The question about who may be responsible (Jimbo or Les) for the offensive play calling appears to have been answered. In the following article Les is depicted as the one who apperently insisted and presumably will continue to insist on a running game, even in games like AU, notwithstanding LSU's speed and pass play weapons. :geauxtige :geauxtige :geauxtige http://www.theadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060919/SPORTS/609190329/1006
Well, if that's the case, you know what sucks? Our running game will likely look like a masterpiece for the next two games and everyone will think we're non-stoppable on the ground.....then comes Florida. Ooops...where's our running game?
I have no problem with his insistence on a running game. What I do have a problem with is running big, not as fast runningbacks out on sweeps and stretch plays against a faster, smaller defensive front seven. With Broussard and Vincent they should be pounding the ball in between the tackles with the FB leading the way. AU showed why this is still an effective offense, even when it's not that successful. After doing that the entire game, eventually the interior of your defense WILL soften up and start allowing those yards. When that happens your play action passes will be wide open. AU stuck with their game plan, made some modest adjustments at the half and came out on top as a result. There is no reason why LSU couldn't do the same with Broussard and Vincent on Saturday.
Anyone who thinks that the running game can just be abandoned doesn't understand football very well. I think we do have a passing team this year and that we are going to be passing the football a lot. We out-passed Auburn, you know. But any passing team can be stopped if the defense doen't respect the run. Even against a run-stopping team like Auburn, we can't completely abandon the run except on desperation less-than-a-minute drives when the opponent is playing a prevent defense anyway. Even when the running game isn't posting big numbers, it keeps all three linebackers in the game and prevents the defense from going to nickle and dime on our receivers.
You're right Red. No way in hell you can just abandon the running game and win football games in the SEC. However, I do wish we would abandon that stupid ass shifting formation we love so much. With our Oline, the only way we will run it sucessfully is out of a pro set or spread formation. They do not open hole period. Couldn't do it against ULL or Arizona very well, didn't do it at all against Auburn, and won't be able to do it against anyone else in the SEC either. Our pass blocking has been excellent. So to exploit this very confusing characteristic of our line, we should use formations that make teams think we are always passing, and run from them.
There are many ways to run the ball effectively. If you can't run from a power formation, then try it from a spread formation. You can also run from a shotgun formation. More draws and quick hitters inside, and less outside with slow RBs. We need to see more of Scott and Williams. I don't think all the blame can be placed on the Oline. We need more speed in the backfield.
I totally agree with chosenone. I don't believe anyone here is saying to totally abandon the running game, but like he said, get rid of that damn shift formation. What's up with that? I also agree on the points made about the spread or pro set formation. If we use a spread type offense, the defense would be constantly questioning themselves, and unlike some teams that run the spread offense, we have the weapons to do it. Right now our running game sucks going up the middle and I don't see that changing.
Not sure if your reply was directed in my direction but, I do not and never have advocated "abandoning" the run. To the contrary, the wisdom of a balanced running and passing attack is unquestionable. :thumb: The issue of who was responsible for the play calling has been debated since Saturday's AU game....the article merely provides a little insight into who may have been the driving force behind the play calling that has been criticised by some since the game. :geauxtige :geauxtige
Please point out who said LSU should abandon the run? In any of these posts. Like you said, even when the run isn't posting big numbers, keep running because it keeps 3 linebackers in the game. It does but against Auburn it got us in bad down and distance situations many times. NO ONE I mean not one post I have read said to abandon the run and throw 58 times. There are many ways to run the football that people have mentioned here without running Hester on 2nd and 9 off tackle. If you want to keep running that play when it netted about -15 yards total, then fine. You and Miles can call a game whereby we run 23 times for 44 yards and lose to Auburn. Did Miles and Company think in the 4th that the problems he saw, "one lineman one play, one lineman the next" were suddenly going to stop and JV would break one for 30 like he hasn't done since 2003? Makes me think they didn't have any other sets to run out of quiet frankly.
I think we need to back off Miles- DiNardo part deuce? You really think so? We've seen the man coach for one season with a hurricane, and then lose one game this season to- I know it no longer even resembles a horse, but it was once a real live horse- officiating and very few mistakes in any aspect of the game, and we're ready to fire the man? For shame. For shame. Now, if we had just lost to Auburn 31-7, then I might join you in calling for his head. But for now, we have a very promising season ahead of us. Let's back off Miles. As for the running game: we need it. Miles knows we need it. Just because we have a great QB and great wideouts doesn't mean we can abandon the run. We need that speed that Scott and Williams have, but they aren't integrated into the team yet- especially Keiland, who was cleared just weeks before ULaLa. We can't expect them to get playing time only to run the ball- they need to be able to block and play every aspect of the running back position, something only JV, AB, and JH can do at the moment.
