Morgan should run once in a while

Donate To GopherHole

Gophergrandpa said:
We are the opposite of Nebraska which, against Illinois, ran the QB 28 times! Putting aside what Fleck’s RPO means (option is to hand off or to pass) as an offensive strategy, I believe that the front seven of defenses confidently collapse on our RBs on plays that look like inside zone because it is a 100% certainty that the QB won’t fake a hand-off and run outside or counter. If we ran a few plays where the QB faked the hand off and ran, it would give the contain guys on defense one more variable to think about, and might increase slightly the chance for some momentary defensive confusion. This MIGHT help our RBs as the game wears on. QB keeper needn’t be for big gains; just need enough of a potential threat to keep the defense wary of collapsing prematurely on the RB. Since this is such a simple concept and we steadfastly refuse to employ it, I think that our coaches have concluded that the risk of injury to Tanner (and concomitant disruption of our very good offense) outweighs the putative benefits of letting Tanner free-wheel in space. He isn’t a big guy.
Click to expand...
There is some merit to this which is why I wouldn’t mind seeing it 1-3 times per game.

Bob_Loblaw said:
I prefer the RPO to the read option in keeping the safeties and LBers honest. This is especially true if we start running more slants out of the RPO again.

They both sort of have the same purpose. They want to punish the defense for flying to the RB. In that situation, I'd rather see the ball in Bateman's or CAB's hands than Morgan's. They are just more dynamic, I'd prefer our QV to get less hits, etc.

I get it though, we run plays and it looks like the QB keep is wide open and those two plays aren't mutually exclusive.
Click to expand...
But I tend to more land on this side.
I don’t think we are running nearly as much RPO this year. I think more of our pass game is drop back and play action this year. Which I suspected it would be coming in because this is the system he ran in his previous stops. It is causing more complicated reads for Morgan too.
 

Some guy said:
I don’t think we are running nearly as much RPO this year. I think more of our pass game is drop back and play action this year. Which I suspected it would be coming in because this is the system he ran in his previous stops. It is causing more complicated reads for Morgan too.
Click to expand...

I agree with this.

I think some of the plays kind of look like an RPO, but I don't think they are. Most of the routes take too long to be an RPO (the lineman would be downfield), instead they are called playaction passes.
 

Gophergrandpa said:
We are the opposite of Nebraska which, against Illinois, ran the QB 28 times! Putting aside what Fleck’s RPO means (option is to hand off or to pass) as an offensive strategy, I believe that the front seven of defenses confidently collapse on our RBs on plays that look like inside zone because it is a 100% certainty that the QB won’t fake a hand-off and run outside or counter. If we ran a few plays where the QB faked the hand off and ran, it would give the contain guys on defense one more variable to think about, and might increase slightly the chance for some momentary defensive confusion. This MIGHT help our RBs as the game wears on. QB keeper needn’t be for big gains; just need enough of a potential threat to keep the defense wary of collapsing prematurely on the RB. Since this is such a simple concept and we steadfastly refuse to employ it, I think that our coaches have concluded that the risk of injury to Tanner (and concomitant disruption of our very good offense) outweighs the putative benefits of letting Tanner free-wheel in space. He isn’t a big guy.
Click to expand...

Well Neb also ran because without Spielman they've got ... no primary targets / play makers so they're trying to just YOLO it and find one.

I kinda doubt that if we ran Morgan defenses would 'have' to adjust. I'd say if Morgan takes it and runs with it ... I'm not sure even his side of the OL that he runs to will hold up under normal pressure anyhow. They still have a good chance of stopping him.

Mo at least has proven he can pick his gaps and take hits and keep going...
 

Bob_Loblaw said:
I agree with this.

I think some of the plays kind of look like an RPO, but I don't think they are. Most of the routes take too long to be an RPO (the lineman would be downfield), instead they are called playaction passes.
Click to expand...

That’s what I think too
It is a larger system change than I was anticipating so I think lack of a traditional spring/summer/fall probably hurt us more than I initially thought it would.
 


A_Slab_of_Bacon said:
Well Neb also ran because without Spielman they've got ... no primary targets / play makers so they're trying to just YOLO it and find one.

I kinda doubt that if we ran Morgan defenses would 'have' to adjust. I'd say if Morgan takes it and runs with it ... I'm not sure even his side of the OL that he runs to will hold up under normal pressure anyhow. They still have a good chance of stopping him.

Mo at least has proven he can pick his gaps and take hits and keep going...
Click to expand...
“Take the hits” is the key to me. I think Morgan, for all his many virtues, is a big injury risk running in open space.
 

gopherfan007 said:
From what I can remember being involved with the team a few years back, when running read option plays, coaches were strongly against Tanner keeping it. I don't remember the reasoning but even in practice he rarely kept the ball.
Click to expand...
Im guessing because when ZA got hurt the backups were freshmen. They didn’t want to risk injury to TM.
 

Bob_Loblaw said:
I prefer the RPO to the read option in keeping the safeties and LBers honest. This is especially true if we start running more slants out of the RPO again.

They both sort of have the same purpose. They want to punish the defense for flying to the RB. In that situation, I'd rather see the ball in Bateman's or CAB's hands than Morgan's. They are just more dynamic, I'd prefer our QV to get less hits, etc.

I get it though, we run plays and it looks like the QB keep is wide open and those two plays aren't mutually exclusive.
Click to expand...
Well stated.
 




Generally speaking: where are our slants, this year? Just like Burns had to ask last week -- and you shall receive! -- where are our vertical passing routes, this year?

Didn't we run the slant to perfection last year? It's not like there's some rule saying you may only run a slant route if it's a (true) RPO play with linemen running downfield to block LBs.
 
Last edited:

MplsGopher said:
Generally speaking: where are our slants, this year? Just like Burns had to ask -- and you shall receive -- where are our vertical passing routes, this year.

Didn't we run the slant to perfect last year? It's not like there's some rule saying you may only run a slant route if it's a (true) RPO play with linemen running downfield to block LBs.
Click to expand...
Slant isn’t as good of a route if the linebackers can get underneath them.

we are running deeper routes for better or for worse
 

I was wondering when someone would bring up this take on the hole
 

It's interesting to see Leidner brought up.

That was an offense where I didn't mind seeing Mitch run ... at the same time I always felt it was the case that we did that because we couldn't do ... a lot else consistently.

Our current offense isn't having trouble scoring points very often ...

I feel like sweating the offensive play calling and trying to score 38 points a game instead of 30.... is how you end up scoring 24 points a game.
 



Some guy said:
Slant isn’t as good of a route if the linebackers can get underneath them.

we are running deeper routes for better or for worse
Click to expand...
Lots of teams in major college and NFL run slant routes, in all kinds of situations. It's a fundamental route in the execution of the forward pass.

Sure, if the defense recognizes or jumps something, bad things can happen.

I'm just saying it seemed to work great last year. If almost all of that success was due to the route being coupled to the RPO play-action .... then let's get back to that then!
 

MplsGopher said:
Lots of teams in major college and NFL run slant routes, in all kinds of situations. It's a fundamental route in the execution of the forward pass.

Sure, if the defense recognizes or jumps something, bad things can happen.

I'm just saying it seemed to work great last year. If almost all of that success was due to the route being coupled to the RPO play-action .... then let's get back to that then!
Click to expand...
I don’t disagree with you. I’m just saying we aren’t running them
 

A_Slab_of_Bacon said:
It's interesting to see Leidner brought up.

That was an offense where I didn't mind seeing Mitch run ... at the same time I always felt it was the case that we did that because we couldn't do ... a lot else consistently.

Our current offense isn't having trouble scoring points very often ...

I feel like sweating the offensive play calling and trying to score 38 points a game instead of 30.... is how you end up scoring 24 points a game.
Click to expand...
Interesting to see that Leidner was brought up? LOL! He is always brought up! I do agree with your comments though.
 

Gophergrandpa said:
“Take the hits” is the key to me. I think Morgan, for all his many virtues, is a big injury risk running in open space.
Click to expand...
Morgan often limps already in going back to the huddle. It would be risky. There are probably more prudent options.
 

Certainly can catch a defense off guard, like Peyton a few years ago.
 



Not that I disagree that Morgan should run more often, but (a) he's not a particularly good runner, (b) he has a tendency to fumble when running, and (c) he's a pretty good passer. I'd rather seem him pass more often.
 

Some guy said:
I don’t disagree with you. I’m just saying we aren’t running them
Click to expand...
And my post #40 was asking, why the hell not, if it worked so well for us last year? Anyway, got it.
 

cncmin said:
Not that I disagree that Morgan should run more often, but (a) he's not a particularly good runner, (b) he has a tendency to fumble when running, and (c) he's a pretty good passer. I'd rather seem him pass more often.
Click to expand...
And I'd rather see us run the ball not using a philosophy of shotgun + zone-blocking. But that's just my taste.
 

cncmin said:
Not that I disagree that Morgan should run more often, but (a) he's not a particularly good runner, (b) he has a tendency to fumble when running, and (c) he's a pretty good passer. I'd rather seem him pass more often.
Click to expand...
Watching Morgan run is like watching Kirk Cousins run. You just cringe and hope for the best.
 

MplsGopher said:
And my post #40 was asking, why the hell not, if it worked so well for us last year? Anyway, got it.
Click to expand...
We have a different OC that didn’t run a ton of that type of RPO at his last spot.
 

MennoSota said:
Watching Morgan run is like watching Kirk Cousins run. You just cringe and hope for the best.
Click to expand...
He ran back to the LOS a couple times instead of falling down for a sack because someone's finger touched his shoelace. Big improvement!
 

Some guy said:
We have a different OC that didn’t run a ton of that type of RPO at his last spot.
Click to expand...
I guess he didn't do a lot of vertical passing routes, either.

Yeah, makes sense to me: our best offense in many years here, with pretty much the same players .... we should definitely chuck it out the window and do completely different things. Yep!

I'd line Bateman up in the slot all the time and have him run 5-10 yard routes. Makes sense.
 

MplsGopher said:
I guess he didn't do a lot of vertical passing routes, either.

Yeah, makes sense to me: our best offense in many years here, with pretty much the same players .... we should definitely chuck it out the window and do completely different things. Yep!

I'd line Bateman up in the slot all the time and have him run 5-10 yard routes. Makes sense.
Click to expand...
We are throwing many more downfield routes this year than we ran last year as a proportion of our passing game so I’m not sure what you are seeing:


I too am disappointed we have strayed from what worked last year...but at the same time...it is difficult to hire a guy and then tell him not to run and coach what he is comfortable with.
Fleck obviously wanted to hire him. Once you hire him to run the offense, you should let him run it the way he wants to run it if the goal is to build a program. Perhaps should’ve hired internal on OC spot but that’s Fleck’s call not mine.

People forget that the great offense score under 20 points in two of the three (or 4 if you count the bowl) biggest games last year.
 

Some guy said:
We are throwing many more downfield routes this year than we ran last year as a proportion of our passing game so I’m not sure what you are seeing:


I too am disappointed we have strayed from what worked last year...but at the same time...it is difficult to hire a guy and then tell him not to run and coach what he is comfortable with.
Fleck obviously wanted to hire him. Once you hire him to run the offense, you should let him run it the way he wants to run it if the goal is to build a program. Perhaps should’ve hired internal on OC spot but that’s Fleck’s call not mine.

People forget that the great offense score under 20 points in two of the three (or 4 if you count the bowl) biggest games last year.
Click to expand...
Bolded: absolute and total bunk, prior to the Purdue game. Burns called them out for being down over 50% on vertical routes.

Last weekend we finally got back to it. Lo and behold.
 

MplsGopher said:
Bolded: absolute and total bunk, prior to the Purdue game. Burns called them out for being down over 50% on vertical routes.

Last weekend we finally got back to it. Lo and behold.
Click to expand...
Ryan burns is talking about balls thrown, not routes run. Which is a completely different subject.

And, a route doesn’t have to be a straight vertical route to be a “downfield route”


EDIT:
I get it though. You want us to just take more shots on fades and vertical routes and just throw it up more. I was reading what you said differently and talking about something else.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom