June 24, 2019, 08:39:54 AM

Author Topic: This year's offseason champion? And the results from the past 4  (Read 5329 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Draft Hobbyist

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 743
  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: This year's offseason champion? And the results from the past 4
« Reply #15 on: May 05, 2013, 07:04:51 AM »
I think you mischaracterized the 49er offense.  They were successful without CK and the read option as they made it to the NFC championship with Smith at the QB position, and for all intents and purposes they didn't throw anymore than when CK took over.  It isn't a college offense, it is a power running game behind one of the best offensive lines in football.  I would call it traditional, not college.  That's why Harbaugh doesn't have CK throw more, he doesn't have to.

The real question offensively is not what CK does, it is what if Gore doesn't have it anymore through age or injury.  Hunter and James are both small backs, which leaves Lattimore and his rehab status.  He may be AP and be ready to play, but what if he's not? I suspect they can still be a punishing run based offense as long as the OL is healthy.  I can see Harbaugh open it up some given the addition of Boldin, but I'm not sure he will have to.

In many ways, I'm am hoping the Packers can get to the point that Aaron Rodgers doesn't have to throw as often as he does.

A team with a power running game with read option elements is a college offense. How many teams have been successful in recent history with power running game? The NFL is now a passing league. You may think I mischaracterize their offense, but I think you mislabel their offense. Even with your characterization I see it as a college offense. The NFL is a passing league. I refuse to look at RB play over QB play as an indicator of how well a team will do next year. The key is the QB. If Gore does phenomenally and Kaepernick does poorly, that will not win SFO a Super Bowl. If Kaepernick doesn phenomenally and Gore does poorely, SFO could still win a Super Bowl. Gore is not going to be better than Adrian Peterson was last season, and MIN barely got into the playoffs last year. They've had Peterson for how long and haven't been a serious contender. I think your looking at the RB position over the QB position is a very, very flawed argument for the NFL.

Offline Twain

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3167
  • Karma: +1/-0
Re: This year's offseason champion? And the results from the past 4
« Reply #16 on: May 05, 2013, 08:20:51 AM »
I'm not sure why you need to twist what I say.

A team that was successful with the power running game?  The 2011 49ers.  And just to point out the obvious, they went farther in the playoffs than the "passing league" offense of the Packers.  A team like the 49ers that has been to the championship game one year, and the super bowl the next is obviously successful.

I'm not looking at running back play over QB play.  I'm looking at team play.  It's more than the QB. 

Minnesota didn't have the defense, or the dominant OL that the 49ers had.  And to your point, CK is better than Ponder.  Thus my point: CK may not be great but he is good enough.

You can call it a "college offense" if you want, but I don't buy it.  And to think that teams gearing up to shut down the read option is going to shut them down this year is an oversimplification.  To stop them, a team is going to need a top level front against the run and a secondary that can take away Crabtree, Davis and Boldin.  The read option is just another twist that was added based on CK's ability.
« Last Edit: May 05, 2013, 08:41:21 AM by Twain »
"The trouble ain't that there are too many fools, but that the lightning ain't distributed right."

Offline Draft Hobbyist

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 743
  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: This year's offseason champion? And the results from the past 4
« Reply #17 on: May 05, 2013, 03:44:00 PM »
I'm not sure why you need to twist what I say.

A team that was successful with the power running game?  The 2011 49ers.  And just to point out the obvious, they went farther in the playoffs than the "passing league" offense of the Packers.  A team like the 49ers that has been to the championship game one year, and the super bowl the next is obviously successful.

I'm not looking at running back play over QB play.  I'm looking at team play.  It's more than the QB. 

Minnesota didn't have the defense, or the dominant OL that the 49ers had.  And to your point, CK is better than Ponder.  Thus my point: CK may not be great but he is good enough.

You can call it a "college offense" if you want, but I don't buy it.  And to think that teams gearing up to shut down the read option is going to shut them down this year is an oversimplification.  To stop them, a team is going to need a top level front against the run and a secondary that can take away Crabtree, Davis and Boldin.  The read option is just another twist that was added based on CK's ability.

It seems you forgot the original point of our discussion, which is if SEA is considered a fluke than SFO needs to be considered a fluke as well. I agree that CK is "good enough", so that is not in debate here. I mean, Trent Dilfer was good enough, so SFO might be able to win despite CK not being elite. Also, if the only team you can list that has been successful with a power running game is SFO then I rest my case, as using SFO's offense to prove SFO's offense seems flawed. Teams that have been successful and have actually won Super Bowls recently with a passing attack: Well...just look up the last bunches of Super Bowl winners.

You say that you do not value RB over QB, but this comment suggests otherwise:
Quote
The real question offensively is not what CK does, it is what if Gore doesn't have it anymore through age or injury.
That's not me twisting your words. You specifically said that the question is not about the QB (CK) it's about the RB (FG). I rest my case from here and agree to disagree with you as I'm sure neither of us are changing our minds.