LOL.. I seen no problem in your rant.. more so, just yanking your chain a bit more.

I keep going back to a thread about forgetting the run and pass exclusively by some member here.. and gotta bend him a bit about it.


Yes.. defense first.. then balance up an offense a bit and feature your strength.

---

Even in that thread (screw the run), I was using hyperbole. I'm along the lines of 70/30. However, if the opponent sucks against the pass, go 80/20. If they suck against the run, go 50/50. Take advantage of their weaknesses.

MM did that in most of '07 and it worked. I think that was his best playcalling season. Loved his playcalling against the Cows and it was very 2007.

I don't believe in balance. I believe in exploitation. I believe in humiliation. If your opponent can't stop the pass, then keep passing. If they can't stop the run, then run the ball down their throats. Do what works.

Of course, play to your strengths. We got 3 elite players active on our roster - Aaron Rodgers, CM3, and Hall of Famer Charles Woodson. Only 1 on O. Put the ball in his hands and good things will happen, but of course we're limited by our OL.

I said when our OL was failing, we'd have to hammer with Kuhn a little bit more. I did say that.

Now if you really want balance, here ya go:

Happy now?

---

Damn.. twist Zombie a bit.. you get Gore'd.. white flag. ;)

Now.. I would love to argue why you run to keep the defense from killing your QB.. but I have done that a number of times.

Agree to disagree.

---

We're not disagreeing here. When your OL fails in pass protection, you send a hammer to soften up your enemy's DL. For us, that would be Kuhn.

In a perfect world, we have a solid pass blocking OL that allows us to pass 70% of the time. We're in an imperfect world where our OL was getting Aaron killed. I already said we'd have to hammer more (a la Kuhn).

There are times in life when you're forced to improvise.

---

Got it. West Coast offense team, short pass = run.

Zombie's been citing Bill Walsh in his posts. Lets see just what Bill Walsh did as head coach of the 49ers.

I went back to take a look at the guys who started thisthe 49ers under Bill Walsh (1979-1988, 3 SB wins), George Seifert (1989-1996), Steve Mariucci (1997-2002). Ill just use 1997 & 1998 under Mariucci, because 99 is when the rug fell out from under the 49ers, and Ill skip 1982 (the strike/scab year). The below numbers are from the regular season stats, obtained from NFL.com.

This was one of the longest successful runs by a club in NFL history. From 1981-1998 the worst record the 49ers had was 10-6. Their combined record over this period was 204-66, a .756 winning percentage. The team had Joe Montana, followed by Steve Young at QB, with Jerry Rice, Dwight Clark, etc on the receiving end. They also had good pass-catching running backs (Roger Craig, Ricky Watters, Tom Rathman, etc)

Before I get to the numbers, want to make a guess on the pass/run ratio of these West Coast Offense coaches? 80/20? 70/30? 60/40?

Nope, keep going. In fact, only TWICE during this period did the 49ers have a pass/run ratio that was 60/40 or higher. The rest of the years were all 59/41 or lower.

The 49ers combined pass/run ratio during this period was 56/44%. Bill Walshs numbers themselves were even lower: 54/46%.

So, the guys who created the West Coast offense, replacing runs with short passes, still ran the ball, on average, almost 45% of the time.

Sure, we could go empty backfield and pass it on every down, but our productivity will be less than if we mix up our offense. Im not saying we need to be a run-first team, but we have to have at least a credible semblance of a running game--a balanced offense makes the passing game better.

---

Season Passes Runs Pass % Wins Losses
1998..556..413..0.57.12..4
1997......432......459......0.48......13......3
1996......550......379......0.59......12......4
1995......644......345......0.65......11......5
1994......511......420......0.55......13......3
1993......524......382......0.58......10......6
1992......480......381......0.56......14......2
1991......522......357......0.59......10......6
1990......583......399......0.59......14......2
1989......483......406......0.54......14......2
1988......502......462......0.52......10......6
1987......501......463......0.52......13......2
1986......582......478......0.55......10......5
1985......550......431......0.56......10......6
1984......496......491......0.50......15......1
1983......528......449......0.54......10......6

1981......517......534......0.49......13......3
1980......597......377......0.61......6......10
1979......602......450......0.57......2......14


Totals10160..80760.56.204.66

Bill Walshs numbers:
...4875...41350.54

edit: On an interesting coincidence, the 56/44% ratio of the 49ers during this period is the exact same ratio of runs to passes the Packers have used in their 6 wins this year. In their 3 losses, the ratio is 74/26%.

Macbob - To be fair though, how many runs were in the 4th Q when the Niners were up by double digits?

They were so dominant a team that they COULD run 10-15 run plays in the 4th Q and end the game. I remember the Niners killing opponents. I was in SF for a lot of this period watching the Niners dominate while the Packers sucked.

---

I'm with Macbob on this one.
Run the damn ball, this ain't basketball!

Zombie-if that's the case, then I hope we have the exact same run/pass ratio as the Niners did... ::wink:

OK then. I'm good with that. :thumbright:

Like for example, this was our very last drive vs the Cows:


I still do think that since it was Matt Flynn in there, we should have thrown at least twice. He needs experience. Plus, you know how much I hate the Cows. I wanted us to get 50+ pts. We came close.

---

Uh oh. We only had 91 total rushing yards, with 26 of those total yards by our QBs. We must have lost to the Vikings this week.

---