Thoughts on our running game...

[StatTiger 3,188]

I believe most will agree we need to establish a more consistent running game if we're going to make it back to the SECCG. For those looking for 200-yard rushing games, you can forget about it unless it's against the likes of Ball State or Western Carolina.

Al Borges has spoken of more balance in the offense and he certainly knows the value of a running game. I would imagine he's searching for quality in our running game rather than quantity.

Here are some numbers to consider...

Since 1969, Auburn is 22-3-0, when we rush for 100-160 yards and complete 60% of our passes in the same game. This record was established against opponents with a .605 win pct, or a 7-5 record.

Since 1961, we are 52-1-0 when we rush for over 100, while holding our opponent to under 100 rushing and completing 60% of our passes.

Since 1969, we are 21-2-1, when we rush between 100-160 yards and pass for 240yds or more.

Since 1971, we are 29-3-0, when we average between 4.3 to 5.5 yards per rush and complete 60% of our passes.

Last year, we ran the ball 61.6% of the time on our TD possessions. Yesterday against Mississippi State, we ran the ball 72.2 % of the time in the first half. The running game did not overpower MSU but it was enough to keep the Bulldogs honest. We were on pace for having a 150 yard rushing day and over 400-yards in total offense. It was evident by the play calling in the second half, Borges was no longer attacking the State defense with the passing game. Of our 7 pass attempts in the second half, six of them came on 3rd down ( obvious passing situations ). Al was no longer mixing up his play calling and there was very little motion. IMO, the first half was more of what we should expect from our offense rather than the second half. I believe we had about 76 yards rushing and 131 passing at the half.

This is a West Coast offense and Borges will always lean towards the passing game as the "main" weapon. If we can average 120-140 yards rushing per game against the "tougher" opponents, it should be enough to compliment our passing game this season. Last year, against the four top-ten defenses we faced, we averaged 125.2 yards rushing per game. The passing game hit on 71% of our passes for nearly 9 yards per pass attempt. Once again, it was all about quality and not quantity. Even against the better defenses, Borges needed just enough push from the running game to aid his passing game.

I believe our coaching staff will settle on a "go to" guy as runningback over the next two games. My money would be on Irons and Stewart. If Lester can stay healthy, he just might make a push too.

WDE

[Erik81 0]

I believe most will agree we need to establish a more consistent running game if we're going to make it back to the SECCG. For those looking for 200-yard rushing games, you can forget about it unless it's against the likes of Ball State or Western Carolina.

  Al Borges has spoken of more balance in the offense and he certainly knows the value of a running game. I would imagine he's searching for quality in our running game rather than quantity.

Here are some numbers to consider...

Since 1969, Auburn is 22-3-0, when we rush for 100-160 yards and complete 60% of our passes in the same game. This record was established against opponents with a .605 win pct, or a 7-5 record.

Since 1961, we are 52-1-0 when we rush for over 100, while holding our opponent to under 100 rushing and completing 60% of our passes.

Since 1969, we are 21-2-1, when we rush between 100-160 yards and pass for 240yds or more.

Since 1971, we are 29-3-0, when we average between 4.3 to 5.5 yards per rush and complete 60% of our passes.

  Last year, we ran the ball 61.6% of the time on our TD possessions. Yesterday against Mississippi State, we ran the ball 72.2 % of the time in the first half. The running game did not overpower MSU but it was enough to keep the Bulldogs honest. We were on pace for having a 150 yard rushing day and over 400-yards in total offense. It was evident by the play calling in the second half, Borges was no longer attacking the State defense with the passing game. Of our 7 pass attempts in the second half, six of them came on 3rd down ( obvious passing situations ). Al was no longer mixing up his play calling and there was very little motion. IMO, the first half was more of what we should expect from our offense rather than the second half. I believe we had about 76 yards rushing and 131 passing at the half.

  This is a West Coast offense and Borges will always lean towards the passing game as the "main" weapon. If we can average 120-140 yards rushing per game against the "tougher" opponents, it should be enough to compliment our passing game this season. Last year, against the four top-ten defenses we faced, we averaged 125.2 yards rushing per game. The passing game hit on 71% of our passes for nearly 9 yards per pass attempt. Once again, it was all about quality and not quantity. Even against the better defenses, Borges needed just enough push from the running game to aid his passing game.

  I believe our coaching staff will settle on a "go to" guy as runningback over the next two games. My money would be on Irons and Stewart. If Lester can stay healthy, he just might make a push too.

WDE

   

180361[/snapback]

good perspective on the lack of second half offensive production-and I totally agree

[auskull 239]

Good post. Its hard to adjust to good backs instead of great backs. We saw some good second effort yesterday.

Ironic that Reddick was taken out when he cleanly missed the block on the DL that sacked Cox. King played most of the third and all of the fourth quarter. I believe that the coaches are very serious about blocking. Sounds like the backs also know that if they don't block, they don't play.

[rexbo 104]

Lack of second half killer instinct, just like last year. Say what you want about the polls, but we dropped out of the top 25, even after shutting a team out. There are way too many teams out there scoring 40+ points a game to move ourselves up in the polls, to be putting the offense in the freezer after half-time. And as we saw last year against 'Bama, in the SEC game and the Sugar Bowl, a good team can come back to bite you when you turn the offense off. Besides, I believe the offense can only get better if you keep them executing throughout the entire game, you never see USC turn it off. Say what you want about not caring about polls, but it was not impressing pollsters with a killer instinct last year that cost us a shot at the NC...

(Another comparison, look what FSU did to the Citadel last night, what could have been a moral victory for the Citadel, and FSU dropping in the polls, turned into an "impressive" won for them by letting the offense loose late in the 4th quarter. There is a reason Bobby Bowden has his teams in the Top 10 every year, he never lets off.)

[Erik81 0]

I also thought another positive aspect of running the ball so much in the second half was getting Cox more experience with the risk of injury.

[aubie57 119]

I like the fact that 4 guys are getting some PT, but I do think in the next week or 2 there will need to be a go to guy, the other guys can still play a good bit, keep'em all pretty fresh for the 4th but I think there needs to be 1 man that plays a majority of the snaps. Irons looked pretty good to me, might need some stick'em though. WAR EAGLE!!!!

[moe 0]

Lack of second half killer instinct, just like last year.  Say what you want about the polls, but we dropped out of the top 25, even after shutting a team out.  There are way too many teams out there scoring 40+ points a game to move ourselves up in the polls, to be putting the offense in the freezer after half-time.  And as we saw last year against 'Bama, in the SEC game and the Sugar Bowl, a good team can come back to bite you when you turn the offense off.  Besides, I believe the offense can only get better if you keep them executing throughout the entire game, you never see USC turn it off.  Say what you want about not caring about polls, but it was not impressing pollsters with a killer instinct last year that cost us a shot at the NC...

(Another comparison, look what FSU did to the Citadel last night, what could have been a moral victory for the Citadel, and FSU dropping in the polls, turned into an "impressive" won for them by letting the offense loose late in the 4th quarter. There is a reason Bobby Bowden has his teams in the Top 10 every year, he never lets off.)

180374[/snapback]

I would be in total agreement with you...last year. We've already lost a game, and the only real responsibilty the polls have is to get #1 and #2 to the NC game. There's no rational way we can make it to the Rose Bowl this year, so why even worry about the polls? All I care about now is winning SEC games - I don't care how or by how many. I just want to get back in ATL and win a 2nd straight SEC championship.

[rexbo 104]

...There's no rational way we can make it to the Rose Bowl this year, so why even worry about the polls?

The long term health of a program is measured by the polls; national attention, recruiting, TV, are all benefits of being near the top. The higher you finish in the polls this year, the higher you start next year. You cannot choose which year to push your team to the top, you have to be there every year if you want the pollsters to pay attention to you when you are finally good enough to be considered for the BCS Championship game. The polls are a really just a popularity contest, and the more points you score, the more popular you are, that's just reality in college football...

[AUslug 1]

The only thing that anybody needs to worry about the polls is that if Auburn wins 8+ games this year then the poll thing will take care of itself. The running game would benefit if one running back would get 20-25 carries a game instead of less than 15.

[rexbo 104]

The only thing that anybody needs to worry about the polls is that if Auburn wins 8+ games this year then the poll thing will take care of itself.

We heard that all last year, and you know what? The poll thing did not take care of itself...

[CCTAU 3,342]

I like the way you put that Stat. My evaluation was to the tune that if Borges don't get his head out of his.....

Horrible play calling (2nd half). I FINALLY saw a Ben drag across the middle at 7 ds on 3rd and 7. And guess what? It freaking worked. The play calling is sporadic to say the least. Kenny and Carl should get most of the work load. The problems with the offense have been (from the outside looking in) that the coaches changed the damn offense. They figured Caddy and Ronnie were gone so no need to use those plays anymore. WRONG. The backs we have can fit into that mold easily. They may not get the production that the dynamic duo got. But if they only get 60% of that, we win.

Irons definitely exibits shades of Caddy. Stewart is no Ronnie. But he is a Stephen Davis prototype. Tre, like I have said before, solidly average. His role os still that as when the DD was here. He is great on select downs coming out and catching passes. Now for Lester. He reminds me of Brent Fullwood. I always thought of Brent as that cartoon character that when he took off, all you saw was a round blur in the area of his feet. Watch Lester. When he decides to go, his feet become a blur. We can run the same offense as when we had the DD. And we can also change it up a little for Brad and Tre. But we will not survive with a passing game that is homerun oriented. 2nd half was full of homerun floaters or screens. The 15 yd in was non-existent. The slant was on vacation. And we seem to never throw the ball to the running back looping out of the backfield and headed upfield when he gets the ball. These are the plays that broke defenses' backs last year.

Defense? If Omar Conner could hit a reciever, we would all be crying right now. LSU will not be so easy. And neither will Carolina. Lot of work needed. These next two weeks need to be a tough two weeks.

We are still growing as a team. Coaching needs to grow with us and allow the players to try some of the things that the team did last year. Nothing ventured.....

[rolltoomer 0]

"Thoughts on our running game"? What running game?

Borges and Tuberville knew we could pass just about anytime we wanted to. They chose to run in the second half--and rightly so in my opinion--come hell or high water. And Auburn couldn't move the ball.

I'm sure that Crooms knew what was going on, and stacked accordingly, but we still needed to be able to run the ball. And we couldn't.

I think we're in for a long year.

[AUslug 1]

The only thing that anybody needs to worry about the polls is that if Auburn wins 8+ games this year then the poll thing will take care of itself.

We heard that all last year, and you know what? The poll thing did not take care of itself...

180435[/snapback]

Auburn won't be playing for the national title this year so if AU wins 8+ games then they will be ranked in the final polls.

Stat could you look up the average number of carries AU running backs have when rushing over 100 yards in game?

[weaglewagon 1]

i'm not too terribly disappointed in our offense. i knew it was going to be an adjustment for sure; however, i am suprised we haven't installed any more motion plays with 2 RB's. there have been a few, but it clearly doesn't look anything like the offense of last year. heck, last year against MSU in the second game we came out moving players & changing formations before every play it seemed like. i'm sure we'll get more into that as cox & the backs get comfortable. just an observation.

[Aubie7 0]

Lack of second half killer instinct, just like last year.  Say what you want about the polls, but we dropped out of the top 25, even after shutting a team out.  There are way too many teams out there scoring 40+ points a game to move ourselves up in the polls, to be putting the offense in the freezer after half-time.  And as we saw last year against 'Bama, in the SEC game and the Sugar Bowl, a good team can come back to bite you when you turn the offense off.  Besides, I believe the offense can only get better if you keep them executing throughout the entire game, you never see USC turn it off.  Say what you want about not caring about polls, but it was not impressing pollsters with a killer instinct last year that cost us a shot at the NC...

(Another comparison, look what FSU did to the Citadel last night, what could have been a moral victory for the Citadel, and FSU dropping in the polls, turned into an "impressive" won for them by letting the offense loose late in the 4th quarter. There is a reason Bobby Bowden has his teams in the Top 10 every year, he never lets off.)

180374[/snapback]

So true!

[mcgufcm 4,107]

untrue. i honestly believe we could have won every game by 30 last year, and it wouldn't have changed enough people's minds. but that was last year. the argument that "The higher you finish in the polls this year, the higher you start next year" is WRONG. we finished 2nd last year, lost less starters than oklahoma, and started almost 10 spots behind them. lsu on the other hand brought in a new staff, finished around 15 i think, and began the year at number 5. sooooo, it's all about who is the vogue pick. not where you finished the year before. i don't care about the polls b/c i just want to win the best conference in america, and we have a lot to correct to have a shot at that. a lot.

the running game needs work. we can talk about state stacking the line. lack of imagination in the play calling. or anything else. the biggest difference is one that i just can't explain: the offensive line isn't getting the same push up front. which doesn't really make a lot of sense with us only replacing two guys (one of which was a former walk-on and the other was the weak link of a dominant line last year... he was still pretty dang good though). those guys have to toughen up in run blocking or we're not going to do a whole lot better on the ground.

as for the actual backs, carl is the best of the group. he reads a hole pretty well, he hits his hole, he falls forward, and he blocks well on pass downs. i expect him to get the biggest work load this season. he's not dynamic (and he's not stephen davis who was a heisman hype/all-sec guy... carl is a long way from that), but he is very solid.

kenny is going to be a change of pace guy. i maintain that i don't see what folks are so giddy about with him. he moves fast, but doesn't pick up a lot of yardage... strangest thing. he does read the zone plays pretty well when the line bothers to block, and he is more electric than tre or carl. he also seems to have the most to learn in other areas.

tre can help this team. he can make us less predictable. i remember when petrino was here tre used to line up in front of ronnie in the i (or the offset i)... it looked funny but tre was murder on that quick hitter hand off. add that in with his ability to catch the ball and move in open space... he could be our big play guy. i hope they don't totally go away from him, but i hope just as much that they'd start using him less in situations like a straight dive play or off tackle runs.

brad looked good, but it's a long time from being the number 3 pick in the nfl draft (as fullwood was). who knows what he can do? he's got what 10 total carries in his career? looked quick as a cat though. maybe he'll get more pt. we'll see.

[Aubie7 0]

untrue. i honestly believe we could have won every game by 30 last year, and it wouldn't have changed enough people's minds. but that was last year. the argument that "The higher you finish in the polls this year, the higher you start next year" is WRONG. we finished 2nd last year, lost less starters than oklahoma, and started almost 10 spots behind them. lsu on the other hand brought in a new staff, finished around 15 i think, and began the year at number 5. sooooo, it's all about who is the vogue pick. not where you finished the year before. i don't care about the polls b/c i just want to win the best conference in america, and we have a lot to correct to have a shot at that. a lot.

the running game needs work. we can talk about state stacking the line. lack of imagination in the play calling. or anything else. the biggest difference is one that i just can't explain: the offensive line isn't getting the same push up front. which doesn't really make a lot of sense with us only replacing two guys (one of which was a former walk-on and the other was the weak link of a dominant line last year... he was still pretty dang good though). those guys have to toughen up in run blocking or we're not going to do a whole lot better on the ground.

as for the actual backs, carl is the best of the group. he reads a hole pretty well, he hits his hole, he falls forward, and he blocks well on pass downs. i expect him to get the biggest work load this season. he's not dynamic (and he's not stephen davis who was a heisman hype/all-sec guy... carl is a long way from that), but he is very solid.

kenny is going to be a change of pace guy. i maintain that i don't see what folks are so giddy about with him. he moves fast, but doesn't pick up a lot of yardage... strangest thing. he does read the zone plays pretty well when the line bothers to block, and he is more electric than tre or carl. he also seems to have the most to learn in other areas.

tre can help this team. he can make us less predictable. i remember when petrino was here tre used to line up in front of ronnie in the i (or the offset i)... it looked funny but tre was murder on that quick hitter hand off. add that in with his ability to catch the ball and move in open space... he could be our big play guy. i hope they don't totally go away from him, but i hope just as much that they'd start using him less in situations like a straight dive play or off tackle runs.

brad looked good, but it's a long time from being the number 3 pick in the nfl draft (as fullwood was). who knows what he can do? he's got what 10 total carries in his career? looked quick as a cat though. maybe he'll get more pt. we'll see.

180614[/snapback]

If we had won every game by 30 last year, especially the last three, we would not have been #2, you are right about that. We would have been #1 going into the BCS game.

[Wishbone 0]

I think under CTT we have relied on super talent at the RB position to make up for inconsistent blocking.

[AUesquire 1]

This is one observation many of you will not agree with but I honestly don't think our run blocking was any better last year than this year so far. When you go back and look at virtually any game from last year, I think you'll notice that the rushing totals we accumulated were more off the ability of CW and RB to break tackles than a bunch of gaping holes. Another factor is when Borges is mixing it up, the D is always off balance so they can't stack the line or key on one player

A perfect example is CW in the SECCG. There were never any openings but he still made YAC after YAC. If I'm not mistaken, I don't think CW had a run of 40 yards or more all of last year. These were two special backs and they rarely went down after the first contact. Our RBs just aren't in that league and our line, despite being as big as has ever been at Auburn, is just not blowing people off the ball.

[texaubie 0]

Regardless of what we scored last year, we were not going to move ahead of USC or OK in the polls unless they lost.

[mcgufcm 4,107]

esquire, i have to disagree in one vivid memory of mine. when we played msu last year, caddy and ronnie didn't get touched within 3 yards of the line. our oline dominated that game. (both guys ran for 100 yards i think). that's why i wonder where the drop off came from. they killed state last year and couldn't do it to the same team this year with roughly the same group of guys.

aubie7, you are crazy if you think beating bama and tennessee by more than we did would've jumped us over usc. the ap wouldn't have ranked the patriots over the trojans.

[Aubie7 0]

untrue. i honestly believe we could have won every game by 30 last year, and it wouldn't have changed enough people's minds. but that was last year. the argument that "The higher you finish in the polls this year, the higher you start next year" is WRONG. we finished 2nd last year, lost less starters than oklahoma, and started almost 10 spots behind them. lsu on the other hand brought in a new staff, finished around 15 i think, and began the year at number 5. sooooo, it's all about who is the vogue pick. not where you finished the year before. i don't care about the polls b/c i just want to win the best conference in america, and we have a lot to correct to have a shot at that. a lot.

the running game needs work. we can talk about state stacking the line. lack of imagination in the play calling. or anything else. the biggest difference is one that i just can't explain: the offensive line isn't getting the same push up front. which doesn't really make a lot of sense with us only replacing two guys (one of which was a former walk-on and the other was the weak link of a dominant line last year... he was still pretty dang good though). those guys have to toughen up in run blocking or we're not going to do a whole lot better on the ground.

as for the actual backs, carl is the best of the group. he reads a hole pretty well, he hits his hole, he falls forward, and he blocks well on pass downs. i expect him to get the biggest work load this season. he's not dynamic (and he's not stephen davis who was a heisman hype/all-sec guy... carl is a long way from that), but he is very solid.

kenny is going to be a change of pace guy. i maintain that i don't see what folks are so giddy about with him. he moves fast, but doesn't pick up a lot of yardage... strangest thing. he does read the zone plays pretty well when the line bothers to block, and he is more electric than tre or carl. he also seems to have the most to learn in other areas.

tre can help this team. he can make us less predictable. i remember when petrino was here tre used to line up in front of ronnie in the i (or the offset i)... it looked funny but tre was murder on that quick hitter hand off. add that in with his ability to catch the ball and move in open space... he could be our big play guy. i hope they don't totally go away from him, but i hope just as much that they'd start using him less in situations like a straight dive play or off tackle runs.

brad looked good, but it's a long time from being the number 3 pick in the nfl draft (as fullwood was). who knows what he can do? he's got what 10 total carries in his career? looked quick as a cat though. maybe he'll get more pt. we'll see.

180614[/snapback]

If that's what you want to believe, ok. But don't say it's "untrue". You or I don't know that. I am saying that, according to everything that was said or reported, we did not win by large enough margins to impress the voters. We had moved into a tie with Chokelahoma at #2. When we failed to put UAT away, like we could have, we dropped back to #3. If we win big, as we should have, we would have had #2 to ourselves. The vote proves it.

[Aubie7 0]

esquire, i have to disagree in one vivid memory of mine. when we played msu last year, caddy and ronnie didn't get touched within 3 yards of the line. our oline dominated that game. (both guys ran for 100 yards i think). that's why i wonder where the drop off came from. they killed state last year and couldn't do it to the same team this year with roughly the same group of guys.

aubie7, you are crazy if you think beating bama and tennessee by more than we did would've jumped us over usc. the ap wouldn't have ranked the patriots over the trojans.

180752[/snapback]

Crazy? No,...just confident.

[rexbo 104]

Regardless of what we scored last year, we were not going to move ahead of USC or OK in the polls unless they lost.

180746[/snapback]

Wrong, we were tied with Oklahoma for 2nd in the AP after destroying Georgia. If we had destroyed 'Bama a few more voters would have put us clearly in 2nd. And with that 2nd place in the AP poll going into the SEC game, if we had kept the momentum and closed out UT in the second half, we might have closed up enough in the Coaches poll to jump to #2 in the BCS poll. It was within our reach...

[Texan4Auburn 1,626]

Actually what killed us was Stoops and his remarks when we tied them at number two in the polls. He accused the voters of following television agenda's with their votes due to contracts. The move worked, he challenged their ability to make their own decesions with that shot and they went right back to OU.

Just look at the different comments made between the AU/Bama game and the USC/UCLA game. Auburn struggled, doesn't matter that its a rivalry game. USC showed what champions are made of fighting through their fiercest rival who has a target on them to end their undefeated season.

Margin of victory was a excuse. Those guys picked OU/USC at the beginning of the year and rode it out cause they wanted to be able to say see, I picked it. Tons even admitted thats how they voted.