Just how pass-happy is this offense?

[Maelstrom787]

This offense has been noted as skewing significantly in favor of passing this year, rather than rushing.

Raw run/pass ratio can be misleading, though. It doesn't account for game situation. If you're playing from behind, you're going to look like a pass-happy team artificially because you were forced to pass to catch up.

We can solve for that by looking at neutral situation data. This throws out the data for when a team is playing from behind, playing with a big lead, playing with a lead during garbage time, etc. Also throws out end-of-half and end-of-game drives as time constraints force the pass.

Where do you think we're at compared to the other teams this year in neutral situation run/pass split since week 2?

Top 10? Top 5? First?

Well, my friends...

We are not even on the same planet.

 

[sutz]

In a word, "TOO."

Offense has been very unbalanced. Sure, game situation dictates a lot, but we need to tone that down IMO. Fact is, we've been so pass happy, that we should be able to run the ball just on the element of surprise.

Seriously, though, MM needs to have a word with Grubb about this.

 

[BirdsCommaAngry]

Pew pew, mothertruckers.

 

[Maelstrom787]

In a word, "TOO."

Offense has been very unbalanced. Sure, game situation dictates a lot, but we need to tone that down IMO. Fact is, we've been so pass happy, that we should be able to run the ball just on the element of surprise.

Seriously, though, MM needs to have a word with Grubb about this.

That's the cool thing about this graph. It throws out most of the game situation influence.

We've just got a hard-on for throwing the ball.

Grubb needs a Frazier to oversee him.

 

[Ozzy]

Bottom line we have to fix this. Macdonald talked about this a little bit saying opponents presented stuff that lead to some of this. They also had multiple drives where Geno reads the defense and calls plays based off of that but regardless it needs to get more balanced and I’m sure it will. A couple of the games were just flat out weird.

I’m fully convinced this stuff will sort itself out as Grubb gains familiarity with his players and how teams approach them. You’re loaded at wr and Geno excels in the type of pass offense Grubb wants to run so I’m fine with them being a pass dominant team but you have to have some balance and Macdonald is fully aware of that.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

You have one of the best RB's in the NFL..........maybe actually use him? grrrr

 

[Ozzy]

I bet they try to get Walker going against the Niners.

 

[Mad Dog]

You know, throwing a short pass to RB's is pretty much the same as handing off if you ask me. It still serves the purpose of bringing LB's up and getting a RB in space to get yards.

As long as the RB's are getting involved in the offence I'm not going to complain about how often we hand off vs dump off.

It's funny how we used to complain about running too much when it wasn't working. Now everyone wants balance.

My complaint with the Grubb offence is the lack of screen game. If you are going to pass a billion times, you've got to hold up the pass rush somehow and an effective screen game is the next best option after an exceptional run game.

 

[Ozzy]

Yeah it feels like they’ve tried to mimic the run game with those short passes probably because Grubb just doesn’t trust this line much. Lets see what they can do tho

 

[West TX Hawk]

Yeah it feels like they’ve tried to mimic the run game with those short passes probably because Grubb just doesn’t trust this line much. Lets see what they can do tho

I think you’re correct on this and it makes sense. They got Walker rather heavily involved in the passing game to feed him but in a different way because Grubb and his assistants likely saw the lack of push and opening holes against Detroit and lack any confidence in the OL.

I highly doubt though we’ll see only 7 runs in a game again. That was extreme.

 

[Lords of Scythia]

https://www.thenewstribune.com/sports

 

[hox]

You know, throwing a short pass to RB's is pretty much the same as handing off if you ask me. It still serves the purpose of bringing LB's up and getting a RB in space to get yards.

As long as the RB's are getting involved in the offence I'm not going to complain about how often we hand off vs dump off.

Yeah if they're constantly getting stuffed trying to run up the A and B gaps due to our weak interior o-line, then short, quick passes are sometimes more effective.

That being said, if A and B gaps are issues, then they should mix it up when they actually do hand off. Maybe 12, 13 personnel to help block, horizontal game, sweeps, draws, screens, fullback, etc.

 

[Ozzy]

https://www.thenewstribune.com/sports

That seemed like a fairly damning response from Macdonald that more plays are getting changed that are runs initially. In some ways this is obvious because of presnap cues and it’s unlikely Grubb would call almost zero running plays.

Regardless it seems like an easy fix and I loved his response to the question. I also appreciate him protecting his player and coach in his answer.

 

[Ozzy]

And my post isn’t a knock on Geno. The plays he’s changing he’s probably reading the safeties and doing the “right” thing in the moment. Sometimes tho to get in a rhythm you need to run even when they want you to and still have some success. Easy fix for these guys.

 

[Rat]

I get these things can be largely based on what the opposing defense is showing, but Walker isn't matchup-dependent. That's the luxury of having an elite talent.

 

[TheLegendOfBoom]

If you followed UW last year, Grubb, started to run the ball “more” in the middle of the year and towards the end of the year UW ran the ball a lot.

This has got to be it.

Possibly, Grubb, wants to preserve the run game towards end of the year (when making a playoff run) to not otherwise risk injury to his RB1 so early in the season.

If you can get the QB into a rhythm and build cohesion with his receivers in the middle of the year, they will perform better in the post season because they have those reps—however a running back tend to get injured a lot during the course of the season (remember all those times Carson got injured) Seattle ran Carson into the ground….

Maybe Grubb is about unleashing his run game when defenses are wearing down in the middle of the season and towards the end of the year…

Cause winning playoff games you need a healthy RB1 to win and possibly, Grubb, is waiting for his offensive line to get better and preserving his RBs to GIVE defenses a harder time towards pushing for playoffs?

Just a thought….

 

[Ozzy]

I get these things can be largely based on what the opposing defense is showing, but Walker isn't matchup-dependent. That's the luxury of having an elite talent.

It’s a fair point and Mike alluded to it so I think Grubb will call more plays, Geno will be coached to not change so many plays and they will be fine

 

[Ozzy]

If you followed UW last year, Grubb, started to run the ball “more” in the middle of the year and towards the end of the year UW ran the ball a lot.

This has got to be it.

Possibly, Grubb, wants to preserve the run game towards end of the year (when making a playoff run) to not otherwise risk injury to his RB1 so early in the season.

If you can get the QB into a rhythm and build cohesion with his receivers in the middle of the year, they will perform better in the post season because they have those reps—however a running back tend to get injured a lot during the course of the season (remember all those times Carson got injured) Seattle ran Carson into the ground….

Maybe Grubb is about unleashing his run game when defenses are wearing down in the middle of the season and towards the end of the year…

Cause winning playoff games you need a healthy RB1 to win and possibly, Grubb, is waiting for his offensive line to get better and preserving his RBs to GIVE defenses a harder time towards pushing for playoffs?

Just a thought….

Interesting thoughts!

 

[knownone]

The thing is, the offense is working. We're 4th in passing and 19th in rushing efficiency. Most metrics have us somewhere between 12th and 6th in total offense. So, what we see on the graph might also reflect the team's inefficiencies in the running game. In simple terms, Grubb calls more passes because they have been significantly more effective.

With that said, they do need to find a better balance. We've invested too much in the running game and have too much talent to have such a vast disparity. And look, Geno's awesome, but he's not prime Peyton Manning. We won't win many games, asking him to throw 40+ times regardless of efficiency. I mean, look at the Bengals. Joe Burrow is having an all-time great volume season, and they are 1-4.

 

[CalgaryFan05]

This offense has been noted as skewing significantly in favor of passing this year, rather than rushing.

Raw run/pass ratio can be misleading, though. It doesn't account for game situation. If you're playing from behind, you're going to look like a pass-happy team artificially because you were forced to pass to catch up.

We can solve for that by looking at neutral situation data. This throws out the data for when a team is playing from behind, playing with a big lead, playing with a lead during garbage time, etc. Also throws out end-of-half and end-of-game drives as time constraints force the pass.

Where do you think we're at compared to the other teams this year in neutral situation run/pass split since week 2?

Top 10? Top 5? First?

Well, my friends...

We are not even on the same planet.

View attachment 67725

To answer the title of the thread.

Way to damned much. Especially when you consider that we basically have no screen pass to speak of, and #7 still has about 1.5 seconds to get rid off the ball. Obviously I'm exaggerating a little - but still. Stupid game planning. Stupid. Did I mention stupid?

I don't follow college ball at 'all'. Is this a college hangover for game planning style for Grubb? That's an honest question.