Matt Forte's touchdown run versus the Buccaneers

Sorry this was a little late, I've been pretty busy. Right, diagram time again.

I'll get the disclaimer out of the way first and explain that as always with these diagrams the alignments can't be 100% accurate through virtue of not having enough room in the drawing space to lay out a field to scale and the inability to draw scale sized little blobs etc. The balance is between making things clear and getting them lined up perfectly, so something has to give at times. I'm also hampered by relying on TV camera angles to judge distances etc.

With that out of the way, we're going to look at Matt Forte's touchdown run against the Buccaneers. We'll start by looking at the offensive formation and the defensive front;

So this is basically the look that the Bears got after sending their second tight end in motion to the strong side (as indicated by the dotted line). The defense shifted, with the weak safety starting to creep down a little and the defensive line shuffiling across to adjust from a relatively balanced formation to one that favours the strong side.

This look is perfect for the Bears. The fact that the strong safety was actually starting to drop back a little deep (slowing his reaction to the play) just made it all the more so. What the Bears are going to do is run a power sweep play to the right side, pulling two offensive linemen to lead the running back around the edge. It's what the Bears have been doing all season and they're the best team at it right now, mainly through virtue of the fact that they're one of the few true power running teams left in the NFL. It's certainly done no harm to Matt Forte's rushing numbers.

Now I'll make no secret of the fact that I love this play. There are just so many things about it that are interesting;

- In an age of zone running schemes it's fun to watch a more old fashioned power running play,
- It has a slightly quirky twist, something you don't see a lot of these days, 
- The blocking on the backside of the play,
- The whole concept of "smash mouth", "power" football,

I'll start with that last point because it's kind of a personal hobby horse of mine to climb on and complain about. Basically people mostly use the term "smash mouth football" in one of two ways, either a) to deride this style of play or b) to suggest that this style of play requires a degree of physical brutality and "manliness" that is beyond the more "finesse" orientated teams. Both arguments are as bad as each other and both fuel each others side of the debate. Both are also wrong.

People using the term in the manner described in A are trying to infer that somehow power football, or indeed running the football in general, is somehow a dying art and the reserve only of those coaches who aren't intelligent or daring enough to design fancy passing schemes. The term "three yards and a cloud of dust" often follow closely behind, in the rather naive and misplaced assumption that offensive coordinators calling power plays are merely holding onto the ball in an effort to not lose the game and to grind down the defense. The fact that Forte ran this one in for a 32-yd touchdown and could have gone further if there was more field to run with tells you everything you need to know about the big play potential of this running style.

On the other hand, people using the term in the manner described in B are trying to infer that power football is the preserve of tough guys, of coaches and players who like nothing more than grinding the opponents facemasks into the turf and then stamping on them for good measure. The implicit suggestion is often that "spread" offenses would never be manly enough to run this type of play, despite the fact that almost all "spread" teams have a power play in their playbooks. It also tends to show a lack of appreciation as to how difficult some of the blocks are, requiring leverage and technique over strength, possibly more so than in a zone play.

Which is second thing that interets me. After spending the last couple of weeks describing many of the details surrounding zone running plays and how ubiqitous they are in the NFL, it's nice to get a look at some "old school" running, if you'll excuse a slightly vague and over used phrase. At the minute the Bears seem to be almost single handedly keeping this style of running alive in the open field.

This isn't just your standard running play though. Normally if you're going to pull offensive linemen then you tend to pull the two guards, who are usually your smallest and most agile linemen. In this case the Bears are going to pull their center and right guard, a pretty unusual occurence, but a welcome and fun change up to see.

Lastly they're going to do something a little risky, but something I think more teams could do with trying; they're going to leave the backside defensive linemen completely unblocked. People always moan about numbers in the box against the run, but one of the best ways to defeat this is to simply leave one of the defensive linemen unblocked. Because this is a play that attacks the edge of the defensive front, you can afford to leave that backside man unblocked because he has no choice but to "stay at home" and play his contain assignment. If he doesn't, and instead persistently comes crashing down the line after the running back, that's when you switch to your constraint plays and start running QB keepers and bootleg passes out the backside.

On that note, let's get down to the details of the blocking scheme and see what's really going on here;

What the Bears are trying to do is to create something of a traffic jam up the middle of the defense, while at the same time trying to get some of their big bodied offensive linemen to the outside where they can block either linebackers or secondary men. It's the running game equivalent of creating a mismatch, like asking Vince Wilfork or Albert Haynesworth to cover a tight end like Jimmy Graham or Tony Gonzalez down the field in the passing game.

It starts by blocking down with the right tackle and tight end, marked with the purple arrows, a color which in retrospect I now regret using. These two players have advantageous angles with which to crash down on the defensive tackle and defensive end to their side. This is part of what I was talking about when I said that this play involves technique and leverage. These two offensive linemen have to get out of their stances quickly at the snap and attack their men from the side on, using their footwork and positioning to seal the two big defensive linemen to the inside.

Then we get the right guard and the center pulling, marked with the light blue arrows. They're obviously important, but we're going to skip past them just for a second.

For now we need to quickly peek at the blocks of the left guard and the left tackle, marked with the green arrows. The left guard probably has the toughest block out of any here. He has to get across the face of the the nose tackle "N" and cut that guy off. Again, this is not a block that really relies on great strength, it's more about speed and positioning. He has to get himself in front of the tackle and stop him from penetrating into the backfield through the hole vacated by the center and right guard, which in this case he did superbly, using his shoulder to block off the tackle who then gets caught up in the wash created by the down blocks of the right tackle and tight end.

The left tackle goes up to get the backside "Will" linebacker. This is a size mismatch in favour of the offense, but it's also something of a speed mismatch in favour of the defense. Luckily for the left tackle, all he really needs to do is to get his hands on the linebacker and disrupt his path across the field. You can't just ignore a 300 pound man trying to push you over as you run and in this case the tackle does manage to get his hands on the backer, knocking him flat on his butt.

We also need to touch on the block of the wide receiver to the play side and that second tight end. The second tight end runs right up and out, pulling the "Sam" linebacker away with him, who he then blocks. This is one of the differences that you can create by playing around with formations. In an "I" formation for example, that second tight end would be replaced by a fullback in the backfield, which would completely change the blocking scheme on the edge, so maybe one day when I catch a team running this play out of the "I", I'll draw it up then and we'll go over that.

The wide receiver on the playside also has a different block to make depending on how the corner over him is aligned. In this case the corner is sitting well back, which commonly would prompt the receiver to ignore him and block down on the strong safety, but as the strong safety is backing off even further, it makes sense for the wide receiver to take that corner, which he does.

Finally then we come to the blocks of the center and right guard. As you can see in the diagram above, they pull laterally across the field, trying to get outside of the wash of bodies in the middle. At this point they're looking for the first "color", that is a jersey of the opposing teams color, to show which they will then attack and block. This explains how having that second tight end in makes a difference. If this were an "I" formation with a fullback in the backfield then the right guard would likely end up getting to the edge first and blocking that "Sam" linebacker as he came down hill.

As it turns out, the linemen find themselves in a wide open space between the wash of bodies to the inside and the one-on-one block of the tight end to the outside. They have the "Mike" linebacker coming down to meet them (I imagine making a large gulping noise as he did) and the weak safety trying to sneak his way across from the backside, because secondary players only tackle from a position where they can't get hurt ;)

Let's put up another diagram so we can get a better look at this;

As you can see, the Mike linebacker now has a difficult choice to make. He can try and take on the block of a 290-300 pound lineman running at full speed, in the hope that he might be able to get around him or at least get a hand on the running back, while also knowing that if he fails then he's going to end up taking a very painful tumble. Or he can choose the lesser of two evils and just try to cut the offensive linemens legs, knowing that it might result in him getting crushed but at least he's taken out a blocker and then someone else can make the tackle.

In this case the Mike backer tried going one-on-one... and the right guard decided to cut the backer for a change, a situation which didn't end particularly well for the backer.

This means that the only person left who can realistically make the tackle and stop this play from going for a first down (the strong safety is too deep) is the weak safety who is desperately rushing across to make the play. The only thing between him and the ball carrier is the small matter of the pulling center. As you might expect, the center meets the challenge of the safety head on... or rather shoulder on, driving him back with a forceful blow and damn near knocking him off his feet. The end result of all that looks a little something like this;

Anyone that feels the need at this point to put on their best Vince Lombardi voice and shout "... what we're trying to get is a seal here - and a seal here - and try to run this play in the alley!", well you go right ahead. Because that's exactly what we're looking for and it's exactly what the Bears got. The Sam linebacker and the corner are sealed to the outside, and the weak safety and Will linebacker are sealed to the inside. This leaves Forte with a clean alley to run through.

Now it comes down to the strong safety to try and save the touchdown, but this is where running backs really earn their money in one-on-one situations with defenders. Forte cuts inside the safety almost effortlessly as he flies across to make the tackle. I'm not sure if Forte has been paid yet.

He still has to dodge a few more attemtped tackles from players that have managed to get off their blocks (*stares evily at the offensive linemen for not finishing off their blocks and staying on their assignments until the whistle*) but Forte manages to dodge these and make the endzone to put the Bears up 7-0.

So there you have it, the power sweep. This is your real "smash mouth" football; a series of difficult but well executed blocks, using technique and leverage to control the defensive line, while creating blocking mismatches of big offensive linemen against second and third level defenders. It's just a little odd that a tactic perfected and made famous by the Packers is now being used by the Bears!

Speaking of the Packers, in case you missed it, that link I put in above ("best Vince Lombardi voice") will take you to an article I wrote a long while back. The main article is a bitch and moan fest about hitting and fines in the NFL (and strippers), but if you scroll down past that you'll get to three videos of Vince Lombardi coaching the Packer Sweep.

As for the Forte run, mercifully someone has uploaded it to YouTube which you can watch here. In the event that link ends up dead due to copyright violations or something, here's the link to the NFL.com video. Enjoy the advert. Both videos show the Fox broadcast, the commentary of which made me laugh when the commentator complains about the pulling linemen getting "caught up on the outside". Or as it's otherwise known to me and you; blocking.

There is also a link here to my recent article about a Frank Gore run against the Lions, which as I mentioned in that article demonstrates a compliment to the power play.

So I hope you enjoyed it. If so, share a link/facebook/e-mail someone etc. And I will see you tomorrow for my week 8 picks. Enjoy your day

The Inside Zone

And I promise I wont complain about Eli Manning this time.

Before we look at the inside zone you need to have read the article on the outside zone, as references will be made back to it. The reason for this is because the plays are so similar.

Really the big difference between the two is the intention of where to send the running back. In the outside zone play, the running back uses the position of the tight end as his aiming mark. He makes a mental note of the spot where the tight end is lined up, and at the snap of the ball is running towards that spot. The goal of the offensive line is then to get outside of the defense and pin them in, allowing the back to get around the end of the line and upfield. Really, if the back has to cut inside then it's sort of a "plan B" situation, often as a reaction to the end tackle having been beaten to the outside.

The inside zone does kind of the opposite. Now the goal is to attack the gap between the offensive guard and the offensive tackle. At no point really should the back find himself running outside of the tackle. He has to get inside and get penetration through the middle of the defense. This play compliments the outside zone for precisely that reason; when the defense starts to cheat and overplay the outside zone, it makes it easier to block them with the inside zone.

The inside zone also shares many of the benefits that the outside zone does in terms of being 'Front Ambiguous', that is to say that it can be used against a wide variety of defensive fronts without the need for any major changes in the way the play is blocked. This helps to reduce the number of plays in the offense, which in turn permits greater repetition of the remaining plays in practice, honing the skills of the players to a finer edge.

To start with then we need to look at the rules that the offensive linemen use. The good thing about this is that they use precisely the same rules as they do with the outside zone. If you have a down lineman covering any part of your body then you are "covered". If not, you are "uncovered". And just like in the outside zone the linemen will decide whether to work together or whether to work alone based on these rules.

The uncovered linemen must work to their playside, helping their covered team mate if necessary. The covered linemen must check their team mate to the backside (or non-playside, if that makes it easier for you). If that man is also covered, you're on your own. If he's uncovered, he'll help you out.

And this is where the main difference comes in. In the outside zone, the preference was to get covered linemen who had help to come out of their stance, hit the defensive linemen over them, and then work up to the linebacker level, letting their backside team mate take over the block on the defensive linemen. The covered linemen with help only really stayed on his original man if that defender made a hard move to the playside.

Now we want our offensive linemen to focus a little more on blocking the defensive linemen. There is no major rush to get up to get wide or to get up onto the linebackers. The uncovered linemen in the outside zone would take a very much horizontal first step, looking to get across and cut off the D-line. Now all our linemen can afford to take a slightly shorter, more controlled first step that goes up towards the D-line, as opposed to laterally across their face.

At this point we'll do a diagram  review, just so we can get a better idea of what we're looking at;

Hopefully now you have a better idea of what the offensive linemen are doing and what they're looking for.

The key to this play is double teams on the defensive linemen, then working up to the linebackers. If the D-lineman goes inside then the backside linemen will take over the block and the playside linemen will work up to the next level and get the linebacker. If the D-lineman goes outside, then the playside linemen stays on him and the backside guy will go up to the linebacker. And if he tries to stay head up on the playside linemen, then the two will work together to drive him back, until one of them can come off and get the linebacker, depending on how things pan out.

The next thing to look at is the running back. In the outside zone, the running back was using the tight end as his original land mark and then he made the decision to cut based on a read of the second defensive lineman to the playside of the center. If that guy went hard outside then he switched his read to the first down defensive lineman and read that guy.

Now with the inside zone we want the running back to start off by aiming at the "B" gap between the playside guard and the playside tackle, using that as his landmark. Some teams like the running back to make a more specific read of the defensive front and then aim at either the inside hip of the tackle or the outside hip of the guard, but I personally find that cumbersome and largely irrelevant for this discussion.

The decision as to where the running back will end up cutting is based on the first down defensive linemen to the playside of the center (remember in the outside zone he read the second man). If this defender works his way to the outside (playside) then the back cuts inside of him. If he tries to drive inside then the back works to get outside of him.

Here's what it looks like;

So in this case the running back reads the block of the defensive tackle and cuts off of him. If that man presses to the playside then the back cuts up inside. If the man presses inside then he cuts around him and up through the resulting wide gap between the guard and the tight end. The block on the "Mike" middle linebacker is determined by the actions of the Nose Tackle. If he drives hard laterally and blocks off the center then that will leave the backside guard with the opportunity to go up and get the backer. If the guard and center can pin him and stop him moving, that will allow the guard to take over the block and the center can go up for the Mike.

There are also two more things we need to be aware of here. First, if the Nose tackle does press hard across the face of the center then that would give him the opportunity to tackle the running back if the back tries to cut inside. For this reason, the back has the option to read the nose tackle after making his first read and to then cut behind him.

This is doable, but risky, as it presents the opportunity for the back to end up dancing about behind the line of scrimmage when really one of the mantras of zone running is "one cut and get up field!", the idea being to remove the chance of negative plays. How much freedom the back has to cut behind the nose really depends on the coaches and their judgement, which will likely be influenced by the quality of the back.

A bigger, slower running back is unlikely to be given too much leeway, especially if he's young and/or inexperienced in this system. A smaller back, with much better cutting ability and/or more experience in the system is likely to be given the green light to cut back as far as he sees fit.

The second thing of note is that some teams have tried to completely avoid the situation above where the back has to potentially read the Nose Tackle by devising methods for making checks at the line of scrimmage to change the play a little.

The first of these methods is to ask the playside guard and tackle to execute a "fold" block. This is where the offensive tackle blocks down on the defensive tackle who is covering the "B" gap, and the offensive guard pulls back off the line and goes around the block of the tackle and up to get the Sam linebacker. The second solution is to simply run away from that defensive tackle, flipping the play as it were, by the quarterback making a check at the line.

The best method I've seen of doing this is to use a "Red/White" call. Obviously you can use any two names you like, but the Red/White concept seems to have gained some traction with many coaches at all three levels. The basic explanation of this is that when a "B" gap is covered (even if just partially) with a defensive tackle, that's referred to as Red. When a "B" gap is uncovered (there will still be a linebacker lurking about 5 or so yards back), then that is referred to as White. Ideally you want to run to the white side and away from the red side. Here's how it looks when you run away from that covered "B" gap;

As you can see we now get the full back going up to get the Will linebacker and we now have two double teams right up the middle of the defense. Now the running back would read the Nose tackle as his first read. If he has to cut back inside of him he'll have a much easier time of it, thanks to the double team on the other defensive tackle.

So there you go, the inside zone. Coupled with the outside zone and a few other runs you can actually put together quite a formidable rushing attack without having to have a hundred different ways to run the ball. The play action possibilities are also pretty good, especially when you substitute the Fullback for a second tight end and start messing around with things like lining him up on the playside and having him run all the way across the formation to block the back side of the play.

Maybe next week we'll take a look at just that?

Tomorrow I'll be back to look at Tom Brady and hopefully I can dig out some video clips to show you what I was talking about with his vision. Till then, enjoy your day.

Dive/Toss play

So I just have time to throw this up before I must depart to the land of sheep. No, not Wales. I mean going to sleep. Ok this is going all kinds of wrong. Let's just get to the point.

One play in particular intrigued me during the Eagles/Falcons game last Sunday night and I want to throw it out there using my new diagram drawing skills (uh huh, stop laughing). The reason it caught my eye is because it shows that the old styles of football never really seem to die. They just disappear and then reappear every now and again.

The play in question is a fake toss into a dive play, from a split backs formation, that harks back to the sort of seventies and eighties style of football. Here's the picture;

And no, I still haven't figured out to stop Blogger from blurring the ass out of the image. But there you go. I even coloured the offense in a shade of green to represent the Eagles... albeit in a shade of green not entirely representative of the Eagles uniforms. I've also omitted the three wide receivers and the corners covering them, because this is a running play and receivers not named Heinz Ward never seem to block these days anyway.

What you can see is the center and left guard doubling down on one of the defensive tackles. The Left tackle is supposed to pull and trap block the other defensive tackle. The right guard pulls to help influence the defense and then takes the end, or if he pushes too far upfield then he ignores him and goes for the "S" backer. The right offensive tackle comes up and then cuts inside to wall off the mike linebacker. Now it is a simple matter for the quarterback to pivot out, fake the toss to the running back on the right who immediately darts outward at the snap, before actually handing off to the left back, marked in the image with a blue line.

It's a simple yet cunning play, reminiscent of a bygone era, right down to the formation. What always makes me chuckle as well (being the sad bastard that I am) is that this is precisely the kind of play teams like the Steelers would use, only for them to be described as a "downhill, smash mouth, power football" team. Except this play is anything but smash mouth. It's a finesse play, based on angles.

You have a double team. You have a tackle pulling to trap one of the defensive tackles. You have a guard pulling to trap an end. You have another tackle heading upfield to blindside the poor "Mike" backer. This is not grinding it out on the ground football. This is a play that involves deception, quick feet, precision practice and great technique. It is the complete opposite of "ground and pound" as far as the running game is concerned.

And that's why I love this kind of play so much. It speaks of the versatility of the old split back sets. And it demonstrates the creativity, tactics and finesse that a running game can possess. A lot of people associate running the football with being an inferior method of moving the ball. They consider it a method for the dumb knuckle heads of the footballing world, compared to the skill and artistry of the passing game. I believe those people simply don't understand the running game and the true depth that it offers.

Of course we'll gloss over the fact for now that the left tackle missed his block, and as a result Falcons defensive tackle Peria Jerry got a clean hit on Vick who then fumbled the ball away...

Hey, there are good running games and there are bad running games. Then there's the Eagles.

On a quick note, you're more likely to see the play above run out of the I-formation in the modern NFL and indeed it has been making a strong comeback in recent years.

On another quick note, I'll be back Saturday night with my picks for the weekend.

Rushing for a Great Defense

As a 49'ers fan, I'm always interested when the name Josh Morgan pops up. By all accounts, the 2nd year wide out has excelled in training and could have a good future ahead of him. Which is why I was a little annoyed that Crabtree waltzed straight in after his holdout and took the starting job from Morgan. Yes Crabtree is good, but I don't like the message it sends to the team. Well, now Morgan gets a shot again as Issac Bruce has suffered an ankle injury, which is why he missed Thursdays game against the Bears and now Morgan has been promoted to a starting job. I think this can only be a good thing for the 49'ers. Now that's not a knock on Bruce. I still think he's a good player. But the trouble is the QB's in San Fran' dont seem too keen on passing to the guy. This means Vernon Davis and Michael Crabtree get all the attention, and consequently, all the coverage. Hopefully Morgans appearance will balance the receiving corps out and create opportunities for the other guys. But the fact that I'm talking about this at all makes me very surprised. When Mike Singletary was announced as head coach, it was made reasonably clear that he was looking to run the football and play great defense. When he hired Offensive Co-ordinator Jimmy Raye from the Jets (where he was a running backs coach) it was made very obvious that the 49'ers were going to run the ball and play great defense. And yet this year, it's been pass happy all the way. Now, that's worked ok, it's scored touchdowns, but it does kind of smack me a little of stupidity by not using the best offensive asset; pro bowl caliber RB Frank Gore. But what's more intriguing for me right now is the phrase that I used twice above; "... run the football and play great defense." What is is about running the football so much that intrinsically lends itself to great defense, or vice versa? Well I'll tell you what, I've got some spare time so we'll have a look and see shall we? The draft: To throw the football a lot and be a pass orientated offense you need three things: 1) An intelligent and quick thinking QB who can read coverages, make the right decisions, and throw the full range of passes. 2) A big left tackle, with quick feet and great pass protection technique. 3) A standout WR with great hands, speed, and route technique. To get those elements you're going to need to pick high in the draft (usually) or trade high picks for quality talent. This is especially true for the left tackle, as there's not many big guys with sufficiently nimble feet. That means that your defense plays second fiddle. They'll have to wait to get corners, linemen and linebackers, usually resulting in a reduction in quality. Conversely, to run the football a lot you need three different things: 1) A solid RB tandem. Usually one guy who is smaller and quicker, and a larger guy who has more power. There are some backs that can do both (e.g. Maurice Jones-Drew). 2) An offensive line built more for push than fancy footwork. 3) A QB who is good enough to punish defenses for playing consistently with 8 in the box. To get those elements you can pretty much scoop up any two RB's in the draft. Seriously, high picks will probably be better in overall quality, but the gulf in talent is no where near what it is for some other positions. The offensive line requires big guys. Quick feet and technique are still important, but not nearly as much as they are for pass protection. And the QB need not be a stunner. He'll probably be doing a lot of play faking and quick throws, but he's not going to see anywhere near the amount of diverse coverages that a Tom Brady or Peyton Manning would. You can dip lower, much lower, for these players. That leaves your high end draft picks free to go after stellar pass rushers, run stoppers, or shutdown corners. Your defense gets the better end of the talent stick. If you're trading or dipping into free agency, you can spend much more of your salary cap on top defensive guys, now that you're not splashing out high end money for two of the most expensive positions in football (QB & LT). The Clock: So it's game day, you're ready, all your new draft picks have been slotted into place. You look across the field and standing their is one of the best offensive units in the land. They can't wait to hit the field and post gaudy numbers against you. What are you gonna do about it? The simplest answer is, don't give them the ball. Run it, build a drive that chews half a quarter off the clock and then score. By running the football you keep the clock ticking. The more it ticks, the less time there is for the opposition to play offense. Less time = less plays. Less plays = less gains. This is kind of the old argument about statistics. The sheer fact that your opponents don't have a sufficient number of snaps to post 300 yards passing means that your defense will appear statistically superior against the pass compared to some other teams. And without as many snaps, teams tend to lean on their pass game for fear of falling behind. This exposes the QB to sacks and interceptions, with every incompletion boosting the defensive stats further. In addition, your defense gets more time on the sideline when you control the ball, allowing those excellent, if a little overweight, pass rushers to get some much needed rest (and oxygen). The Turnovers: We're talking both offensive and defensive here. Your high round defensive draft picks should be better at creating turnovers. They should force more three and outs, forcing the opposition to punt (essentially a turnover on downs. Of sorts). But more importantly here is how offensive turnovers affect your defense. The reality is, teams generally throw more interceptions than they have lost fumbles. Running the football simply doesn't turnover the ball as much. That means less extra possession's handed to the opposition, which your defense would otherwise have to face. But even more critically here, most fumbles are recovered near the spot of the original fumble. The field position change is usually very little (but not always, fumbles do get returned for touchdowns). When balls are intercepted however, you tend to get much bigger changes in field position and a higher incidence of touchdown returns. And it's the field position that hurts your defense the most. It instantly gives the opposition a shorter field with a better chance of scoring. Again this another stat linked situation. Your defense concedes more touchdowns/field goals in a game than it's really worth. In addition to the three above there are two other factors that I think are important, but these are mainly subjective factors and as such there are no real stats that we can look at to prove or disprove them: The Motivation: A primarily run based offense is not going to produce 5 or 6 touchdowns a game. Not unless the opponent is really bad (*cough* Browns). Therefore I think mentally as a defensive player, you have to appreciate that the offense will not bail you out if you make a mistake. In your mind, you must understand that a lot hinges on your ability to carry out your role effectively. I think this extra motivation helps push defensive players to excel. The Coach: This one is very subjective. But chances are, if you're a very run minded Head coach, you're also a bit more conservative. This is likely to spill into your defense, especially if your the co-ordinator. That means you're unlikely to take some of the big chances that you see aggressive defenses take.... ones which often get exploited for big gains. Your more likely to sit back, stifle the offense, and wait for it to make mistakes of it own, and take only calculated risks at the appropriate moment. You give up less big plays, your defense gives up less points. So there we have it, my take on why running the football and playing great defense are so often linked together. I could be wrong, I could be half right. Use your noggin and make up your own mind.

Running off my mouth.

Ok so today I'm gonna look at running the football, and why there's a chance it might become en vogue once more. First of all I'd like to clarify that I'm not talking about Miami's 'Wildcat'. The reason is simple. Without a true QB in there they lack any immediate passing threat. Their passing game basically consists of long, drawn out plays involving plenty of play action. And teams are learning quickly that if you can force the edges with your cornerbacks and play two deep safeties, you can shut the Wildcats pass attack down. No, what I'm talking about is true power running. "I" formations and the like, with a fullback in the backfield leading the way. Pulling guards and pounding the rock. Every team in the NFL seems to have packages for this (accept maybe New England and Indianapolis). But few teams do it often and do it properly. Two teams that stand out are the Tennessee Titans and the Carolina Panthers. Last season these two teams went 13-3 and 12-4 respectively for a combined tally of 25-7. They both bombed in the playoffs. And that's actually a point worth noting. During the regular season they both ran the ball. A lot. They leaned on their respective two headed rushing attacks to get the job done for them. Then in the playoffs both teams made a cardinal error. They tried to pass to win. Both teams asked their QB to win it for them and both failed. Miserably. Scary thing is, it's been a running theme again for them this season (no pun intended). Neither team looked at it's mistakes. Neither team has sat down and thought to themselves "Hey, we did great running the ball last year, why are we throwing it this year?". As a consequence, they now have a combined record of 4-10 having played 14 games between them. They've also managed to generate 21 INT's between their starting QB's. The moral of the story? Play to your strengths, and in both cases, that's power running. So what is it about running the football that's so great? Firstly, you don't turn the ball over anywhere near as much. I know some teams (or rather their running backs) have problems with ball retention, but as I mentioned yesterday, a lot of that is down to poor technique. It's easily fixable. To get a look at how it's done properly, turn to Cardinals WR Larry Fitzgerald and look at his ball control technique. Anytime he feels pressure he wraps that ball up tight. The result is that in 83 games, with a combined tally of 489 touches, he's fumbled the ball just 5 times. Kerry Collins or Jake Delhomme have produced more turnovers individually in just one season. Now consider the question of clock and ball control. You run the football, you get tackled, the clock keeps running. This means that gradually throughout the course of the game you leave less and less time available for a high scoring pass offense like the Patriots or the Saints to put points up on the board against you. They can't score 35 or 40 points because they don't have the time or the sufficient number of possessions to do it. And then we look at 3 and outs. The beauty of running the ball is that even if you're run play gets stuffed close to the line of scrimmage, chances are you can at least get a yard or two. Conversely every incompletion on a pass play gets you nothing, zero, zlich. And that's before we even get started on the number of runs that are stopped for big losses versus yards lost through sacks. Ultimately what it adds up to is more manageable down and distance situations (3rd & 2 as opposed to 3rd & 8). "But what about big plays? What happens when your team gets behind and you need to score?" I hate this supposed argument. So far this season the leagues running backs have combined for 30 runs of 40 or more yards. If it wasn't for Tennessee and Carolina (amongst others) being so pre-occupied with their QB's, the tally would be even more. It just boils my blood to listen to the notion that running the football can't produce explosive plays. Because it does. And if teams ran the ball more against the fabled 'prevent' defenses, that are designed to stop the pass by removing linebackers and introducing more defensive backs, then I'm sure you'd see more big plays. If you want a good example, just go back to the last game ever played in Texas stadium, which was last years Week 16 clash between the Cowboys and the Ravens. The Cowboys gave up rushing touchdowns of 77 and 82 yards on back to back Ravens possessions. And of course, running the football attracts 8 man boxes. It attracts safeties looking to stuff the run. Which creates opportunities for play action passes going deep down the field. Just ask the Saints. The difference maker in their season so far has been points scored on defense and the fact that this year they actually run the football. In fact, they've almost chalked up as many rushing touchdowns as they have passing (14 rushing to 16 passing). And if you still don't believe me, ask Brett Favre and Carson Palmer. With Peterson of the Vikings and Benson of the Bengals producing so well on the ground, both Favre and Palmer have seen a lot more 8 man boxes and cover three looks. And for them, that's bread and butter. They will, and have, picked such coverage apart all season long. Even Jake Delhomme did last year (!!!), as teams respected the Panthers rushing attack so much (and with good reason) that it created one on one matchups for Steve Smith on the outside. Conversely, teams that don't run the ball as much get into trouble far more often than teams that don't pass as much. Look at the Dolphins blowing their huge lead over the Saints a few weeks ago, or the Jets giving the ball away passing against the Bills despite having dominated on the ground all day. The Eagles lost to the Raiders purely because they couldn't, or wouldn't run the ball. They gave the Raiders ample opportunities to break up passes, get sacks and gave them plenty of clock to play with. And we all know what's happened to the Panthers and Titans this year..... So in summary, if you wanna win football games at this level it's best to have a balanced attack. Run the ball to set up the pass. If you're QB isn't that great run it a little more. If your defense isn't great, run it a little more. If you want to hold onto a lead, run it a little more. Gradually we're starting to see teams with strong run games dominate football games. Last year the Steelers and the Ravens, who both exemplified this theory, contested the AFC championship game. The Steelers went on to win the Superbowl. Look for the trend to continue and for more teams to turn to power football as a way to make it to, and through, the post season.