The Ringer seems to think so . . . and certainly the numbers back this up. The article says they run him too much between the tackles when outside runs would be more productive. For what it's worth . . . Link - ( New Window )
Whoever wrote this has not played or coached one down of organized football in his/her life, that I am sure of. You can't go backwards and see what worked and use that as a model of what to do moving forward in the running game. If your options are cut in half you tip your hand to the defense. He may be more productive on outside runs, BUT, almost none of the runs that became outside runs were designed that way. That's point #1, it's not where the yards are gained but where the play is designed that ultimately determines "type" of play. Secondly, if you stop running in the A and B gaps altogether you free up LBs and Ss to cheat to the outside gaps and you get a really crowded edge. No football coach on earth would ever abandon the inside runs because some hipster fuckface no nothing looked at some numbers and crunched them. It works because we use him everywhere, the runs are blocked and designed to sometimes feign where he's going and if you cut out inside runs you are absolutely hand cuffing your ability to be strategic. Garbage article, garbage analysis and garbage "writer" trying to use analytic data after the fact to eliminate a huge portion of why this offense has worked since the bye.
This type of reductive reasoning is great for cutting wasteful spending, or conserving energy or patterning traffic flow, but offensive football is a dynamic diverse organism that has to be able to do everything it's capable of to sustain itself.
Whoever wrote this has not played or coached one down of organized football in his/her life, that I am sure of. You can't go backwards and see what worked and use that as a model of what to do moving forward in the running game.
Isn't that exactly what scouting is? Looking for other teams tendencies and then trying to take them away?
Quote:
... almost none of the runs that became outside runs were designed that way. That's point #1, it's not where the yards are gained but where the play is designed that ultimately determines "type" of play.
Agree 100%. Especially when the RB has the cutback ability of SB. I think it was one of his runs against the Skins where the OLB had perfect technique on him and he gave a slight move inside before cutting outside and the LB barely got a hand on him.
Quote:
Secondly, if you stop running in the A and B gaps altogether you free up LBs and Ss to cheat to the outside gaps and you get a really crowded edge. No football coach on earth would ever abandon the inside runs because some hipster fuckface no nothing looked at some numbers and crunched them.
That's not what he's saying. The point is that they should run outside more, not that they should do it exclusively. And they should increase the % of outside runs until the efficiency (average) of those runs begins to balance the efficiency of inside runs.
There's no doubt this article is flawed from premise Â
To execution, as FMiC and Joey in VA and others noted.
The most "efficient" backs in the NFL this year according to NextGenStats, this writer's source, are right now a bunch of guys largely producing garbage with the exception of Adrian Peterson who's ranked 11th at the moment. Only one or two of their top 10 "efficient" backs ate averaging over 4 ypc!
Really this article is click bait and nothing more.
Truth is also that Barkley, prolly more than any RB since Sanders, runs wherever the hell he sees daylight...
Because he can.
So even if he posits to run MORE outside until the average balances, he's still wrong. The play selection in the run game has been damn near perfect since the bye because of the balance. It's like a boxing match, you can't just throw haymakers all day or hooks all day, you have to work the body to keep the opponent honest. This about being more difficult to defend by showing a lot of runs out of similar looks. I'm sorry but I disagree with his premise 100%.
is that there definition of "efficient" blows. It's more useful as a measure of an OLs performance than a RBs. It's not remotely a measure of a RBs actual efficiency.
is that there definition of "efficient" blows. It's more useful as a measure of an OLs performance than a RBs. It's not remotely a measure of a RBs actual efficiency.
...you have to establish that you are willing to attack inside the tackles first. This is one of those football truths they are disregarding in favor of blind stats. They are wrong.
with Barkley and include screens to him split wide. Isolate him on one side, quick screen, and he’ll dominate the DB.
He should get several a game and then decoy him and throw some to Engram on the other side.
Coach Shurmur says they design the game plan to the strengths of their players. Perhaps we don't see more of that because they think the screen is not one of Eli's strengths?
I agree with your principle though - We haven't seen a lot of SB outside - stacked for bubble screen or in isolation, and we don't see a lot of other more traditional passes in the flat (like a screen) to SB, where he would naturally be in a good position to dominate. You would have to imagine the defense cheating to that side opening the other side.
Coach Shurmur says they design the game plan to the strengths of their players. Perhaps we don't see more of that because they think the screen is not one of Eli's strengths?
It could also not be something that they have confidence in the OL being able to block. Screens have a certain level of technique required to pull off.
The team is trying to implement a whole new O. They are just starting to get it, and don't yet know how to utilize all of the weapons. Plus the OL is still problematic. It will take a while more to best know how to use all the weapons together effectively, and not just Barkley
RE: To be an effective running team outside the tackles... Â
...you have to establish that you are willing to attack inside the tackles first. This is one of those football truths they are disregarding in favor of blind stats. They are wrong.
+1. If everytime Barkley touches the ball its an outside run, the defense will be standing there waiting for him
But for the second half versus Philly, it seems like Â
Saquon’s at his best when he runs inside and then goes outside. He’s able to create angles that just don’t happen in the pros with his speed/size/cutting.
Speaks nothing to the inside run opening up outside opportunities Â
learning Its not like he started behind an Pro Bowl type
line the entire team is learning yet another new offense .
If Eli has always had a weakness in the touch pass in
running a screen game something we have had problems with
the other thing I would touch on is the types of plays
that get Barkley the ball while moving . We see very little in the screen game and too many plays to the sidelines .
where he has little room to use his elusiveness .
The O-line is weak up the middle when they do manage to open
a hole Barkley is a threat to take it to the house .
I sometimes question when they bring in Gallman who I like as a back and I get resting him but he should get 20 carries a game . I think next season the line will be shored up
and the Look the hell out . As great as Gurley is Barkley
is every bit as good and potentially better .
is that there definition of "efficient" blows. It's more useful as a measure of an OLs performance than a RBs. It's not remotely a measure of a RBs actual efficiency.
This.
Dead wrong, but carry on being wrong, this thread is full of incorrect assumptions. Barkley has made runs in spite of this OL, more often than not, he's an animal who makes this OL look better than it is. You and giants#1 deserve each other.
The article also points out they have the worst, 2nd worst, and 3rd worst passer ratings in the NFL so I'm fairly confident they'd be worse. FWIW
SB can kill them either way. No need to over think it.
This type of reductive reasoning is great for cutting wasteful spending, or conserving energy or patterning traffic flow, but offensive football is a dynamic diverse organism that has to be able to do everything it's capable of to sustain itself.
Isn't that exactly what scouting is? Looking for other teams tendencies and then trying to take them away?
Agree 100%. Especially when the RB has the cutback ability of SB. I think it was one of his runs against the Skins where the OLB had perfect technique on him and he gave a slight move inside before cutting outside and the LB barely got a hand on him.
That's not what he's saying. The point is that they should run outside more, not that they should do it exclusively. And they should increase the % of outside runs until the efficiency (average) of those runs begins to balance the efficiency of inside runs.
The most "efficient" backs in the NFL this year according to NextGenStats, this writer's source, are right now a bunch of guys largely producing garbage with the exception of Adrian Peterson who's ranked 11th at the moment. Only one or two of their top 10 "efficient" backs ate averaging over 4 ypc!
Really this article is click bait and nothing more.
Truth is also that Barkley, prolly more than any RB since Sanders, runs wherever the hell he sees daylight...
Because he can.
This.
He should get several a game and then decoy him and throw some to Engram on the other side.
He should get several a game and then decoy him and throw some to Engram on the other side.
Coach Shurmur says they design the game plan to the strengths of their players. Perhaps we don't see more of that because they think the screen is not one of Eli's strengths?
I agree with your principle though - We haven't seen a lot of SB outside - stacked for bubble screen or in isolation, and we don't see a lot of other more traditional passes in the flat (like a screen) to SB, where he would naturally be in a good position to dominate. You would have to imagine the defense cheating to that side opening the other side.
Coach Shurmur says they design the game plan to the strengths of their players. Perhaps we don't see more of that because they think the screen is not one of Eli's strengths?
It could also not be something that they have confidence in the OL being able to block. Screens have a certain level of technique required to pull off.
+1. If everytime Barkley touches the ball its an outside run, the defense will be standing there waiting for him
Saquon’s at his best when he runs inside and then goes outside. He’s able to create angles that just don’t happen in the pros with his speed/size/cutting.
line the entire team is learning yet another new offense .
If Eli has always had a weakness in the touch pass in
running a screen game something we have had problems with
the other thing I would touch on is the types of plays
that get Barkley the ball while moving . We see very little in the screen game and too many plays to the sidelines .
where he has little room to use his elusiveness .
The O-line is weak up the middle when they do manage to open
a hole Barkley is a threat to take it to the house .
I sometimes question when they bring in Gallman who I like as a back and I get resting him but he should get 20 carries a game . I think next season the line will be shored up
and the Look the hell out . As great as Gurley is Barkley
is every bit as good and potentially better .
Quote:
is that there definition of "efficient" blows. It's more useful as a measure of an OLs performance than a RBs. It's not remotely a measure of a RBs actual efficiency.
This.