• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Next year’s football team

i don't think there's any actual evidence to support the concept of "flow of the game" helping RBs, although obviously wish someone like kenneth walker would have gotten more carries last year. (here's one article on running back by committee: https://www.numberfire.com/nfl/news/9082/do-running-back-by-committees-work-in-the-nfl).

seems one of the tenets of our offensive is the combination of our tempo + rotating skill players will keep us fresher than the opposing defense, which does make sense to me. few related thoughts from that are:

1/ the defensive injury stoppages (not sure if anyone is actually faking it) are really detrimental to us
2/ someone said this on the DC thread, but the bend but don't break approach to defense really doesn't align with our offensive philosophy. intuitively a more aggressive defense that might give up some long plays but in general gets the defensive off the field seems like a better fit.
3/ also feels like using power backs like carney (or cooley) are a better fit as physical runners who can wear down the defense (which i believe i've seen is supported by data)
 
IAppreciateIt said:
i don't think there's any actual evidence to support the concept of "flow of the game" helping RBs, although obviously wish someone like kenneth walker would have gotten more carries last year. (here's one article on running back by committee: https://www.numberfire.com/nfl/news/9082/do-running-back-by-committees-work-in-the-nfl).

seems one of the tenets of our offensive is the combination of our tempo + rotating skill players will keep us fresher than the opposing defense, which does make sense to me. few related thoughts from that are:

1/ the defensive injury stoppages (not sure if anyone is actually faking it) are really detrimental to us
2/ someone said this on the DC thread, but the bend but don't break approach to defense really doesn't align with our offensive philosophy. intuitively a more aggressive defense that might give up some long plays but in general gets the defensive off the field seems like a better fit.
3/ also feels like using power backs like carney (or cooley) are a better fit as physical runners who can wear down the defense (which i believe i've seen is supported by data)
Click to expand...

100% agree on #2. We had quite a few turnovers this year (27, T-6th) and that seemed to make a huge difference in our wins right up until UNC. Then whenever our defense got a turnover we tended to turn it right back over. I think more blitz/pressure packages to get teams off schedule would absolutely help even if it meant we allow the inevitable chunk plays as a result. There were a few times this year when it felt like our defense simply could not get stops to save their life and relied on either it being the end of a half or forcing a turnover (UNC, NC ST, Army, Clemson).
 
deacdixieboy said:
He has been the #1 QB on the board in several different draft rankings throughout the season.
Click to expand...

Sam's draft stock is at an all time low at the moment. Scouts will point to the Pitt game and the Wisconsin game as showing that when makes mistakes his decision making snowballs and he continues to make more and more mistakes. You absolutely cannot have that happen if you want to play on Sundays. If Sam were to declare for the draft right now it would be a worse decision than Newman declaring.
 
Wake needs speed - greasy speed on defense and especially in the secondary. The pipe dream of having Davis and Greer play needs to end, they are not healthy. Greer played 4 snaps in an ACCCG. The slowness of the secondary and the LB's, is the single reason why we can't deal with qbs who can run, or can't run, but do against us. Why NC State didn't insist on running the ball vs our defense is a fireable offense - thanks Doeren!
 
tigerswood said:
I saw one Denver Broncos blog post. Anywhere else? Most places online don't even give him a draft grade.
Click to expand...

He was also on a USA Today one recently that wasn’t that and I believe an Athletic one.
 
As far as Hartman is concerned I have seen some clickbaity articles throwing out Hartman as one of the first QB's off the board. But, realistically I think with some of the clunkers he has dropped in big games he would likely be a very late round pick or an UDFA. I also don't see him going before Corral, Pickett, Willis, Howell (if he goes), and even Ridder. I hope he's seen that guys leaving with iffy draft chances should have stuck around a bit more. It still bugs me we lost multiple years of eligibility for Sage.
 
Marshall is transferring. Looked good in limited action this year, but with the logjam at RB it's probably best for him. Throw in Carney 2 next year and we're super deep.

Wish him the best.
 
SCDeac said:
Marshall is transferring. Looked good in limited action this year, but with the logjam at RB it's probably best for him. Throw in Carney 2 next year and we're super deep.

Wish him the best.
Click to expand...

He might also be a casualty of the scholarship situation. I liked what I saw from him, but we need an upgrade at that position group.
 
IAppreciateIt said:
i don't think there's any actual evidence to support the concept of "flow of the game" helping RBs, although obviously wish someone like kenneth walker would have gotten more carries last year. (here's one article on running back by committee: https://www.numberfire.com/nfl/news/9082/do-running-back-by-committees-work-in-the-nfl).

seems one of the tenets of our offensive is the combination of our tempo + rotating skill players will keep us fresher than the opposing defense, which does make sense to me. few related thoughts from that are:

1/ the defensive injury stoppages (not sure if anyone is actually faking it) are really detrimental to us
2/ someone said this on the DC thread, but the bend but don't break approach to defense really doesn't align with our offensive philosophy. intuitively a more aggressive defense that might give up some long plays but in general gets the defensive off the field seems like a better fit.
3/ also feels like using power backs like carney (or cooley) are a better fit as physical runners who can wear down the defense (which i believe i've seen is supported by data)
Click to expand...

I agree with all points.

I'm not necessarily for giving one guy 90% of snaps, but a 60/40 split between 2 guys seems reasonable. 30/30/30/10 seems a little ridiculous.
 
Hartman ain’t playing in the NFL folks. Come back down to earth.
 
Brendan207 said:
He should go pro - he was incredible this year.
Click to expand...

Agree he had a great year, but he's not getting any love on draft boards. I haven't seen him in any top 100 lists, and the 1 draft site I've seen that currently goes past 100 has him as their 34th best WR, which is UDFA territory. And would he be eligible for the Senior Bowl when he's listed as a junior? I'd think he'd need a good Senior Bowl week and run a sub 4.5 at the combine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top