So... about those running backs

#76
#76
Backwards K said:
I want all of that to be true but the Vols are 12th in the SEC in rushing and these backs normally get only what they line gives them. The lack of an elite back is a major problem in the red zone and a major reason why the Vols have struggled to score there.

Not saying they arent' serviceable backs but not sure if any of the the 3 would start anywhere else in the conference. Vols currently have 3 SEC backup level running backs
Click to expand...

Vols have struggled in the red zone because we've turned the ball over probably the most in the country inside the redzone.


There is nothing wrong with the RBs.
 
#77
#77
Carp said:
Vols have struggled in the red zone because we've turned the ball over probably the most in the country inside the redzone.


There is nothing wrong with the RBs.
Click to expand...

We're 105th in red zone offense, with a 77% scoring percentage, and only 6 of the 27 scores are rushing TDs. There are only 6 other teams in all of FBS with equal or lower rushing TDs in the red zone; it's not just a problem with turning the ball over, the run game has been relatively ineffective.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vettefool, Big Al Orange and Backwards K
#78
#78
Vol_from_86 said:
Our running backs only averaged 3.4 yards per carry against Kentucky. They averaged 3.6 ypc against UAB and they averaged 3.7 ypc against South Carolina.

Those averages aren't just "not great". They are abysmal. I don't know if it's the running backs who aren't getting the job done or if it's the offensive line or both, but it's definitely a valid concern. I wouldn't say I'm "worried" about it, because it has no impact on me or anyone I love, but if we want this winning streak to continue and if we want to build on this season the running game absolutely has to get much better.
Click to expand...
What flavor of crack are you smoking? 3.4 yard per carry is a first down every 3 plays. It's not great but its enough anything over 3 a carry is average ad there's a lot of teams that would kill for that average. Like I said I never said it was good but its not horrible either. We ran well enough to have moved the chains at that rate.

My whole argument wasn't to say oh gosh everything is great but I'm not gonna chicken little everything either. The running game for that entire game was because of the opponent. When you play against an option team if they get up you do no and cannot run the ball if you plan on winning. It is the power of the option it allows teams to eat up clock and it's really hard to defend even on a team without tons of talent. Throw some elite athletes at it and you can run up some impressive scores but even without that you keep your defense rested enough you can win games only scoring 14-21 points on a regular basis. Bituli got 19 freaking tackles.... there are games when TEAMS don't get 19 tackles. It's because UK had 7 pass attempts and 64 rush attempts. We only had the ball for 18:43... not the first half the whole game. this was not because our defense sucked or our coaches sucked or our running backs sucked.. it's was 100% the offense UK ran. Had we jumped out to a lead the rushing stats would have been much different because we could have played keep away instead of catchup.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BanditVol
#79
#79
Looked like they were loading the box daring us to throw figuring to get 50% of the 50-50 balls, wrong! We should stop calling them 50-50 balls when talking about our receivers. Should be 100-0!
 
#80
#80
ice said:
I have not been impressed with our RB s for the last 2 or three years. I know the OL has something to do with that but. I don`t think they would be stellar with a good Ol.
Two star backs at best.
Click to expand...


Vs. Kentucky we had 17 carries for 83 yards, which is 4.9 yards per carry, which is actually pretty good. We just didn't have that many attempts.

Consider that we were behind for most of the game and were forced to throw, plus the above oft-cited decision by Chaney to target their overmatched DBs.
 
#82
#82
pimo1 said:
What flavor of crack are you smoking? 3.4 yard per carry is a first down every 3 plays. It's not great but its enough anything over 3 a carry is average ad there's a lot of teams that would kill for that average. Like I said I never said it was good but its not horrible either. We ran well enough to have moved the chains at that rate.
Click to expand...

Only if you are 100% successful on 3rd-down conversions. Currently we are sitting at a 42% success rate on converting 3rd down. There are currently about ~100 FBS teams with a YPC>3.77 (our average), so no, there aren't that many teams killing to just have a YPC>3.0.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Big Al Orange and bpalmer28
#83
#83
BeardedVol said:
We're 105th in red zone offense, with a 77% scoring percentage, and only 6 of the 27 scores are rushing TDs. There are only 6 other teams in all of FBS with equal or lower rushing TDs in the red zone; it's not just a problem with turning the ball over, the run game has been relatively ineffective.
Click to expand...

We've turned the ball over, by my count, 7 times in the red zone. You don't think that contributes to our efficiency? Also, the number of rushing TDs in the red zone is predicated on getting into the red zone in the first place, something we haven't done with great frequency.

I'm not saying we can't stand to do better. Surely we can. But putting most of the blame on the RBs is silly, imo. Again, we've ran it well 4 of the last 5 games.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Remy
#84
#84
Carp said:
We've turned the ball over, by my count, 7 times in the red zone. You don't think that contributes to our efficiency? Also, the number of rushing TDs in the red zone is predicated on getting into the red zone in the first place, something we haven't done with great frequency.

I'm not saying we can't stand to do better. Surely we can. But putting most of the blame on the RBs is silly, imo. Again, we've ran it well 4 of the last 5 games.
Click to expand...

We've also settled for field goals on 11/35 trips, and successfully passed for TDs on 10/35 trips compared to 6/35 rushing TDs from the redzone. I just don't think the red zone turnovers are as impactful on our rushing stats as a whole. We just have not been a very good rushing team this year, and much of that is due to the oline still not being effective at opening holes for the runningbacks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Big Al Orange
#85
#85
BeardedVol said:
We just have not been a very good rushing team this year, and much of that is due to the oline still not being effective at opening holes for the runningbacks.
Click to expand...
I completely agree with this statement as I stated earlier, but I think it should be noted that Chandler still averages 5.1 yards per carry. I think he needs more touches. I specifically think that he needs Gray's touches. Gray may become a great player, but it seems to me that he consistently misses the few holes that are there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Big Al Orange and BeardedVol
#86
#86
BeardedVol said:
Oline is bigger, has continued to improve on providing pass protection, but is still pretty bad at opening holes for running backs; we're currently 102nd in rushing offense this season.

Will Friend needs to step up his coaching.
Click to expand...
2 freshmen tackles, a guy who was out until right before the season due to blood clots... yeah I think they're doing fine.
 
#87
#87
Other_Guy said:
2 freshmen tackles, a guy who was out until right before the season due to blood clots... yeah I think they're doing fine.
Click to expand...

We are 10 games into the season, the off season isn't the only time we should expect the coaching staff to get improvement out of the players, freshmen or not.
 
#88
#88
We were seeing improvement in the running game week to week until the injuries mounted in the South Carolina game. We've regressed since then, which is why I don't feel very confident going into the Missouri game. I hope we can get our top 6 linemen healthy during the bye week. We're a few poorly timed defensive lapses away from missing a bowl game without a running game IMO.
 
#89
#89
The bigger point in all this is KY held the ball for 42 minutes. 10 plus on their first drive. That has a lot to do with our stats. We were pretty efficient with what we did in the other 18 mins. I do want to see the O Line take a step forward in Columbia though. But I expect Mizzou to stop the run first thinking they can get to and rattle JG. Hopefully a fool's errand. GBO!
 
#90
#90
pimo1 said:
What flavor of crack are you smoking? 3.4 yard per carry is a first down every 3 plays. It's not great but its enough anything over 3 a carry is average ad there's a lot of teams that would kill for that average. Like I said I never said it was good but its not horrible either. We ran well enough to have moved the chains at that rate.

My whole argument wasn't to say oh gosh everything is great but I'm not gonna chicken little everything either. The running game for that entire game was because of the opponent. When you play against an option team if they get up you do no and cannot run the ball if you plan on winning. It is the power of the option it allows teams to eat up clock and it's really hard to defend even on a team without tons of talent. Throw some elite athletes at it and you can run up some impressive scores but even without that you keep your defense rested enough you can win games only scoring 14-21 points on a regular basis. Bituli got 19 freaking tackles.... there are games when TEAMS don't get 19 tackles. It's because UK had 7 pass attempts and 64 rush attempts. We only had the ball for 18:43... not the first half the whole game. this was not because our defense sucked or our coaches sucked or our running backs sucked.. it's was 100% the offense UK ran. Had we jumped out to a lead the rushing stats would have been much different because we could have played keep away instead of catchup.
Click to expand...

We clearly think very differently.
 
#93
#93
BeardedVol said:
Very little in the area if run blocking and creating holes for running backs. Pass protection has been on an upward trajectory since midway though last season
Click to expand...
You also understand the injury situation, right?
Just how closely should the OL be to all-league status?
 
#94
#94
Other_Guy said:
You also understand the injury situation, right?
Just how closely should the OL be to all-league status?
Click to expand...

Where did I say anything about "all-league status"?

We're 102nd in rushing offense, and a lot of that has to do with the oline; there's plenty of room to grow before we worry about being "all-league status" or not.
 
#95
#95
defenses are committed to stopping our running game. This is because JG has been inconsistent in the passing game and the other guys are inexperienced. Defenses have picked their poison and we have called the pass...which is what we should do. Interesting to note that Bama , especially in the second have , focused on our passing game and we ran the ball very effectively. In these last two games defenses may call a more balanced game given the recent success of our passing game . It will be a real test of the play caller to call the right plays based on a balanced defense

I think that the goal will be to get under center more , which will lend itself to the running game and play action game. That is a step / transition that is a bit beyond the QBs current skill set and practice time
 
#96
#96
BeardedVol said:
Where did I say anything about "all-league status"?

We're 102nd in rushing offense, and a lot of that has to do with the oline; there's plenty of room to grow before we worry about being "all-league status" or not.
Click to expand...
You also don't seem to take into consideration 3 different QBs (plus Jennings) directing traffic. Jordan had nearly 100 yards against Bama. SC has a solid run defense. Heck, UABs isn't too shabby. I like Chandler and Jordan, but they're inconsistent and it's not like either is Etiene out there. Again I would point to injuries being an issue too. If you want to gripe about their play against a bad UK run D, fine. They're certainly inconsistent. But they've also put the hammer down in the 2nd half on multiple drives lately, including Bama. I'm just not sure how much improvement you were expecting from 2 freshmen, Trey Smith's health situation affecting his practice and injuries lately.
 
#99
#99
VolInNW said:
Agree 100%. Although I cut Pruitt some slack for bringing friends in (pun intended) at first as this is his first shot at the big chair, and anyone would like some trusted people around as you get your footing.

That said, in year 3, Pruitt will be growing into the job more and more, and needs to ditch the dead weight. His move to fire Helton and hire Cheney showed me he gets this. I expect a few of our assistants will be looking elsewhere at the end of the season. Since as I understand it so few are actually recruiting, I doubt Pruitt will wait till February.
Click to expand...
Pruitt didnt fire Helton, who left for a head coaching job. But I agree hiring Chaney was a smart move.
 
#100
#100
LTVol said:
Pruitt didnt fire Helton, who left for a head coaching job. But I agree hiring Chaney was a smart move.
Click to expand...

I would be shocked if Helton wasn’t quietly encouraged to seek alternate employment. Directly fired? No. But it was clear Pruitt wasn’t keeping him.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top