K-State Football...

[michigancat]

LOL, you have nothing to suggest that KSU's running game is keeping KSU from scoring points, other than "I coach jr. high football and understand nuances".

Getting stuffed at the one yard line kept KSU from scoring seven points against a PITIFUL Iowa State defense just after averaging less than 2 YPC on three attempts from inside the ISU six yard line.

 

Weren't you complaining about my initial sample size being too small?

 

[ksu_FAN]

This years statistics show that to be a Top 5 team in the BCS you need a solid running game (all 5 are in the top 30 nationally in rushing yards per game).  However after that it is all over the map and 6 teams in the BCS top 20 aren't even in the top 50.  8 of the top 10 teams in rushing offense aren't in the BCS top 20.

Having a solid run team, especially in YPC is important, but doesn't gurantee success and plenty of teams that are barely average rushing the football have very good teams.  Today's offenses that spread the field and have numerous pass attempts that essentually act as a running game has negated the old adages about running the football, but certainly you can't throw it out completely either.  The variety of offenses in today's game make it tough to make blanket statements about running the football.

[catzacker]

Look at the flip side of this...the defense...by all accounts (and statistics) our rush defense sucks and our pass defense is good...but we've given up 11 passing TD's in comparison to 7 rushing TD's.  And IIRC, of the passing TD's we've given up, like 7 of them have been for 20+ yards (thanks watts). 

[cireksu]

what is scary about the team rushing stats is that we score way more poinst/game than everyone around us except for Purdue!


Purdue!

[michigancat]

This years statistics show that to be a Top 5 team in the BCS you need a solid running game (all 5 are in the top 30 nationally in rushing yards per game).  However after that it is all over the map and 6 teams in the BCS top 20 aren't even in the top 50.  8 of the top 10 teams in rushing offense aren't in the BCS top 20.

No, they show that top 5 BCS teams have solid running games this year.  3 of the top 5 BCS are also in the top 10 in pass efficiency, and a 4th is 11th.  Only one is in the top 15 in rushing.

Having a solid run team, especially in YPC is important, but doesn't gurantee success and plenty of teams that are barely average rushing the football have very good teams.  Today's offenses that spread the field and have numerous pass attempts that essentually act as a running game has negated the old adages about running the football, but certainly you can't throw it out completely either.  The variety of offenses in today's game make it tough to make blanket statements about running the football.

I agree.  Obviously, jr. high coaches would think running the football is the most important thing...mostly because they don't have a choice.

[Bookie Pimp]

Nice "pot shot", Rusty...

This "Jr High coach" knows so little about the game that he's been a speaker at some of the top coaching clinics in Texas, as well as being recently offered the job as the Defensive Coordinator at a school in the largest high school classification in the state.

And, guess what... We will face plenty of teams that will be capable of running pass-based offenses.  Yet, our focus will be to stop the run first, because running the ball and stopping the run is what wins football games.

[michigancat]

Nice "pot shot", Rusty...

This "Jr High coach" knows so little about the game that he's been a speaker at some of the top coaching clinics in Texas, as well as being recently offered the job as the Defensive Coordinator at a school in the largest high school classification in the state.

And, guess what... We will face plenty of teams that will be capable of running pass-based offenses.  Yet, our focus will be to stop the run first, because running the ball and stopping the run is what wins football games.

You can definitely win by focusing on stopping the run and running the ball, but it isn't the only way.  Rushing offnese is not holding KSU's offense back, that's all I'm saying.

And LOL @ whipping out the "credentials".

[GoldbrickGangBoss]

LOLOL

[Bookie Pimp]

Nice "pot shot", Rusty...

This "Jr High coach" knows so little about the game that he's been a speaker at some of the top coaching clinics in Texas, as well as being recently offered the job as the Defensive Coordinator at a school in the largest high school classification in the state.

And, guess what... We will face plenty of teams that will be capable of running pass-based offenses.  Yet, our focus will be to stop the run first, because running the ball and stopping the run is what wins football games.

You can definitely win by focusing on stopping the run and running the ball, but it isn't the only way.  Rushing offnese is not holding KSU's offense back, that's all I'm saying.

And LOL @ whipping out the "credentials".

Nope.  It's NOT the "only way".  It's simply the BEST way.  

And, I disagree.  If KSU's offense posed a bit more of a threat running the football, or at least being considerably more balanced, they would be FAR more efficient in the red zone. Or, anywhere else on the field for that matter.

LOL @ your low FBIQ.

[catzacker]

So the problem with the team is the offense?  Or are we just wanting to know how an offense that averages 36ppg could get better?  Kind of like "I wish Ell could throw the ball better". 

[cireksu]

Would you guys agree that the ammount of rushing that we are doing is holding us back? 

IMO JJ should get 25 touches/game.

[ksu_FAN]

More interesting stats on the topic (Big 12 only).

Redzone TD % (rank) - rushing yards per game (rank).
OU 1 - 7
UT 2 - 3
MU 3 - 5
Tech 4 - 11
ku 5 - 5
NU 6 - 9
aTm 7 - 2
OSU 7 - 1
KSU 9 - 8
CU 9 - 6
ISU 11 - 10
BU 12 - 12

I would like to see more rushing attempts by backs per game.  Right now Johnson and Patton combine to average 22 rushing attempts (at 5.2 per) per game.  I suppose I'd like to see that at just slightly more, perhaps 25-30.

[GoldbrickGangBoss]

Maybe if Kstate rushed more they'd have Freeman throwing less and his interception number wouldn't be sky high.

Maybe teams that run the ball with a decent ypc also have a low amount of turnovers because fumbling just isn't as common as throwing interceptions and interceptions are much more likely if you're throwing a billion times a game due to lack of a running game.

Maybe.

[michigancat]

Nope.  It's NOT the "only way".  It's simply the BEST way. 

If two teams get identical yards, and one turns the ball over significantly less than a team that runs significantly better, the team that holds onto the ball will win more games.  You only think it's the best way because it's how you've been taught.

And, I disagree.  If KSU's offense posed a bit more of a threat running the football, or at least being considerably more balanced, they would be FAR more efficient in the red zone. Or, anywhere else on the field for that matter.

What are you looking for?  X more carries/game?  A specific run to pas ratio?  More YPC?  Or will you just know it's good enough when your coaching-clinic-speaker gut tells you it's good enough?

Would you guys agree that the ammount of rushing that we are doing is holding us back? 

IMO JJ should get 25 touches/game.

36 points a game!

[mjrod]

I think the statistics show that having a good running game increases your chances of success.

For example..

KSU - Auburn  - KSU had 27 yards rushing,  289 passing.  (Loss by 10)
KSU - San Jose St.  KSU had 152 yards rushing, 272 passing. (win by 20)
KSU - Missouri St.  KSU had 221 yards rushing, 325 passing. (win by 49)
KSU - Texas - KSU had 113 yards rushing, 217 passing. (win by 20)
KSU - ku - KSU had 53 yards rushing, 310 passing. (loss by 6)
KSU - CU - KSU had 249 yards rushing, 214 passing. (win by 27)
KSU - OSU - KSU had 125 yards rushing, 404 passing. (loss by 1)
KSU - BU - KSU had 208 yards rushing, 255 passing. (win by 38)
KSU - ISU - KSU had 78 yards rushing, 347 passing. (loss by 11).

Just looking at those numbers, and only for KSU, when the numbers are more even, the balance is there, KSU's success is much more definitive in terms of scoring.

I'd say that maybe the red-zone correlation isn't as significant as is the ability to run the ball and control the game.  Doing so, means you can end up winning the game.

So when Prince says we need a running game to help win games, I think it shows pretty well that having one helps us win.

Perhaps, that's the better relationship.

[michigancat]

I think the statistics show that having a good running game increases your chances of success.

For example..

KSU - Auburn  - KSU had 27 yards rushing,  289 passing.  (Loss by 10)
KSU - San Jose St.  KSU had 152 yards rushing, 272 passing. (win by 20)
KSU - Missouri St.  KSU had 221 yards rushing, 325 passing. (win by 49)
KSU - Texas - KSU had 113 yards rushing, 217 passing. (win by 20)
KSU - ku - KSU had 53 yards rushing, 310 passing. (loss by 6)
KSU - CU - KSU had 249 yards rushing, 214 passing. (win by 27)
KSU - OSU - KSU had 125 yards rushing, 404 passing. (loss by 1)
KSU - BU - KSU had 208 yards rushing, 255 passing. (win by 38)
KSU - ISU - KSU had 78 yards rushing, 347 passing. (loss by 11).

Just looking at those numbers, and only for KSU, when the numbers are more even, the balance is there, KSU's success is much more definitive both in terms of scoring.

I'd say that maybe the red-zone correlation isn't as significant as is the ability to run the ball and control the game.  Doing so, means you can end up winning the game.

So when Prince says we need a running game to help win games, I think it shows pretty well that having one helps us win.

Perhaps, that's the better relationship.

In KSU's case, this is more a function of getting an early lead, than "ability to run".

rushing by quarter:

Code: [Select]

ATT YDS YPC
1st Quarter  60  274  4.57 
2nd Quarter 56 172 3.07
3rd Quarter 63 248 3.94
4th Quarter 95 515 5.42
rushing based on score:

Code: [Select]

ATT YDS YPC
Winning By 15+ Pts  84  498  5.93
Winning By 8-14 Pts 46 177 3.85
Winning By 1-7 Pts 45 217 4.82
Tied 45 165 3.67
Losing By 1-7 Pts 27 63 2.33
Losing By 8-14 Pts 17 26 1.53
Losing By 15+ Pts 10 63 6.30
KSU runs the ball when they win, they don't necessarily win when they run the ball.  1057 yards came with the game tied or a lead, 152 yards came when trailing.

You could do the same thing for turnovers, FWIW.

AU: -1
SJSU: -2
MSU: even
UT: +4
ku: even
CU: +4
OSU: -2
BU: +6
ISU: -2

The only game KSU lost with a negative turnover margin was SJSU.  The only game they lost with the turnovers even or better was ku (an undefeated top 5 team).

[mjrod]

I think the statistics show that having a good running game increases your chances of success.

For example..

KSU - Auburn  - KSU had 27 yards rushing,  289 passing.  (Loss by 10)
KSU - San Jose St.  KSU had 152 yards rushing, 272 passing. (win by 20)
KSU - Missouri St.  KSU had 221 yards rushing, 325 passing. (win by 49)
KSU - Texas - KSU had 113 yards rushing, 217 passing. (win by 20)
KSU - ku - KSU had 53 yards rushing, 310 passing. (loss by 6)
KSU - CU - KSU had 249 yards rushing, 214 passing. (win by 27)
KSU - OSU - KSU had 125 yards rushing, 404 passing. (loss by 1)
KSU - BU - KSU had 208 yards rushing, 255 passing. (win by 38)
KSU - ISU - KSU had 78 yards rushing, 347 passing. (loss by 11).

Just looking at those numbers, and only for KSU, when the numbers are more even, the balance is there, KSU's success is much more definitive both in terms of scoring.

I'd say that maybe the red-zone correlation isn't as significant as is the ability to run the ball and control the game.  Doing so, means you can end up winning the game.

So when Prince says we need a running game to help win games, I think it shows pretty well that having one helps us win.

Perhaps, that's the better relationship.

In KSU's case, this is more a function of getting an early lead, than "ability to run".

rushing by quarter:

Code: [Select]

ATT YDS YPC
1st Quarter  60  274  4.57 
2nd Quarter 56 172 3.07
3rd Quarter 63 248 3.94
4th Quarter 95 515 5.42
rushing based on score:

Code: [Select]

ATT YDS YPC
Winning By 15+ Pts  84  498  5.93
Winning By 8-14 Pts 46 177 3.85
Winning By 1-7 Pts 45 217 4.82
Tied 45 165 3.67
Losing By 1-7 Pts 27 63 2.33
Losing By 8-14 Pts 17 26 1.53
Losing By 15+ Pts 10 63 6.30
KSU runs the ball when they win, they don't necessarily win when they run the ball.  1057 yards came with the game tied or a lead, 152 yards came when trailing.

You could do the same thing for turnovers, FWIW.

AU: -1
SJSU: -2
MSU: even
UT: +4
ku: even
CU: +4
OSU: -2
BU: +6
ISU: -2

The only game KSU lost with a negative turnover margin was SJSU.  The only game they lost with the turnovers even or better was ku (an undefeated top 5 team).

It's called game management.

You can get an early lead, then you can go to the run to keep the other offense off the field, force them to become one dimensional and make mistakes.

You get more turnovers in a game when you're forced to play from behind.  It's something that affects us as well as any other team.   It's part of the game.

What you cannot deny is that the run game is important as part of the overall strategy for success, and the numbers do not speak otherwise.

You may argue that the running game has less effect on one aspect or another, but managing the game is just as much strategy of using various combinations, one of which is an effective running game.

[Bookie Pimp]

Nope.  It's NOT the "only way".  It's simply the BEST way. 

If two teams get identical yards, and one turns the ball over significantly less than a team that runs significantly better, the team that holds onto the ball will win more games.  You only think it's the best way because it's how you've been taught.

Agreed.  Turnovers will absolutely KILL you.  

Very few championship exceptions to the rule of "Run the ball.  Stop the run. Win the game." exist...  Spurrier's method is about the only championship example that comes to mind off the top of my head and even his defenses were predicated on stopping the run first.

And, I disagree.  If KSU's offense posed a bit more of a threat running the football, or at least being considerably more balanced, they would be FAR more efficient in the red zone. Or, anywhere else on the field for that matter.

What are you looking for?  X more carries/game?  A specific run to pas ratio?  More YPC?  Or will you just know it's good enough when your coaching-clinic-speaker gut tells you it's good enough?

Offensively, we're looking for:

1) No turnovers
2) Win time of possession
3) Average > 5 yds per rush
4) < 20 yds in penalties

Defensively, we're looking to:

1) Hold oppoonent to < 100 yds rushing
2) 3 "takeaways"
3) Five "3 & outs"
4) ZERO TD's after "sudden change"
5) NO plays > 20 yds
6) Win 60+% of 3rd downs
7) Less than 3 yds per rush

[catzacker]

I do think that JJ does need to get more touches, maybe 5 more per game, but that's because I think he's a weapon that needs to be used more and because I think JF should throw a touch less.  We're something like 0-8 in JF's starts when he has >40 Pass attempts.  

[michigancat]

Fun fact, KSU gets more YPC in the red zone than Oklahoma (best red zone TD% in conference).

OU gets 3.04, KSU gets 3.75.

The difference is OU's passing efficiency is 291.74, while KSU's is 150.04.

^I realize that's just anecdotal evidence, but it's interesting.

http://www.cfbstats.com/2007/team/327/rushing/offense/situational.html
http://www.cfbstats.com/2007/team/327/passing/offense/situational.html
http://www.cfbstats.com/2007/team/522/rushing/offense/situational.html
http://www.cfbstats.com/2007/team/522/passing/offense/situational.html

[michigancat]

Nope.  It's NOT the "only way".  It's simply the BEST way. 

If two teams get identical yards, and one turns the ball over significantly less than a team that runs significantly better, the team that holds onto the ball will win more games.  You only think it's the best way because it's how you've been taught.

Agreed.  Turnovers will absolutely KILL you. 

Very few championship exceptions to the rule of "Run the ball.  Stop the run. Win the game." exist...  Spurrier's method is about the only championship example that comes to mind off the top of my head and even his defenses were predicated on stopping the run first.

OU 2000, but you have the same defense.

Offensively, we're looking for:

1) No turnovers
2) Win time of possession
3) Average > 5 yds per rush
4) < 20 yds in penalties

OK, looking at this specifically, running the ball isn't your number one priority, and you could easily replace #3 with a completion %/YPA combination of some sort and still achieve what you're looking for in time of possession.

Defensively, we're looking to:

1) Hold oppoonent to < 100 yds rushing
2) 3 "takeaways"
3) Five "3 & outs"
4) ZERO TD's after "sudden change"
5) NO plays > 20 yds
6) Win 60+% of 3rd downs
7) Less than 3 yds per rush

Why is yards per rush #7, but yards per game #1?

[michigancat]

It's called game management.

You can get an early lead, then you can go to the run to keep the other offense off the field, force them to become one dimensional and make mistakes.

You get more turnovers in a game when you're forced to play from behind.  It's something that affects us as well as any other team.   It's part of the game.

What you cannot deny is that the run game is important as part of the overall strategy for success, and the numbers do not speak otherwise.

You may argue that the running game has less effect on one aspect or another, but managing the game is just as much strategy of using various combinations, one of which is an effective running game.

I agree with that, but it seems KSU's success hinges more on an early lead than anything.  JMO, no stats involved.

[mjrod]

It's called game management.

You can get an early lead, then you can go to the run to keep the other offense off the field, force them to become one dimensional and make mistakes.

You get more turnovers in a game when you're forced to play from behind.  It's something that affects us as well as any other team.   It's part of the game.

What you cannot deny is that the run game is important as part of the overall strategy for success, and the numbers do not speak otherwise.

You may argue that the running game has less effect on one aspect or another, but managing the game is just as much strategy of using various combinations, one of which is an effective running game.

I agree with that, but it seems KSU's success hinges more on an early lead than anything.  JMO, no stats involved.

That's true with any team.

[Bookie Pimp]

Nope.  It's NOT the "only way".  It's simply the BEST way. 

If two teams get identical yards, and one turns the ball over significantly less than a team that runs significantly better, the team that holds onto the ball will win more games.  You only think it's the best way because it's how you've been taught.

Agreed.  Turnovers will absolutely KILL you. 

Very few championship exceptions to the rule of "Run the ball.  Stop the run. Win the game." exist...  Spurrier's method is about the only championship example that comes to mind off the top of my head and even his defenses were predicated on stopping the run first.

OU 2000, but you have the same defense.

Like I said, there ARE exceptions to the rule.  

Offensively, we're looking for:

1) No turnovers
2) Win time of possession
3) Average > 5 yds per rush
4) < 20 yds in penalties

OK, looking at this specifically, running the ball isn't your number one priority, and you could easily replace #3 with a completion %/YPA combination of some sort and still achieve what you're looking for in time of possession.

I've already agreed with you that creating/elimination of turnovers is HIGHLY important. Ball security is ALWAYS the number one point offensively.

So, in turning to your second point, the key word here is "easily".  I believe that to be false.... Here's why.

TIME.  Game time, and practice time.

Game time:  Anytime a pass hits the ground, the clock stops. Thus leaving more time for the other offense.  If they are out rushing you, then they are eating more of the clock.  Once the ball is snapped, a running play that nets zero yards still runs  about 40-45 seconds off the clock.  An incomplete pass runs about 5 seconds off the clock on average.

Practice time:  The key is "reps".  There is only so much practice time and any time spent practicing passing takes away from time spent practicing your run game.  Run blocking and pass blocking are two distinctly different skills, not to mention the amount of timing involved in a pass game.

Theoritcally, replacing#3 with a completion %/YPA combination of some sort to still achieve what you're looking for in time of possession might be "easy".  Practically, however, it's anything but "easy".

Defensively, we're looking to:

1) Hold oppoonent to < 100 yds rushing
2) 3 "takeaways"
3) Five "3 & outs"
4) ZERO TD's after "sudden change"
5) NO plays > 20 yds
6) Win 60+% of 3rd downs
7) Less than 3 yds per rush

Why is yards per rush #7, but yards per game #1?

It's just the order in which I posted them.  If one accomplishes #7, then it is highly unlikely that the offense would accomplish #1.

[michigancat]

Game time:  Anytime a pass hits the ground, the clock stops. Thus leaving more time for the other offense.  If they are out rushing you, then they are eating more of the clock.  Once the ball is snapped, a running play that nets zero yards still runs  about 40-45 seconds off the clock.  An incomplete pass runs about 5 seconds off the clock on average.

Why is time of possession so important to you?

Practice time:  The key is "reps".  There is only so much practice time and any time spent practicing passing takes away from time spent practicing your run game.  Run blocking and pass blocking are two distinctly different skills, not to mention the amount of timing involved in a pass game.

Theoritcally, replacing#3 with a completion %/YPA combination of some sort to still achieve what you're looking for in time of possession might be "easy".  Practically, however, it's anything but "easy".

I get how it can be difficult to successfully implement a passing offense at the jr. high/high school level, but I this doesn't applies with KSU.  I mean, how much better does a team scoring 37 ppg need to be?  You could also argue that practicing the run game is a waste of time because you get fewer yards per play and fewer big plays rushing.  It's all about what you feel is important.

It's just the order in which I posted them.  If one accomplishes #7, then it is highly unlikely that the offense would accomplish #1.

Gotcha, I thought you were listing them in order of priority.

[cireksu]

winning TO battle>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> running the ball successfully.

[cireksu]

make that not turning it over at all and gettting at least 1 turnover.

[Bookie Pimp]

Why is time of possession so important to you?

While not "impossible", it's much harder to score when the other team has the ball.  The more you increase your TOP, the more you reduce your opponents opportunites for scoring.

Practice time:  The key is "reps".  There is only so much practice time and any time spent practicing passing takes away from time spent practicing your run game.  Run blocking and pass blocking are two distinctly different skills, not to mention the amount of timing involved in a pass game.

Theoritcally, replacing#3 with a completion %/YPA combination of some sort to still achieve what you're looking for in time of possession might be "easy".  Practically, however, it's anything but "easy".

I get how it can be difficult to successfully implement a passing offense at the jr. high/high school level, but I this doesn't applies with KSU.  I mean, how much better does a team scoring 37 ppg need to be?  You could also argue that practicing the run game is a waste of time because you get fewer yards per play and fewer big plays rushing.  It's all about what you feel is important.

I agree completely when discussing the jr high level.  There are still WAY too many basic fundamentals to be taught at that level.

However, it applies pretty equally at both the HS and collegiate levels... especially in Texas where we have spring football and constant 7-on-7 tourneys going on all summer long to work on timing between QB's and receivers.  The main difference is the overall size, speed, and quality of athletes across the board as you get to the next level.

How much better does a team that avg.'s 37 PPG need to be?  Easy.... Enough better to hold on to the ball long enough to keep from losing four games!!  And, I stand by the fact that it could be accomplished by a better ground game which could effectively shorten contests and limit opponents possessions.  

At the end of the day, what I feel is important is the W-L columns...  Hell, I don't care if our offense only averages 20 PPG if we don't lose!!  

It's just the order in which I posted them.  If one accomplishes #7, then it is highly unlikely that the offense would accomplish #1.

Gotcha, I thought you were listing them in order of priority.

 

[michigancat]

While not "impossible", it's much harder to score when the other team has the ball.  The more you increase your TOP, the more you reduce your opponents opportunites for scoring.

You also reduce your own opportunities for scoring in the process.

How much better does a team that avg.'s 37 PPG need to be?  Easy.... Enough better to hold on to the ball long enough to keep from losing four games!!  And, I stand by the fact that it could be accomplished by a better ground game which could effectively shorten contests and limit opponents possessions.   

I agree, but I really only think that applies in the Auburn game, like I said before.

One thing you haven't mentioned is personnel.  KSU has an O-line full of FP's, an All-American WR, a 6-5 QB with a rocket arm, and a couple average RB's.  It makes sense to throw quick passes to the All American as much as possible, right?  You negate the pussyness of the line, somewhat and get the ball in the hands of your best player.

If KSU had Darren McFadden at RB and some badass OL's, then I would have a problem with the run/pass ratio, but KSU's offense is really playing to its strengths right now.  Prince has shown at UVA that he will adjust his system to suit his personnel - with Matt Schaub at QB, he passed 466 and rushed 439 times.  With Marques Hagans at QB, he passed 363 and rushed 450.  I think you'll see more emphasis on running the ball with the departure of Nelson and hopeful depussification of the OL.

[Bookie Pimp]

While not "impossible", it's much harder to score when the other team has the ball.  The more you increase your TOP, the more you reduce your opponents opportunites for scoring.

You also reduce your own opportunities for scoring in the process.

Again, the chances for scoring are greater when you have possession of the ball.  Why wouldn't one want to maximize time of possession if this is the case?

How much better does a team that avg.'s 37 PPG need to be?  Easy.... Enough better to hold on to the ball long enough to keep from losing four games!!  And, I stand by the fact that it could be accomplished by a better ground game which could effectively shorten contests and limit opponents possessions.   

I agree, but I really only think that applies in the Auburn game, like I said before.

One thing you haven't mentioned is personnel.  KSU has an O-line full of FP's, an All-American WR, a 6-5 QB with a rocket arm, and a couple average RB's.  It makes sense to throw quick passes to the All American as much as possible, right?  You negate the pussyness of the line, somewhat and get the ball in the hands of your best player.

If KSU had Darren McFadden at RB and some badass OL's, then I would have a problem with the run/pass ratio, but KSU's offense is really playing to its strengths right now.  Prince has shown at UVA that he will adjust his system to suit his personnel - with Matt Schaub at QB, he passed 466 and rushed 439 times.  With Marques Hagans at QB, he passed 363 and rushed 450.  I think you'll see more emphasis on running the ball with the departure of Nelson and hopeful depussification of the OL.

Good points.... Especially about trying to take advantage of Nelson.

However, with that said, part of the problem regarding our OL being a bunch of FP's is due to the excessive time spent on pass blocking.  Any OL worth his salt would MUCH rather run block and knock somebody's dick in the dirt than pass block any day.  We spend WAY too much time working on pass blocking, IMHO, which in turn, causes our OL to become bigger FP's.

It seems that we are continuing to recruit pass-blocking FP's though, and I tend to agree with Ballplayers at gopowertard in that Freeman is an incredible talent, but doesn't seem to have the "intangibles" that it takes to win close games.  We may be stuck in this funk for at least another 2 years or so...