How the Saints running game can be more effective
 

How the running game can be more effective...

Stop falling behind early and run the ball more. That pretty much covers it.

Block

Yep, I think we've fallen behind by 2 scores early in all 3 games haven't we? Not sure about Chicago though.

I agree Ingram getting the ball earlier in the game and more often but...

The problem is defense. If you fall behind and you have to score 40 points a game then you aren't going to use Ingram very much.

It makes sense when you see Ingram on the field the D will play the run first. With PT and sproles you don't know what is going to happen run / pass?

I still think it is early to worry about our running game... if you fix the D everything will be dandy.

Easy as that !!

He makes valid points - BUT so does eveyone on this thread DON'T BE BEHIND!!

Therefore our defense could do a lot for our running game if we weren't behind in the first quarter so much....

I agree, but I would also add that it isn't just on the D. Our offense has been slow to start this year. Not necessarily going three and out on the first drive, but we haven't really gotten our offensive "rhythm" going until the second half this year.

I agree with papz and strato but if Brees is on fire as he was against the Texans then why run?

That was the first thing that I thought of too Strat. Get the offensive line to block and create some holes. It's that simple.

While having balance is ideal, I have no issues with it being lopsided one way or the other as long as we're moving the ball and scoring points.

We lose and Brees throws the ball 50 times... why didn't we run the ball more?
We lose and Brees throws 30 times, why didn't we throw the ball more?
We fumble pounding the football, why didn't get leave it in Brees' hands?
We throw an INT, why didn't get run the ball in that instance?

Conclusion: Don't lose. The media/fans will be unhappy and criticize your every move.

we are averaging 4.4 ypc

you know how we can run the ball more effectively? try running the ball

blaming the line? do you guys realize how effective we actually are on the ground?

we almost average a first down every 2 runs

Actually 4.2, which is about average (we're 13th in the league)

New Orleans Saints Team Leaders | Teams | NFL.com

66 rushes for 288 yards

4.36 ypc which i rounded using my 4th grade math

either way it doesnt matter.

we can run the ball. we could last year too.

you know what the problem is? its that we just dont run

I say just do what it takes to win. Run,Pass, sack fumble.

The problem is situations. We cannot and do not and have not for YEARS been able to impose our will with the running game. You can talk YPC 'til the dry cows come home. Recent history shows we can't run for that 1-3 yards when we need it most. Period. That is it. That is all. Anything else is damn lies and statistics.

statistics are the only facts.

you can dismiss them but thats because you dont want to believe the truth. fact is that ingram takes more short yardage carries and his ypc reflects that. 3.6 ypc is great for a short yardage back that gets most of his carried when the defense knows we are going to run

no we dont impose any running games because we dont run the ball enough. we are a pass first...pass second...and maybe run the ball third but probably pass team

ignore facts all you want but ur fighting a losing battle and ur going to end up blaming the wrong ppl

Dear God. Whatever man. :dunce:

you wanna debate then debate.

you wanna pretend like ur right? defend ur stance with some facts that are going to back up ur claims

Here are some stats for you:

http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/team/_/stat/rushing"]2011 NFL Team Rushing Stats - National Football League - ESPN

I know what I see. I see a team that is not able to impose its will with the running game. You see what you want to see. Stats allow you to do that.

There are teams below our mid-level ranking who actually run for more YPC than we do. You know what that means you can do with your YPC right? Right. I think the younguns over at SR miss you. Later holmes.

You run against an inferior defense. Of the last three games, all three were formative, therefore we were playing catch-up with the pass.

If the game is progressing in our favor, we'll see more running plays, but we have to score on our first or second series and get ahead!

But for God's sake, the game is not out of reach until we are up by 17 to 24 points. Keep scoring. I don't care if you do that with the run game or passing game.

Pedal to the metal for a full 60 minutes!

Alaska

ur looking at it completely wrong and SR has nothing to do with this

teams can run for more ypc but over the course of a season the teams that can run the ball effectively will show statistically. last year we managed over 4 ypc throughout the season and still didnt run the ball. that was supposedly because of injuries.

now we are healthy and are still doing well running the ball but fail to commit to it on any level.

stats allow me to use completely unbiased facts to support an opinion that ive come up with. u ignore the stats because they dont support an opinion that youve come up with...so find something else because so far it just sounds like ur wrong but wont admit it

Well, if we have a 4.4 average YPC, then basically we win if we win the coin toss and don't fumble?

I think not.

Fact is, you don't run just to say you did. You run if and when it's effective or when you want to keep a pass-rushing defense honest.

I think we can improve our running game by getting Ingram a little Northeast and Northwest time, especially since we cannot stabilize our O-line. That way he benefits from blocking by TEs and other backs.

I firmly believe that WITH A HEAD OF STEAM, Mark Ingram will be a beast, but he needs to get forward of the line to explode.

I keep having nightmares of that last play against Green Bay...

Recurring nightmares...

Alaska

of course you dont just run for the sake of running. however, we do need to establish some form of ground game. we turn the ball over so quickly with dropped passes or incompletions. at least with running the ball you can keep the ball.

something else of note is that we run more play actions than most other teams but we run the ball so few times. teams caught on last year and if we continue to play action without trying to run we are going to start seeing our sack totals go up again

Thanks little man, but I don't need a lesson okay? Few people (if any) here do. The kids at SR may have caused you to think otherwise. You brought up YPC as your 'evidence', not me. I just showed you were you screwed up...with stats.

You can spin the stats any way you want. That's what people do with stats. That's why people have debated using them in ever facet of human history and why the debate will continue. A truly unbiased opinion considers that. You do not. I am and have been aware of this. But you aren't the only one. The internet is full of folks like that. ;)

This isn't about me admitting I'm wrong or professing I'm right. We don't run the ball very well. If you're a numbers guy you can see that if by nothing else that looking at where we rank...by the numbers. Of course the numbers don't tell the whole story - they NEVER do - which most of us concede. Most of us...with a few noted exceptions...

The last few posts in this thread will show that to a reasonable person.

Now...looking at those stats I just pointed you to, I'd say the Raiders are a damn good running football team. In a league of 32, the Saints are middle of the pack. If that's good to you then okay. Clearly we have different standards with which we measure success. We struggle to run the ball when we need to. Period. Stats over the course of the season will show you that. Or you could just watch the game.

Either way I don't care what you do.

what does SR have to do with anything? the majority of posters here have or have had an SR account. several posters were banned from SR and hold obvious grudges. maybe thats why you are so hateful towards them

ur biggest issue is you are comparing us to other teams around the league. who cares how many ypc the raiders have. the fact of the matter is that WE can do it successfully

5 ypc is an amazing average but 4 ypc is more than enough. teams that run more find more success running. its not necessarily because they are better at it. its more likely that the higher amount of attempts leads to more long runs. we rarely run so we cant establish any sort of consistancy or threat

NFL.com, ESPN, and CBS all show 4.2 (77 rushes for 299) which by my math is actually 4.152 yards per carry, rounding up to 4.2, which places us 13th, or middle of the pack.


NFL Stats: by Team Category

Stats: NFL Rushing Offense - CBSSports.com

like i said. it really doesnt matter whether it 4.4 or 4.2

we can argue semantics all you want. 66 runs from our running backs. kneel downs and scrambles arent considered designef run plays although they show up in stats as runs.

our end around from meachem would only increase our ypc because it was a designed run

4+ypc is more than sufficient to be considered a solid run game

I'm gonna run the middle ground in this argument. We have yet to display a balanced attack. With the effectiveness of our passing attack you would expect that when we do run to mix things up in a drive it would have better results as defenses have to respect the pass. The issue is that we run almost exclusively in predictable situations. Yet we still manage respectable averages and results when doing so. I think we will see some games where the run game becomes dominant and Payton rides it. And also we will see many more where it stays the way it is, a secondary tool to our passing attack sometimes forgotten. Hopefully be seasons end Payton feels them both enough to have great balance and excel at all situations against opponents. We can do it....again.

So how does that compare to other teams stats if you take out kneel downs and scrambles? You can't just alter stats for one team and ignore the other 31.

My guess is it still puts us about middle of the pack in YPC. We can do better, which was the whole point of this thread.

no. the point of the thread was to show how we can be more effective running the ball...not how we compare to other teams.

we can be more effective by running more because we do find success on the ground when we actually try.

trouble is our rushing attempts, not our rushing average

No, there isn't really any "trouble". We do OK running the ball, but we can do better.

More of the same still puts us middle of the pack.

You are correct that we probably should run the ball more, but when you fall behind early its difficult.

Also when the other team expects us to run, we haven't looked that good. When we're 2 scores down, its easier to pad rushing averages since your opponent is expecting pass moreso than the run.

We can certainly improve.

Ill start *****ing that we don't run enough if we lose a game because we are not running enough. Up to now we have played from behind and win because we DONT run the ball. Having balance is a good general rule in the NFL, but it does not necessarily apply to us. We are an exception to the rule in this regard. People apply that rule to average teams or the majority of the teams in the NFL. We are not an average team, and our offense is unlike most if not all offenses in the NFL historically, so this rule does not apply to us as much as it does to other teams. Now if teams start figuring us out because we are one dimensional and Payton refuses to give the run a fair shake then I will question him. As for now any problems we have had have nothing whatsoever to do with us not running enough.

And that's where the rubber meets the road. Good running teams can run it, period. We cannot. Certainly we haven't proven that we can. Saying we are a good run team and offering YPC is a joke. Saying we are a good running team except that we don't try is a joke. There is no evidence to support that except that we don't try which means what, we just poof up some proof?

If we don't base it on other teams, then do we base it on the calories in a jar of peanut butter? Good God, I swear some people really WILL argue with a stop sign.

When it's 3rd down and 3 and we line up in the "I" and everybody and their brother knows we're going to run the ball...anybody here who says he doesn't have his doubts (based on any damn thing you want to base it on) is full of it. Those doubts have more to do with our line than they do with any back on our roster.

Do we have our moments? Yep. We have some damn good running backs. Are we consistent? Hell no we are not. We can't say we're a good running team because we just somehow know we 'would' be if we were to try harder. If I had tried harder I'd be an astronaut.

Hey look everybody. I'm an astronaut. :doh:

Canton, you used to post a lot here and at the time you seemed to get along with most of the posters. I'm not sure what happened but now when you post it smacks of arrogance and contempt.

Most of us are not interested in feculent behavior.

Chris Ivory

If he's healthy, we GOT a running game.

I just don't see that happening. His running style lends himself to injury. Hes got to play smarter and not rely purely on his brute force. If he can do that maybe, but I am not holding out hope. I will be thrilled if he does work out, and will consider it an awesome bonus, but I am not holding my breath.

Don't you have some prep to do, The Dude?!

LOL ;-P