Run the ball more but with who?

seabowl

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 16, 2009
Messages
4,534
Reaction score
1,386
Ok I get it but if we tried to run the ball more this year we would have done even worse. We didn’t run more because our backs seem to always be hurt. Carson hurt, Hyde hurt, Homer hurt, Dallas hurt, Penny forget about it. Also our OL is always hurt too.

Name me the back that you can rely on?

I got it. It’s Lynch but he’s retired.

Unless we find another Beast I am not confident this will work.
 

xray

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 19, 2018
Messages
9,562
Reaction score
1,629
Location
AZ
If Carroll wants the run game back as his front and center offense then it won't be Carson . His best games are behind him IMO and the rest of the RB room are just backups . The Hawks need to find another reliable-durable RB that opponents defenses fear . Another ' Beast Mode ' comes to mind . Unfortunately those guys are rare and don't seem to show up much in the draft very often . Maybe the Saints will trade Kamara straight across for Penny . Probably not . LOL
 

mistaowen

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2010
Messages
6,335
Reaction score
612
Gotta improve the line and then it wont matter who the RB is. LG and C need to be much better next season.

I'd like Carson back but not if he wants 10+ mil a year.
 

AgentDib

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2010
Messages
5,474
Reaction score
1,255
Location
Bothell
RBs get hurt in the NFL on every team not just ours, and teams mitigate that with depth. We had enough depth this year but the timing of everybody being hurt at the same time was unfortunate. Most of the good teams are looking at huge salary cap issues this off-season so we're actually in relatively good shape there. Carson's injury history will be priced into his contract and so there's no reason for us not to be involved in the bidding unless it gets crazy.

However, it's less about quantity running the ball and more about quality. The main concern with the 2020 offense is that we were unable to capitalize on teams playing soft defense. Increasing the threat of our running game is one way to make teams bring more defenders into the box to stop it, and then that opens up everything in the passing game for Russ. It would be fine if we never ran the ball as long as other teams loaded up the box, but our issue was too many times needing to hit intermediate and long passes against teams that were just sitting back and waiting for them.

There are other ways to improve the running game besides simply adding RBs. There's room for improvement with our run blocking, not just from the OL but also from the TEs, WRs and maybe a FB. Reducing penalties is maybe the biggest factor, as nothing kills a running game like a holding call. We can also improve the running scheme itself, and/or adjust the passing scheme to capitalize on safe short passes that the opposing defense is giving us.
 

Maelstrom787

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 28, 2011
Messages
12,014
Reaction score
9,974
Location
Delaware
hawksbydesign":1wsmyoie said:
If Pete wants to run the ball more then he doesn’t need a 35 million dollar QB.

I guess the Packers could cut Rodgers then?
 

SoulfishHawk

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 6, 2012
Messages
30,010
Reaction score
10,477
Location
Sammamish, WA
That argument doesn't hold up at all, unless you just really want Russ gone. If we could ask any great QB who is making bank, I guarantee most or all of them would tell you they want a really good running game. Need one in fact. Notice that GB, with a very high $ QB runs it 54.6 percent of the time. I doubt the Saints and/or GB fans are saying they should get rid of their QB because they run it more than they pass it.

These playoff teams all pound the rock:

Baltimore runs it 67.1 percent of the time
Tennessee 61.7
Cleveland 60.9
Saints 57.1
Packers 54.6
Rams 54.5
Indy 54.3
Buffalo 50 percent

And KC is at 49.3. Almost half the time, they are running the ball.
 

Latest posts

Top