From: heim@vms.macc.wisc.edu (JOHN HEIM	)
Subject: Re: Is the run-and-shoot finished?
Organization:  University of Wisconsin Academic Computing Center
Date:  4 JAN 93 13:08:49    

In article <1i8nl9INNpb0@MINERVA.CIS.YALE.EDU>, tseng-neill@yale.edu (Neill Tseng) writes...

>In article <1993Jan4.055821.22307@leland.Stanford.EDU> daveshao@leland.stanford.edu (David Shao) writes:
>>
>>Though this game was a rather extreme case, the key to the Bills victory
>>was what detractors of the run-and-shoot have been saying all along--
>>without a tight end, a team cannot have a running game to grind out
>>the clock while protecting a lead.  It is a fundamental, and probably
>>fatal, flaw of the run-and-shoot.
>>
>>Contrast the Bills-Houston game with the Vikings-Redskins game.  When
>>the Redskins needed to, they simply ran the ball right at the Vikings
>>in the fourth quarter taking ten minutes off the clock.  
>>
> 
>	I disagree here.  The reason the Oilers lost today was not because of
>	the run-and-shoot, it was because of bad defense.  The Oilers offense
>	didn't even get the ball in the second half until there were only about
>	four minutes left in the third quarter.  Furthermore, it still would
>	have been too early to go to the running game.  Teams that get too
>	conservative, offensive or defensively, have been shown to pay for it.

Obviously, a major defensive breakdown is required to blow a 
32 pnt lead.  The thing is, an offensive can give a defense a BIG hand 
by controlling the ball for a while.  A good time consuming drive by 
the offense is the best thing for a defense that's in disarray -- 
especially when the defense is a good one like the Oilers.

>	No matter what offense you're running, you have to keep up the attack.
>	But anyway, the run-and-shoot has shown that it can be a good
>	possession-type offense.  It has evolved more away from the quick
>	strike toward a more ball-control offense.  Each year, the Oilers are
>	near the top in time of possession.  The Oilers could have gone into a
>	more ball-control, time-consuming playcalling mode if they had
>	wanted to; the key is they didn't really have the opportunity today, 
>	because the momentum had shifted too greatly and the defense and 
>	special teams couldn't do their jobs.  It's stupid to blame the offense
>	because they built up the huge lead in the first place.  The Bills

I wouldn't *blame* the offense.  I would say that a 8-9 minute drive 
for a TD or even a FG when the score was 35-17 would have won the game 
for the Oilers.  

>	didn't have an answer, and personally, I don't think they ever found
>	one.  The interceptions came 1)on a bad pass by Moon, who had been 
>	sitting since halftime and for most of the third quarter and was
>	understandably not as sharp as he had been and 2) on an obvious
>	holding penalty.  I've thought long and hard about the run-and-shoot,
>	and I don't think it's the problem.  Remember, the Oilers still had a
>	potent running attack with Lorenzo White.  The Oilers also had one of
>	the best percentages scoring inside the red zone, especially TDs.  The
>	run-and-shoot can be quick strike or ball control.  And the only 
>	time in the past 3 years that I've ever seen it truly stopped was last
>	season in the Monday night game against the Eagles.  

The R&S itself may not be the problem.  But what was missing yesterday 
was a series of plays *guaranteed* to gain 3-4 yards and take 50-60 
seconds off the clock each.  These kind of plays are not normally in 
the R&S playbook.  Maybe they should be added for an occasion such as 
this.

JGH
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro