jdee said:
It's haunted Jack Pardee even more.
Maybe he could've sent in a few running plays when he had a 35-3 lead and work on the clock. :grrr:
Blame the coach for that.
Not the quarterback.
But almost every run and shoot team, or run shoot style team has gone to the playoffs, which makes me wonder, why not more. There is no reason to believe the run and shoot is an inferior offense. In fact, everything suggests that it is a superior offense. It wins games at every level with inferior talent. And wins a lot of games.
As for the buffalo game, the wr went out of bounds. That was our game. It was taken from us. But at least we got it back on the miracle. The world tends to even itself out.
As for the buffalo game, the wr went out of bounds. That was our game. It was taken from us. But at least we got it back on the miracle. The world tends to even itself out.
Run n Shoot is a superior offense, but you can't protect a lead with it.
I also don't believe the BS that a team can't win a Super Bowl with the Run and Shoot offense. No a team has not yet done it but damn it was only around for 10 years or so in the NFL. With more time I am sure that a team would have wound up in the Super Bowl. It was sure a hell of a lot of fun to watch. I wouldn't mind seeing it again. Gunny is right though, it can be tough to keep a lead. But that 35-3 was a fluke. We beat the bills the week before 28-3 so you didn't always have to blow it.
An interestig read on the run and shoot. Mostly supports it, but good read. The stats are mind boggling. What is even crazier is the running back stats.
Part 1
http://www.geocities.com/Colosseum/Field/8581/mellor1.html
Part 2
http://www.geocities.com/Colosseum/Field/8581/mellor2.html
Part 1
http://www.geocities.com/Colosseum/Field/8581/mellor1.html
Part 2
http://www.geocities.com/Colosseum/Field/8581/mellor2.html
Run and shoot superior?
That's why there is not a single nfl team that even runs anything like it. Because it is superior. Of course you have it's modern progeny the spread offense that is used in college.
The run and shoot like the wishbone is a college offense that is used by teams with lessor talent. I don't buy the comments that you win and make playoffs with it either. The jerry glanville falcons used it and sucked. The lions used it(called it the silver streak) and it basically failed there. Without barry sanders it would have failed more than it did there. For ten years now nobody has even bothered with that crap so it hardly impressed anyone.
The oilers won with it because they had #1, moon. Try that offense with a mediocre QB and see how it works.:sad2:
That's why there is not a single nfl team that even runs anything like it. Because it is superior. Of course you have it's modern progeny the spread offense that is used in college.
The run and shoot like the wishbone is a college offense that is used by teams with lessor talent. I don't buy the comments that you win and make playoffs with it either. The jerry glanville falcons used it and sucked. The lions used it(called it the silver streak) and it basically failed there. Without barry sanders it would have failed more than it did there. For ten years now nobody has even bothered with that crap so it hardly impressed anyone.
The oilers won with it because they had #1, moon. Try that offense with a mediocre QB and see how it works.:sad2:
The Bills had the K-Gun offense, and it worked, too.
As with any offensive (or defensive) scheme, you have to have talent for it to work. You could theoretically win without ever throwing the ball if you had dominant blockers and RBs.
Every scheme has advantages and disadvantages, but in theory none is any better or worse than any other. The Oilers found out that the run-and-shoot didn't let them run the clock with a big lead. On the flip side, a conservative offense makes it hard to come back from a big defecit.
As with any offensive (or defensive) scheme, you have to have talent for it to work. You could theoretically win without ever throwing the ball if you had dominant blockers and RBs.
Every scheme has advantages and disadvantages, but in theory none is any better or worse than any other. The Oilers found out that the run-and-shoot didn't let them run the clock with a big lead. On the flip side, a conservative offense makes it hard to come back from a big defecit.
This reminds me of the most conservative playoff comeback I think I have ever seen. I was literally yelling at Randall Cunningham to throw the damn ball, but he kept calling running plays down 22-12 vs. the giants with like 1 minute 30 seconds to go. It was the most absurd thing I had ever seen. The clock was melting away. It was like the Vikings were trying to run out the clock. Seriously. But they somehow, like a turtle, scored 10 points in a minute and half to win 23-22. That is the last time I ever doubted a team that refused to throw the ball. One interesting thing about most of McNair's and Montana comebacks were that they often mixed in running plays. McNair on the scamble for 15. Montana would run 5 yard running plays with craig. Really interesting comeback styles that were leaning toward conservative.
I would say that Atlanta and Jim Kelly's K-Gun were the two closest offenses to run and shoot that made it to the superbowl. They seemed to have plenty of run and shoot elements. If the Colts ever get there, they may be the next closest after those two teams, but their style is more audible oriented and controlled than freakishly free like a run and shoot. Many people believe they too have run and shoot elements mixed in on the heavy side tho'. Ironically, they too suffer from not winning big games.
PhiSlammaJamma said:
And, they never will as long as #18 is there. :ha: :lol:
RollTide said:
didnt Scott Mitchell throw for almost 4000 yards with Detroit?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
