Re: No Running Game
 

Yes, that's exactly what I was saying. You did well to read between the lines there ... ummmm ... no. I wasn't questioning Pierre Thomas, which I had hoped was indicated by the rest of the context around it. I was saying that based on the logic we have crucified Mark Ingram on, we should also hold up Pierre Thomas. And because I don't think Pierre is to blame, I was using that to demonstrate the real problem definitely lies with the O-line. Having said that, the stats do not lie, on the ground we are very poor indeed.

Look at those down-and-1 conversions. They were worrying. You should be able to plough through them and carry on but we were at 4th down far too many times.

We are definitely managing the clock very well but let's understand why we are doing that. That's largely because we are getting the opposition offence off the field so damn quickly. That is our defence doing that great work. And yes Brees throwing the ball about with so much accuracy obviously helps a great deal but I would rather see a balanced game and an improved running game.

Re: No Running Game
 

Referring to the OP comment that we kept coming up short because of the running game, I blame the turf. That ground at Chicago is ass crap.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk - now Free

Re: No Running Game
 

I get what you're saying man, but there's really no need for concern as far as I can tell. The offense is doing a great job of taking whatever they're being given and executing very efficiently. They're still softening defenses and taking control of games.. though it did seem like they throttled down too soon today, but maybe it was just the bears D adjusting

Everyone assumes you need a running game to be able to really control time of possession, and would probably say that might be the biggest reason you want to have a running game. Clearly though, we are dominating time of possession without one, and still managing to keep enough balance that play action is an option.

Re: No Running Game
 

I may have given the false impression I am quite concerned :) I guess I am just on the quest for perfection. Whilst I don't want to say it, if we were to win the NFC I feel we would face the Broncos in the Superbowl and they just seem to be awesome in every aspect of the game!

I just love a bit of smash-mouth football when it's needed. Whether it is managing the game clock or just churning out a required yard to get a fresh set of downs and allow us to throw some deep passes to Jimmy Graham :)

Also I remain confused about Ingram. I defended him. Then slaughtered him. And now I really REALLY don't know if his horrendous stat line was anything to do with him :)

Re: No Running Game
 

THIS! ^^^

The purpose of a running game is to control the clock while moving the ball. The Saints are doing that tremendously with their short passing game. It beat the hell out of a straight run game.

Re: No Running Game
 

They are doing it pretty well with their long passing game as well! :)

Re: No Running Game
 

Yep, zero run game, and we lead the entire NFL in time of possession.

Re: No Running Game
 

At some point these guards have to start earning their checks...

Re: No Running Game
 

Without a run game, we are predictable. O-line needs more versatility.

Re: No Running Game
 

Normally I'd agree, but with a passing game that has Sproles, PT, Colston, Moore, Graham, Watson, Meachem, Stills and Toon, we're anything but predictable.