From: daveshao@leland.stanford.edu (David Shao)
Subject: Re: Is the run-and-shoot finished?
Originator: daveshao@leland.Stanford.EDU
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 93 09:46:41 GMT

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

The Bills scored a touchdown to make it 35-10, then recovered the onside
kick and scored again to make it 35-17.  The Oilers still had an 18
point lead when their offense got the ball back.  That's more than two
touchdowns and a field goal.  

>       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.
>	No matter what offense you're running, you have to keep up the attack.

What offense invented produces points consistently throughout a game?
An offense's ability to score touchdowns ebbs and flows during a game.
A much less ambitious, and achievable goal, is to ask it to take some
time off the clock.  

>	No offense can be perfectly executed for 60 minutes.  Klingler is
>	right, it CAN'T be stopped when executed properly.  I agree, though, 
>	the problem is that it's not always executed properly.  But I don't
>	see any empirical evidence to show that it can't be executed well
>	enough to win, and win consistently.

I see no empirical evidence that a team can use the run-and-shoot to 
win a Super Bowl.   I see a lot of empirical evidence of a great
offensive team, the Oilers, not winning playoff games.

>       Remember, the Oilers have made
>	the playoffs the last six years, something no other team can claim
>	That's consistency.  The problem with the Oilers is not the run-and-
>	shoot and not even really the coaches; it's the players and their
>	attitudes, and the need for a good clutch field-goal kicker.

Unless this kicker is a drop-kicker the Oilers would not have won today.

>	Their problem is with the players.  They are
>	inconsistent and don't have the correct attitudes.  

And which players should be replaced?  The quarterback, Warren Moon?
He's definitely the best run-and-shoot quarterback ever.  The receivers?
Didn't THREE of them make the Pro Bowl (Jeffries, Givens, Duncan),
with the fourth being Webster Slaughter?  How good does the receiver 
corps have to be before it is good enough?  Or should Lorenzo White be 
replaced?  The Oilers have
assembled an incredible amount of talent for their skilled positions
on offense.  They can't do much better.  If the Oilers think their
players are all head-cases, let them see how fast other teams will
snatch them up! 

Every wide receiver I see, including Jerry Rice, drops his share of balls,
even in critical situations.  Didn't Jerry Rice fail to run down the
long bomb in the Tampa Bay game when the 49ers were trying to run out
the clock?  The man obviously has an attitude problem.  Had the 49ers
lost, clearly Rice should have taken the blame.  :-)

No matter what the run-and-shoot advocates claim, the reliance of the run
and-shoot on the forward pass makes it a low percentage offense against
GOOD opposition.  Yes, the Oilers can beat some good teams at home and
they can beat some poor teams.  But this year they lost twice to their
division competitor Pittsburgh, once at home, they lost to Miami and
Denver on the road, and they lost to Green Bay and Cleveland at home.
They beat Kansas City and Buffalo at home and Minnesota on the road.
That's one good team beaten on the road, and this game was in
a domed stadium.

The inconsistency shown by the Oilers is not the fault of talented but
laggard players.  It is an inherent feature of the run-and-shoot.

>	In my honest opinion, though, I really don't think the best team won

Isn't there some indication that the system may be at fault when the
team that uses it fails to win against teams it should beat?  

A central theme of sports is that the great teams can win in several
ways.  They are balanced.  The Lakers of the 80's had to learn to play
tough defense and a half-court game.  The run-and-shoot stunts the
development of the Oilers as a complete offense.  The Oilers are a sports
tragedy, especially Warren Moon.




Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro