Jump to content
  • USF Bulls fans join us at The Bulls Pen

    It's simple, free and connects you to other South Florida Bulls fans!

  • Members do not see this ad, Register

  • Men's Basketball
    Great Season Bulls!
    nit3.jpg

    Sun 3/24, 7:30 pm ESPNU

     
      1 2 Final  
    VCU 32 38 70  
    Bulls 30 35 65  
    📻 Listen 📊 Live Stats 📺 ESPNU  
    Prediction Contest - In Game Thread 
    Last:  Romped over UCF 83-77
     
     

How would you use our RBs?


Guest BasketBull.

Recommended Posts


  • Group:  Member
  • Topic Count:  0
  • Content Count:  5,236
  • Reputation:   321
  • Days Won:  2
  • Joined:  10/09/2007

our problem last year was that when Ford was in defenses could easily sniff out the run.  when BBQ was in, they could sniff out the pass or stuff that lame option-handoff.  putting 2 backs in there--- one who can run well and one who can block and catch well, will add an element of unpredictability that our playcalling lacked last year.

thats actually a pretty good point

WTF do you mean "actually" ?

i always make good points.

:thumbsup

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 26
  • Created
  • Last Reply

  • Group:  Member
  • Topic Count:  0
  • Content Count:  117
  • Reputation:   0
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  04/29/2007

our problem last year was that when Ford was in defenses could easily sniff out the run.  when BBQ was in, they could sniff out the pass or stuff that lame option-handoff.  putting 2 backs in there--- one who can run well and one who can block and catch well, will add an element of unpredictability that our playcalling lacked last year.

thats actually a pretty good point

WTF do you mean "actually" ?

i always make good points.

:thumbsup

They would be good points if they weren't wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Member
  • Topic Count:  0
  • Content Count:  5,900
  • Reputation:   628
  • Days Won:  5
  • Joined:  09/02/2007

It is real simple: Give it to the truck 15-25 times and run it down other teams throughts.  Dare teams to stop us like Oregon dared us to stop Stewart.  Then when they put nine in the box we can play action pass for TDs just like they did to us.  Then throw in Taylor, Williams, Samuels, et al. whenever Ford gets tired.  We will put up 32 ppg!

Well we averaged 34.7 ppg last year.  So you want the offense to be less effective?   ;)

If our offense can lower the T/Os we will be better offensively than last year.  Even with the 3-headed RB.

I don't necessarily think that less ppg means that our offense is less effective. If we can get 24-30 ppg, turn the ball control (which has always been bad for us) into a 2:1 ratio (exaggerated, but you get the point), we will win a lot more games than if we score quick, and put our defense back on the field. I wouldn't mind some lower scoring games where our offense just grinds it out on the ground and gives the defense enough time to rest up and be completely dominant every time the other team has the ball.

PPG isn't all there is to being efficient on offense, threads like this really make me wish that we had Andre back, and could see a nasty combo of him and Grothe. I hope Ford turns into that kind of guy (more physical ability, but does he have Dre's instincts and quickness?). If he comes on this year like most of us think he is capable of, this offense could be a serious threat in any game. If we need to play keep away, Ford can pound it for 25 carries in a game. If we need to catch up, or just put a whippin' on someone, we let Grothe mix it up between running, passing, and mixing in Ford.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Member
  • Topic Count:  0
  • Content Count:  1,777
  • Reputation:   139
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  09/20/2003

I would bet a lot will be decided on how our OL performs.  If our OL becomes dominant and can open holes then I see more of Ford in a inside zone/read type running game.  If not, then I can see more of an outside or off tackle speed type running game utilizing a larger proportion of Taylor etc.

OL should be fine we only lose Walker. Well let me think about that. All three games USF lost last year he was not playing.  hmm this could be interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Member
  • Topic Count:  0
  • Content Count:  5,236
  • Reputation:   321
  • Days Won:  2
  • Joined:  10/09/2007

our problem last year was that when Ford was in defenses could easily sniff out the run.  when BBQ was in, they could sniff out the pass or stuff that lame option-handoff.  putting 2 backs in there--- one who can run well and one who can block and catch well, will add an element of unpredictability that our playcalling lacked last year.

thats actually a pretty good point

WTF do you mean "actually" ?

i always make good points.

:thumbsup

They would be good points if they weren't wrong.

and what makes them wrong, Francis?

care to expound on your inane babbling, or do you get your kicks by being a mindless contrarian?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Member
  • Topic Count:  0
  • Content Count:  260
  • Reputation:   2
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  08/06/2007

I'd like to see Richard Kelly lead blocking for Ford and Taylor.  And I'd also like to see them use Samuels kind of like Ean Randolph in the slot and on returns.  I think our return game, especially on punts, needs a shot in the arm and I'd like to see Samuels or Baker back there, or possibly one of the young corners.  I like Marcus Edwards and all, but he doesn't exactly light it up on punt returns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Member
  • Topic Count:  0
  • Content Count:  117
  • Reputation:   0
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  04/29/2007

our problem last year was that when Ford was in defenses could easily sniff out the run.  when BBQ was in, they could sniff out the pass or stuff that lame option-handoff.  putting 2 backs in there--- one who can run well and one who can block and catch well, will add an element of unpredictability that our playcalling lacked last year.

thats actually a pretty good point

WTF do you mean "actually" ?

i always make good points.

:thumbsup

They would be good points if they weren't wrong.

and what makes them wrong, Francis?

care to expound on your inane babbling, or do you get your kicks by being a mindless contrarian?

Expound?  Not a problem skippy.

"our problem last year was that when Ford was in defenses could easily sniff out the run." 

Maybe defenses could sniff out Ford running they just couldn't prevent him from averaging 4.7ypc, the best of the backs with 25+ carries. Reality doesn't support your "point".

"when BBQ was in, they could sniff out the pass or stuff that lame option-handoff"

Strange that Ben had 25 receptions for 239yds ranking 4th among all players. I assume the Grothe read option is what you mean by "lame option-handoff"? I wouldn't call Grothe running for 800+ yards for a 4.4ypc average a problem with most of the yards coming from that "lame" play, it's actually one of MG's strong suits. Does it work every time, of course not, what play does?  Are there things the offense needs to work on, yes, but it starts with better play by the O-line and fewer turnovers.

Opinions about how the offense should be run by wannabe OC's are always humorous reads, I do thank you for the laugh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

It appears you are using ad blocking tools.  This site is supported through ads.  Please disable in order to enjoy full access to The Bulls Pen.  Registration is free and reduces ads.