Am I Being Realistic

[Clay_Allison]

I agree. Remember, I'm not saying he's blameless. We all went into last year thinking the line was a weakness though and for the early part of the season it proved true yet again.

Being slow to adjust to the development and improvement of Smith, Frederick and Leary doesn't mean he "refuses" to run, it means he was (properly to blame for being) slow to recognize and adjust.

He says all the time he wants to run, he has run before, and he is at the very least allowing it to happen now (my guess is he has more input than some believe though).

He's not averse to running the ball and I bet he is loving this.

I'm sure he is loving the way Linehan is running the offense, but if it was him calling plays he wouldn't be doing it this way.

If he was calling plays he'd still abandon the run, maybe not on purpose, but that's what he does. As soon as the other team scored he'd want to answer back with a quick score and when he went 3 and out and ran the defense right back out onto the field and the other team scored he'd come back passing. Big Ben, Parliament.

 

[Rev]

I believe a few of the ones where we had less than 20 carries were early in the season and may have been reasoning in his mind to abandon.

Look, not saying it's right to abandon it, but it was clearly later in the year before it started being every week with over 4 ypc.

He ignored half a season of successful line blocking. Fault worthy? Yes. Proof that he won't run it with a competent OL? Absolutely not because it was disproved before and is being disproved again. Clearly meaning the personnel upgrade had convinced us to run again.

By the way, the line was still not really a huge strength last year. Smith is better now, Frederick better now, we added Martin who is an upgrade, and I think Leary is also playing better than he was last year.

It wasnt later in the year that he was averaging over 4 ypc and only had 4 weeks period under 4 for the year. Out of the first 6 weeks only 2 weeks were under 4 and one was almost there. It includes a week of almost 7 ypc and a week of 5 ypc. He gave up running the ball.

 

[Cotton]

Which I already explained. You, however, can't explain why he ran previously and is now doing so again.

He's not. Linehan is. Which is what you can't get through your thick skull.

 

[Cotton]

Has there ever been anybody this mediocre defended this much?

Ever?

It's ridiculous. We should start a Garrett forum and just let Smitty sit in it by himself and spank his monkey.

 

[Cotton]

I'm sure he is loving the way Linehan is running the offense, but if it was him calling plays he wouldn't be doing it this way.

If he was calling plays he'd still abandon the run, maybe not on purpose, but that's what he does. As soon as the other team scored he'd want to answer back with a quick score and when he went 3 and out and ran the defense right back out onto the field and the other team scored he'd come back passing. Big Ben, Parliament.

And this is exactly what Smitty refuses to admit.

 

[Cotton]

It wasnt later in the year that he was averaging over 4 ypc and only had 4 weeks period under 4 for the year. Out of the first 6 weeks only 2 weeks were under 4 and one was almost there. It includes a week of almost 7 ypc and a week of 5 ypc. He gave up running the ball.

Dude, it was clearly later in the year cause Smitty says so. Stop muddling the debate with facts. Smitty will just come back in with, "Listen, I didn't say he was without fault, I was just saying he is dreamy."

 

[jsmith6919]

Smitty will just come back in with, "Listen, I didn't say he was without fault, I was just saying he is dreamy."

 

[Smitty]

It wasnt later in the year that he was averaging over 4 ypc and only had 4 weeks period under 4 for the year. Out of the first 6 weeks only 2 weeks were under 4 and one was almost there.

So half the time in the first six weeks it was under 4 ypc. That's the definition of inconsistency.

You keep citing this and saying "He abandoned the run." Yes, I know he did abandon the run. I'm not saying he didn't.

What you are ignoring is the point about that a handful of games in one season where he did, in fact, abandon the run -- after THREE YEARS of a completely unsustainable rushing attack -- does not prove that he wouldn't be running now. The evidence is there that back in 2007-08, he ran the ball a lot actually. Back when he trusted his line.

Citing "5.3" in late 2013 means shit -- he still didn't trust the line, because even early in the year, it was inconsistent. Even if that was an irrational distrust, it was BECAUSE of the distrust, not because of a hatred for the running game. If he hated the running game, he wouldn't be allowing it now, so we KNOW it was because of trust.

Now he trusts it... because now it's clearly a dominant line and better than it was last year. Maybe it took too long for him to establish that trust, but that is why.

Now we are running it.

This is exactly what I said would happen once we got a solid line in place. Six years of evidence which all support my theory trumps a handful of games from last year when the line finally started to play well and Garrett just took too long to catch on. Well, he's caught on now.

 

[Smitty]

I'm sure he is loving the way Linehan is running the offense, but if it was him calling plays he wouldn't be doing it this way.

The evidence supports that he'd be running way more than he did last year. Whether it would be the exact same amount as with Linehan is obviously a matter of total speculation.

But again... Linehan is only doing this because of the line. He is another guy who was pass happy when he didn't have a line in Detroit. Linehan is completely different than what he was in Detroit because of the personnel here.

Garrett? No, that couldn't apply to him.... for some illogical reason.

If he was calling plays he'd still abandon the run, maybe not on purpose, but that's what he does.

It wasn't what he did in 2007-08 when he had a decent OL.

 

[Clay_Allison]

The evidence supports that he'd be running way more than he did last year. Whether it would be the exact same amount as with Linehan is obviously a matter of total speculation.

But again... Linehan is only doing this because of the line. He is another guy who was pass happy when he didn't have a line in Detroit. Linehan is completely different than what he was in Detroit because of the personnel here.

Garrett? No, that couldn't apply to him.... for some illogical reason.



It wasn't what he did in 2007-08 when he had a decent OL.

He didn't run as much in 08 as you seem to think and Sparano was a big part of the 07 offense. His tendencies are well established and incredibly predictable. Claiming they were all part of his master plan is silly. He's far from the only offensive play caller with that problem either.

 

[Cotton]

 

[Smitty]

He didn't run as much in 08 as you seem to think and Sparano was a big part of the 07 offense.

We ran it 419 times in 2007 and 401 times in 2008 with decent OLs. Not too much of a change losing Sparano.

We ran it 336 times in 2013.

His tendencies are well established

Those tendencies were well established in a four year period where it was well established our line was not capable of run blocking at a competent level with any consistency.

Claiming they were all part of his master plan is silly.

I'm not claiming it's part of his master plan. I'm saying that flawed playercallers will trust their line when they have one... and won't when they don't.

He's far from the only offensive play caller with that problem either.

Yes, I know... you know who another one is? Scott Linehan. Because he did it in Detroit without a quality line.

So this idea that it's "all Linehan" calling all these running plays because he's somehow stepped into a playcalling vacuum that Garrett has decided to vacate for him, and it just happens that all of a sudden Linehan has turned into a run guru, is completely bogus.

Linehan is running because he can. Garrett would be running more as well. Just as much more? I don't know, but obviously more in line with 2008 numbers than 2013 numbers.

 

[Rev]

So half the time in the first six weeks it was under 4 ypc. That's the definition of inconsistency

Math is not your strongsuit I see. 2 out of 6 is under 4. Thats not half. Those were the only games I cited since you said that it wasnt until the end of the year that he was averaging 4 or over.

 

[Smitty]

Math is not your strongsuit I see. 2 out of 6 is under 4. Thats not half.

You said three times it was under 4 yards per carry in the first six weeks.

 

[Cotton]

We were 21st in the league in rush attempts in 2007, and 25th in 2008. Yeah, we really ran it a lot. Keep digging.

 

[Rev]

You said three times it was under 4 yards per carry in the first six weeks.

No. I said 2 were and I misspoke the other part. Of the 2 that was under 4 one of them was almost 4 so it was pretty close.

 

[Smitty]

Actually, I just looked on PFR.

It was four times in the first six weeks that they were under 4 yards per carry.

Week 1 Giants - 3.78 ypc
Week 2 KC - 2.31 ypc
Week 5 Denver - 3.71 ypc
Week 6 Washington - 2.52 ypc

And for good measure, also

Week 7 Philly - 2.84 ypc

So actually 5 out of the first 7 weeks by my count. Are my numbers wrong?

 

[Smitty]

We were 21st in the league in rush attempts in 2007, and 25th in 2008. Yeah, we really ran it a lot. Keep digging.

It was a ton more than in 2012 and 2013. Garrett is pass happy, no one is disputing that, but 420 carries a season is much more liveable.

We're on pace for 520 now, but that isn't going to keep up. It will drop back down into the 480-90 range range or so probably, that would be my guess. Still very high, but then again, this OL is also a lot better than that 2007-08 OL as well, so it merits more carries.

 

[Cotton]

It was a ton more than in 2012 and 2013. Garrett is pass happy, no one is disputing that, but 420 carries a season is much more liveable.

We're on pace for 520 now, but that isn't going to keep up. It will drop back down into the 480-90 range range or so probably, that would be my guess. Still very high, but then again, this OL is also a lot better than that 2007-08 OL as well, so it merits more carries.

We were in the bottom 3rd in the league in two years you tried to use as proof that Garrett ran "a lot". Your argument is invalid.

 

[Cotton]

The evidence is there that back in 2007-08, he ran the ball a lot actually. Back when he trusted his line.

Quoted for posterity.