What is the first thing a football team has to do?

[had]

If you had to say that one thing was the most important thing for a football team, one thing that you had to accomplish, what would it be?

--Stopping the pass?
--Throwing the ball?
--Running the ball?
--Stopping the run?
--Other?

For me, it's stopping the run. That's where I plant my flag.

 

[-X-]

Running the ball.

 

[Wonderboy]

My first reaction is running the ball but I've seen good play callers use the play action game to set up the run successfully. So I'll say stopping the run even though I'm an offensive guy first. Good question!

 

[had]

Running the ball.

Well, this had been a nice chat.

Obviously I disagree, as do the thousands in my support.

 

[-X-]

Running the ball.

Well, this had been a nice chat.

Obviously I disagree, as do the thousands in my support.

I see your thousands and raise you my legion.

Checkmate.

 

[had]

My first reaction is running the ball but I've seen good play callers use the play action game to set up the run successfully. So I'll say stopping the run even though I'm an offensive guy first. Good question!

But why would you say stopping the run? Why is that the first thing?

To me, it's the first thing because it is what football is all about.

Football is about taking. About pushing back. Fighting.

A team that can stop the run will beat the living snot out of a team that can run the ball.

I will provide arguments as the need arises.

 

[DR RAM]

My first reaction is running the ball but I've seen good play callers use the play action game to set up the run successfully. So I'll say stopping the run even though I'm an offensive guy first. Good question!

But why would you say stopping the run? Why is that the first thing?

To me, it's the first thing because it is what football is all about.

Football is about taking. About pushing back. Fighting.

A team that can stop the run will beat the living snot out of a team that can run the ball.

I will provide arguments as the need arises.

Not if they can't stop the team that can run the ball :hehe:

 

[had]

Running the ball.

Well, this had been a nice chat.

Obviously I disagree, as do the thousands in my support.

I see your thousands and raise you my legion.

Checkmate.

I see your legion and raise Wonderboy.

(two moves to me for false mate)

 

[had]

Not if they can't stop the team that can run the ball :hehe:

Absolutes and all. High end stuff. Maybe not too helpful.

But Dr. Ram, did you know that the Bradford pic in you signature makes him look like a mannequin with a cracked arm?

I've been trying to tell you.

 

[-X-]

Running the ball.

Well, this had been a nice chat.

Obviously I disagree, as do the thousands in my support.

I see your thousands and raise you my legion.

Checkmate.

I see your legion and raise Wonderboy.

(two moves to me for false mate)

It's a good question though. I guess a lot of it could do with the division you're in as well. But there are plenty of teams who rely on offensive power, some that thrive on running the ball, and some that rely on their defense. My rationale (since I didn't explain it the first time) is that stopping the run is great and all, but what happens when you're facing a team that's predicated on the pass? Like our friend Mike Martz we were discussing earlier.

And why would stopping the run be so important? Would it be because running the ball is MORE important?

<smacks your king right off the board>

 

[HometownBoy]

You've got to establish a run game, almost all the best teams have some semblance of a run game to take the heat off them, and most of the good teams the minute you take their run away crumple, ala the Niners.

But the way of the run has changed, you've got to pass to set up the run now, you've got to be willing to get chunks and willing to attack the guys in the sky then find a nice groove of rhythm in that balance.

Going overly heavy on one is always doomed to fail, we've watched it fail teams before and that won't be changing any time soon.

We've been too pass heavy, and our passes have been lame and uncreative. It makes us predictable and stoppable with minimum effort. That has to change.

 

[Wonderboy]

My first reaction is running the ball but I've seen good play callers use the play action game to set up the run successfully. So I'll say stopping the run even though I'm an offensive guy first. Good question!

But why would you say stopping the run? Why is that the first thing?

To me, it's the first thing because it is what football is all about.

Football is about taking. About pushing back. Fighting.

A team that can stop the run will beat the living snot out of a team that can run the ball.

I will provide arguments as the need arises.

Well my post said my preference would be to be an offensive force than a defensive one. Mainly because the rules of the NFL inhibit defense as we knew it 5 years ago (but to be fair I just like offense more). But since I think good coaches can use the passing game correctly to set up the run that means I've got to choose one of your options on the defensive side of the ball. I choose to stop the run because it makes the opponent one dimensional and I can tee off with my pass rushers and take my chances. Kind of like what Rams opponents have done the last three weeks!

CHECKM... down to the running back in the flat!

 

[had]

It's a good question though. I guess a lot of it could do with the division you're in as well. But there are plenty of teams who rely on offensive power, some that thrive on running the ball, and some that rely on their defense. My rationale (since I didn't explain it the first time) is that stopping the run is great and all, but what happens when you're facing a team that's predicated on the pass? Like our friend Mike Martz we were discussing earlier.

And why would stopping the run be so important? Would it be because running the ball is MORE important?

<smacks your king right off the board>

If the run can be taken away, the game opens up. The OL cannot contain the rush. The QB is harried and exposed. The game is in hand.

As far as Martz is concerned, well, I'd say that the two times he was in the SB, he didn't really get his run game going, or, maybe the other team took it away.

 

[-X-]

It's a good question though. I guess a lot of it could do with the division you're in as well. But there are plenty of teams who rely on offensive power, some that thrive on running the ball, and some that rely on their defense. My rationale (since I didn't explain it the first time) is that stopping the run is great and all, but what happens when you're facing a team that's predicated on the pass? Like our friend Mike Martz we were discussing earlier.

And why would stopping the run be so important? Would it be because running the ball is MORE important?

<smacks your king right off the board>

If the run can be taken away, the game opens up. The OL cannot contain the rush. The QB is harried and exposed. The game is in hand.

As far as Martz is concerned, well, I'd say that the two times he was in the SB, he didn't really get his run game going, or, maybe the other team took it away.

Compelling. I'll have to mull that over as I replay the last two games against the Rams.
Which, as it turns out, makes both of our points.

By the way, the chicken predates the egg.

 

[had]

But since I think good coaches can use the passing game correctly to set up the run that means I've got to choose one of your options on the defensive side of the ball.

So, you're saying that good coaches can set up the run by passing the ball, and that means you have to choose a defensive option for the first priority?

Wouldn't you choose 'passing the ball' instead?

I don't get it.

 

[had]

you've got to pass to set up the run now

Steven Jackson?

 

[HometownBoy]

you've got to pass to set up the run now

Steven Jackson?

Yes, what about him?

He was a talent that doesn't come around very often, capable of running through even the most putrid of situations. There's a reason he was the one thing universally appraised on our terrible teams. He was a talented individual that had skills and the ability to put them together that your average RB just doesn't have.

We can't just sit around and hope that we get somebody like that again.

 

[had]

Compelling. I'll have to mull that over as I replay the last two games against the Rams.
Which, as it turns out, makes both of our points.

By the way, the chicken predates the egg.

I'm not trying to make a point about these current Rams, although I do believe (obviously) that the first thing they have to fix is the rush D.

I was just curious what guys think is the first thing a team has to do. Or, has to be good at.

The chicken/egg thing, I don't know from.

 

[had]

Yes, what about him?

He was a talent that doesn't come around very often, capable of running through even the most putrid of situations. There's a reason he was the one thing universally appraised on our terrible teams. He was a talented individual that had skills and the ability to put them together that your average RB just doesn't have.

We can't just sit around and hope that we get somebody like that again.

What about him?

What about him is, you do NOT have to pass to set up the run.

peace

 

[HometownBoy]

Yes, what about him?

He was a talent that doesn't come around very often, capable of running through even the most putrid of situations. There's a reason he was the one thing universally appraised on our terrible teams. He was a talented individual that had skills and the ability to put them together that your average RB just doesn't have.

We can't just sit around and hope that we get somebody like that again.

What about him?

What about him is, you do NOT have to pass to set up the run.

peace

Yeah, I forgot how easy it is to find and draft Steven Jacksons.