- Admin
- #1
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2003
- Messages
- 8,409
- Reaction score
- 17,615
- Age
- 41
Offline
Here's some basic explanation... what I feel was the cause from a coaching perspective.
Bush is dangerous on screens, but I would argue that he would have to be set up better (like any player). To do this, you have to not compartmentalize him as much in the running game (i.e. just giving him heavily designed/gimmicky/situational carries) and give him more of those regular runs.
This started last year when Mike Bell and PT were both factored into the running game. This gave Bush fewer inside carries and regular, big on big runs (which he can absolutely run)... and more of those outside zones and draws.
DC's #1 priority for Bush is defending him in space. Their #1 priority with Thomas is containing his (inside) rushing on early downs. This is because of their skill types and how they are used.
When Thomas is in the backfield... especially on those PA screens... the gaps are being squeezed. With Bush, defenders are playing more conservatively, not attacking the inside rushing lanes and are in better position to see the screen develop.
Screens, much like draws and play action, have to be set up. This includes setting up your personnel to run them. The flaw wasn't in the design or in the player... it's in the setup (or lack thereof).
We didn't set him (or any of our backs) up for the screen game because we fell behind early and had to throw. We didn't have the time and space to stubbornly assert the running game. So even though we may have been facing a strong pass rush and thought we could take advantage of it, the screens were obviously being sought out by the defense when Reggie Bush was in the backfield.
If you want to see this in action, watch the fake screen to Bush that ended up being a completion to Colston down the seam. Watch the defenders react to the fake. With most backs, that's one defender (the one who is responsible for the back or the flats). On that play, 3 players instantly moved with the playfake, abandoning their assignments and giving Colston space down the middle. Obviously, like most defenses, their #1 priority for Reggie Bush was containing him in space.
The dilemma is that with our weapons, there aren't enough snaps to focus on setting up a single player to make big plays. What's more prudent is to set up the offense to make big plays. So are you going to continue to move Bush around and split him out to draw coverage and create space in the passing game. Or are you going to put him in I formation and get him some regular carries to set him up for a big play on a screen later in the game.
I don't believe in abandoning plays because they didn't work the first time, but when they haven't worked all game, late in the game on a critical down is not the best time to go back to them.
Bush is dangerous on screens, but I would argue that he would have to be set up better (like any player). To do this, you have to not compartmentalize him as much in the running game (i.e. just giving him heavily designed/gimmicky/situational carries) and give him more of those regular runs.
This started last year when Mike Bell and PT were both factored into the running game. This gave Bush fewer inside carries and regular, big on big runs (which he can absolutely run)... and more of those outside zones and draws.
DC's #1 priority for Bush is defending him in space. Their #1 priority with Thomas is containing his (inside) rushing on early downs. This is because of their skill types and how they are used.
When Thomas is in the backfield... especially on those PA screens... the gaps are being squeezed. With Bush, defenders are playing more conservatively, not attacking the inside rushing lanes and are in better position to see the screen develop.
Screens, much like draws and play action, have to be set up. This includes setting up your personnel to run them. The flaw wasn't in the design or in the player... it's in the setup (or lack thereof).
We didn't set him (or any of our backs) up for the screen game because we fell behind early and had to throw. We didn't have the time and space to stubbornly assert the running game. So even though we may have been facing a strong pass rush and thought we could take advantage of it, the screens were obviously being sought out by the defense when Reggie Bush was in the backfield.
If you want to see this in action, watch the fake screen to Bush that ended up being a completion to Colston down the seam. Watch the defenders react to the fake. With most backs, that's one defender (the one who is responsible for the back or the flats). On that play, 3 players instantly moved with the playfake, abandoning their assignments and giving Colston space down the middle. Obviously, like most defenses, their #1 priority for Reggie Bush was containing him in space.
The dilemma is that with our weapons, there aren't enough snaps to focus on setting up a single player to make big plays. What's more prudent is to set up the offense to make big plays. So are you going to continue to move Bush around and split him out to draw coverage and create space in the passing game. Or are you going to put him in I formation and get him some regular carries to set him up for a big play on a screen later in the game.
I don't believe in abandoning plays because they didn't work the first time, but when they haven't worked all game, late in the game on a critical down is not the best time to go back to them.
Last edited: