[BostonCard]

I am not sure that the issue is exactly that we don't have the personnel to have a pass all-the time offense, but we don't have a passing system to do that.

This is my beef. The passing system just isn't very diverse. 

I think that our current pass game design is perfectly good for a team with a strong running game.

My concern is that the coaches appeared to have no idea that we would in fact be a team with no run game. Self-assessment is key.

I don't think anyone anticipated that we would struggle in the run game.  On paper, we returned the best running back in the country and four fifths of an offensive line that enabled him to be the top running back in the country last year.  We aren't just struggling, our running game has cratered.  We went from 5.9 ypc (second in the conference) and 202 yards per game (third in the conference) to 3.1 ypc (last) and 86 yards per game (second to last).

I think any reasonable observer would not just be surprised at the changes; they would be shocked.  So I don't hold the staff responsible for not anticipating it.  What is concerning, however, is that six games into the season nobody seems to have any insights into why,  let alone developed a plan to fix it (that I can see, and of course, I don't know what the coaches are thinking or doing).

So here is where I disagree with OutsiderFan.  While I agree that our passing offense is not optimally suited for the kind of offense we are running, it seems to me that it would be much better to try to fix the running game, which is clearly not working, than "fix" the passing game, which works well (if sub-optimally).  That's not to say that we shouldn't tinker around the edges (for example, the first pass to Smith was a short pass just past the line of scrimmage, well in front of the defender, that went for six or seven yards; we could do with more of that).  Wholesale changes to the offensive philosophy, however, would be a mistake (witness Kelly's luck changing the Bruins offense, and he had an entire offseason to do so).  A merely adequate running game (4.5 yards per cary and 170 yards per game, which is about what the median teams, Utah and ASU average) would leave us with a much more powerful offense and would put us in a position to win most of the rest of our games.  So, I would focus my energy on getting some marginal improvement in the run game, which would make our passing game more effective.

BC

[BostonCard]

I am not sure that the issue is exactly that we don't have the personnel to have a pass all-the time offense, but we don't have a passing system to do that.

This is my beef. The passing system just isn't very diverse. 

I think that our current pass game design is perfectly good for a team with a strong running game.

My concern is that the coaches appeared to have no idea that we would in fact be a team with no run game. Self-assessment is key.

I don't think anyone anticipated that we would struggle in the run game.  On paper, we returned the best running back in the country and four fifths of an offensive line that enabled him to be the top running back in the country last year.  We aren't just struggling, our running game has cratered.  We went from 5.9 ypc (second in the conference) and 202 yards per game (third in the conference) to 3.1 ypc (last) and 86 yards per game (second to last).

I think any reasonable observer would not just be surprised at the changes; they would be shocked.  So I don't hold the staff responsible for not anticipating it.  What is concerning, however, is that six games into the season nobody seems to have any insights into why,  let alone developed a plan to fix it (that I can see, and of course, I don't know what the coaches are thinking or doing).

So here is where I disagree with OutsiderFan.  While I agree that our passing offense is not optimally suited for the kind of offense we are running, it seems to me that it would be much better to try to fix the running game, which is clearly not working, than "fix" the passing game, which works well (if sub-optimally).  That's not to say that we shouldn't tinker around the edges (for example, the first pass to Smith was a short pass just past the line of scrimmage, well in front of the defender, that went for six or seven yards; we could do with more of that).  Wholesale changes to the offensive philosophy, however, would be a mistake (witness Kelly's luck changing the Bruins offense, and he had an entire offseason to do so).  A merely adequate running game (4.5 yards per cary and 170 yards per game, which is about what the median teams, Utah and ASU average) would leave us with a much more powerful offense and would put us in a position to win most of the rest of our games.  So, I would focus my energy on getting some marginal improvement in the run game, which would make our passing game more effective.

BC