• Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!

Rushing Offense

SoldierGriz

SoldierGriz

Well-known member
DONOR
Last season:
11 games
1806 yards
4.88 YPC
20 TDs
164.2 yards per game
Ranked 59th in FCS

This season:
14 games
1942 yards
3.95 YPC
33 TDs
138 yards per game
Ranked 79th in FCS

I got these numbers directly from the NCAA stats page.

I don't know what to make of it. Face value, doesn't look like the trajectory they are looking for, but 3 more games and tougher schedule may account for the decrease in production. The TD number this year is fantastic. The YPC number this year, not so much.

Griz gotta continue to invest heavily in this area IMO.
 
Dalton Sneed
2018: 675 yds on 131 carries, 5.15/att
2019: 168 yds on 91 carries, 1.84/att

The big difference was the injury to Sneed.
 
grizindabox said:
Dalton Sneed
2018: 675 yds on 131 carries, 5.15/att
2019: 168 yds on 91 carries, 1.84/att

The big difference was the injury to Sneed.
Click to expand...

Good point. Makes me wonder about production next year...
 
grizindabox said:
Dalton Sneed
2018: 675 yds on 131 carries, 5.15/att
2019: 168 yds on 91 carries, 1.84/att

The big difference was the injury to Sneed.
Click to expand...

Two fold - Sneed did not run nearly as much or as productively, Montana did not call designed runs for him hardly at all even when he was healthy AND sacks are counted in team & individual rushing stats. Montana gave up 38 sacks for a loss of 213 yards.
 
Gave up 25 sacks last season vs 38 this season with 3 more games played. I'm no math wizard, but doesn't look good.

So, Sneed mobility, scheme, tougher schedule provide full context?
 
SoldierGriz said:
Gave up 25 sacks last season vs 38 this season with 3 more games played. I'm no math wizard, but doesn't look good.

So, Sneed mobility, scheme, tougher schedule provide full context?
Click to expand...

I would say yes. Not sure how many times he was sacked last year, but I think it would have been a lot more if not for his mobility.
 
SoldierGriz said:
Gave up 25 sacks last season vs 38 this season with 3 more games played. I'm no math wizard, but doesn't look good.

So, Sneed mobility, scheme, tougher schedule provide full context?
Click to expand...

I would say yes. All three of those things. What used to be Sneed scrambles for 6-15 yards became Sneed sacks....and just the much more difficult schedule to be sure.
 
2018: Sneed 675; Eastwood 514
2019: Knight 1030; Ostmo 319; Sneed 168

For all the reasons cited above; enormous difference in the run defenses played in '19 relative to '18. I like the sustainability of 2019 results. Having a 1000 yard RB is huge.
 
Tougher schedule and less Sneed running or not, still doesn't bode well for the progress of the O line. I know they improved some but need to take another step up to go deep in the playoffs. They had trouble handling Weber's very good defensive front and these are the calibre of defenses you meet in the playoffs. I attribute half of Sneed's Weber game interceptions to the O line.
 
Plainsman said:
Tougher schedule and less Sneed running or not, still doesn't bode well for the progress of the O line. I know they improved some but need to take another step up to go deep in the playoffs. They had trouble handling Weber's very good defensive front and these are the calibre of defenses you meet in the playoffs. I attribute half of Sneed's Weber game interceptions to the O line.
Click to expand...

These things take time. I feel like they were the biggest group of concern coming into the season, and overall they were far better than I was anticipating.
 
Htowngriz said:
Plainsman said:
Tougher schedule and less Sneed running or not, still doesn't bode well for the progress of the O line. I know they improved some but need to take another step up to go deep in the playoffs. They had trouble handling Weber's very good defensive front and these are the calibre of defenses you meet in the playoffs. I attribute half of Sneed's Weber game interceptions to the O line.
Click to expand...

These things take time. I feel like they were the biggest group of concern coming into the season, and overall they were far better than I was anticipating.
Click to expand...
Absolutely right. A good offensive line requires guys who are not only individually talented, but work well together. The line is the toughest thing to shore up, because you can't just sign one or two hotshots and be good to go. You have to recruit big boys and then give them time to gel as a unit. I'm sure it'll be priority for Hauck and we'll have a great one in the years ahead.
 
SoldierGriz said:
Last season:
11 games
1806 yards
4.88 YPC
20 TDs
164.2 yards per game
Ranked 59th in FCS

This season:
14 games
1942 yards
3.95 YPC
33 TDs
138 yards per game
Ranked 79th in FCS

I got these numbers directly from the NCAA stats page.

I don't know what to make of it. Face value, doesn't look like the trajectory they are looking for, but 3 more games and tougher schedule may account for the decrease in production. The TD number this year is fantastic. The YPC number this year, not so much.

Griz gotta continue to invest heavily in this area IMO.
Click to expand...

interesting stats. also worth considering is that the best running back on the 2018 team only played in 4 games.
 
Plainsman said:
Tougher schedule and less Sneed running or not, still doesn't bode well for the progress of the O line. I know they improved some but need to take another step up to go deep in the playoffs. They had trouble handling Weber's very good defensive front and these are the calibre of defenses you meet in the playoffs. I attribute half of Sneed's Weber game interceptions to the O line.
Click to expand...
More than half; they manhandled our OL; he was under constant pressure. Weber had our offensive tendencies well scouted by this game. Without a running game they were reading and jumping routes. They are a very, very good defensive team.
 
I don’t understand football as well as most of you but we had pretty good record with a tough schedule. Sneed was injured and not as effective when he came back. Akem missed games. We made the playoffs. A lot of improvement over last year. Something got fixed.
 
Rxgrzz said:
I don’t understand football as well as most of you but we had pretty good record with a tough schedule. Sneed was injured and not as effective when he came back. Akem missed games. We made the playoffs. A lot of improvement over last year. Something got fixed.
Click to expand...
10 dominant wins in that schedule was not easy and should be acknowledged as a great second step to where we want to be.
 
Rxgrzz said:
I don’t understand football as well as most of you but we had pretty good record with a tough schedule. Sneed was injured and not as effective when he came back. Akem missed games. We made the playoffs. A lot of improvement over last year. Something got fixed.
Click to expand...

You appear to understand better than a lot of other posts on egriz. Don't sell yourself short. Good brief summary.
 
kemajic said:
Rxgrzz said:
I don’t understand football as well as most of you but we had pretty good record with a tough schedule. Sneed was injured and not as effective when he came back. Akem missed games. We made the playoffs. A lot of improvement over last year. Something got fixed.
Click to expand...
10 dominant wins in that schedule was not easy and should be acknowledged as a great second step to where we want to be.
Click to expand...

Still believe there were a lot of injuries we could have sustained and gone even deeper than we did (even Akem’s, in the long run), but Sneed’s wasn’t one of them. His scrambling ability MADE his game. Taking that away, along with the O-line’s struggles against better teams, put us in a precarious position.
 
I’m sure the stats aren’t available anywhere, but it would be interesting to see how the numbers would look if we could subtract Sneed’s rushing yards out from both years.

Not all “rushing yards” are created equally, in my view. A scrambling quarterback who can extend plays and gain positive yardage when his receivers are covered is extremely valuable, obviously, but is not a substitute for a more traditional running game. A better measure of how our running game has progressed would be to compare our 2018 vs 2019 stats on designed running plays, without counting Sneed’s runs on pass plays that broke down.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top