We don't need to eat that clock, we simply need to score touchdowns.
Agreed. You run the offense that scores you points. If it means rushing for 250 yards, fine. If it means slinging it 45 times, fine. It will likely require some balance between the running and passing game and we have to run our offense. I hate the term "open up the playbook". I'm a firm believer in running your offense. Execution trumps all. Teams can get an idea of what you do best but if you execute properly and efficiently, you will be successful. See 2008 when our offense seemingly ran about 7 plays. We were amongst the best offenses in the country statistically and were on a course to challenge for the conference title until both Des and Fenroy got banged up.
If we throw the ball 45 times, the chances are we lose 55-28 or some other unsatisfying score. Tulsa will score if given the opportunity. I think the best chance to win this game is to limit their opportunities to score. Of course. we still need to play our game, whatever that is, but I think we will be disappointed if we try to get into a shootout with one of the best offensive teams in the country.
For the record, Hud said that we didn't open up the playbook vs SLU. Guessing he felt fine with our scoring against SLU, and just needed more from defense.
This is the idea. Tulsa cannot score without the ball. If we can run it effectively, that will eat clock as well as open up the high-percentage passing game. If we attempt to "open the playbook" and start slinging it around, we end up with 3 and outs that play into Tulsa's strength. Again, as long as it is working! But 3 running plays and a punt is the same as 3 pass plays and a punt.
Turb-Both scores you posted would be bad but 21-14 means that we are in it at the end. I'm not talking about a moral victory, I mean we are in it with a chance to win. If we hold them to 21 points, I think we win by 2 scores.
If we CAN run the ball against Tulsa... and keep moving the chains... that's a different argument altogether. But we had one of our greatest, if not the greatest, running backs in school history... and could not run against crappy defenses (and win the game) in the SBC. Talking as if "game control" is within our arsenal... with a running game... is something some of you need to show me evidence of. It's fantastic theoretically... but unless you guys know something I don't... every coach in college football would run over pass every down if he knew he could "get first downs, keep his defense off the field, and score touchdowns". This mythology everyone keeps talking about... "we should control the clock by running the ball" is pure bunk. And talking about "execution"? Have you guys been watching Hud run offenses the past few years?
I hope you guys are right. But if we come home with an L... and we ran the ball excessively to the delight of this forum... I'm not going to be pleased. This program is not built for using the shield to win battles. I don't care how many times we get our legs cut out from under us trying to learn how to use our swords... we need to learn how to use the sword!
There are currently 6 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 6 guests)