catcher.

So don't think power running game and 3 yards and a cloud of dust. Instead think formations that scream one thing but having the personal to be equally effective running or passing from them.

After all, the two RB/FB one TE set was the base formation once upon a time. It works even better if both the RB and FB are capable runners, catchers, and blockers. Clearly the TE has to be skilled as both a blocker and a pass catcher.

You have 7 DB/LB's to account for 5 offensive players. If Stills can run a 9 route and tie up a CB and FS, if Parker can run a deep in route and take a CB downfield and get released to a SS, a play action holds the OLB long enough for Drake to be open on the wheel route, and maybe Gesicki/Allen gets single coverage against a LBer.....well good things could happen. Do it enough and the defense has to change, then go no huddle and hope you can over power all those DB's.
 

j-off-her-doll

Finheaven VIP
Joined
Apr 29, 2009
Messages
17,707
Reaction score
5,548
Location
Dream Songs
Most teams run the majority of their plays out of the 11 personal group. The Pats used the two RB's one TE group a lot more than most teams. They are very good at passing in that formation. They are also very good running in that formation.

They tend to murder you with passing to the middle of field, get you to bring in more DB's, then go no huddle and run several times in a row.

Flores has come out and said teams don't know how to play defense against two backs. We drafted a FB for a reason.

Drake and Ballage are both capable pass catchers with good size and speed. Cox is supposed to be good as well and is supposed to be good at pass protection.

What we lack is the TE that is equally feared as a blocker and a catcher.

So don't think power running game and 3 yards and a cloud of dust. Instead think formations that scream one thing but having the personal to be equally effective running or passing from them.

After all, the two RB/FB one TE set was the base formation once upon a time. It works even better if both the RB and FB are capable runners, catchers, and blockers. Clearly the TE has to be skilled as both a blocker and a pass catcher.

You have 7 DB/LB's to account for 5 offensive players. If Stills can run a 9 route and tie up a CB and FS, if Parker can run a deep in route and take a CB downfield and get released to a SS, a play action holds the OLB long enough for Drake to be open on the wheel route, and maybe Gesicki/Allen gets single coverage against a LBer.....well good things could happen. Do it enough and the defense has to change, then go no huddle and hope you can over power all those DB's.
Very good line of thought - to help crystallize the point, base sets (2 WR with 2 TE and a RB or 2 WR with 2 RB and a TE) are much more efficient for passenger than 3 WR sets. Interesting enough, 4 WR sets are about as efficient as base sets - again, much more efficient than 3 WR sets. When I think about the why, it's pretty clear to me that 3 WR sets are easier to defend (talking passing game exclusively), because most teams now have 3 CB's who can cover at a starting level. For the average offense, you're not going to create mismatches, because your 3rd WR is not going to be significantly better than the opposing team's 3rd CB. Base sets remove the 3rd CB and replace them with a LB, who will not be as good in coverage - especially since teams invest less in LB3 than CB3. Most teams, though, don't have 4 CB's who can cover at a starter level, so if you have 4 WR's who can play, you can create mismatches that way, too.

4 WR sets are kind of the gold standard, because they're also the most efficient personnel package to run out of. Base sets, though, are great for play action, and this is one area where 3 WR sets do well (Rams are the best example), too. Play action passes are much more efficient than straight dropbacks, and play action from Under Center is more efficient than play action from Shotgun. This is where 12 and 21 (base sets) really shines in its ability to put the D in a bind. Eventually, I think teams will shift their defensive approach and counter base sets with more DB's anyway, and then running out of base sets will become more efficient, but we're not there yet. Small sample size, but play action out of Pistol is even more efficient than play action Under Center, and I think teams should implement more Pistol concepts (always thought it was underutilized, but it's nice to have some evidence to back up those suspicions).

These are all broad, big-picture points, and the effectiveness of each package will vary depending upon the opposing D, so I think it's best to adopt an approach of adaptability, where you can take advantage of the weaknesses of a given opponent. NE does this better than anyone. In building a team, though, I'd want plan to run the majority of my plays from base or 4 WR sets, with some 3 WR or extra heavy (1 WR) sets peppered in.
 

BSQ

Scout Team
Finheaven VIP
Joined
Jan 17, 2008
Messages
3,330
Reaction score
1,707
Location
Dania Beach, FL.
REcommit? When was the last time Mia.i ACTUALLY committed to the run game?
Ricky Williams era was the last time we really were committed to the run game. I hope we return to hard nose football as opposed to the bull crap finesse style of Philbin/Gase. If we do and Deiter is half as good a run blocker as his clippings suggest we could have something going on the left side. Tunsil and Deiter is a lot of power to run behind, especially, with a lead Fullback! I'm projecting that we've actually hit on a LG. I know, let's at least wait until the pads come on, but I've got a good feeling about the Wisconsin standout. The kid started something like 54 straight games so he's not a soft, injury prone prima donna and Wisconsin has produced some o-linemen in the past. Could we have hit on an o-lineman? It would be big if Deiter was a plug and play at a high level guy.
 
Top Bottom