Morgan should run once in a while

Donate To GopherHole
MNSpaniel

MNSpaniel

Active member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
985
Reaction score
184
Points
43
I think they should call Morgan's number once in a while in that RPO. It just shouldn't running back or pass. He always carries the fake out and you can see that nobody even gives him a look. They all just crash in on the running back. I think if he kept it once in a while like Leidner used to it would open the run more. Just keep the defense honest.
 

MNSpaniel said:
I think they should call Morgan's number once in a while in that RPO. It just shouldn't running back or pass. He always carries the fake out and you can see that nobody even gives him a look. They all just crash in on the running back. I think if he kept it once in a while like Leidner used to it would open the run more. Just keep the defense honest.
Click to expand...
We've been saving it for wisconsin.
;)
 

I couldn't agree more. He needs to do it a couple of times per game just to keep the defense honest. Right now they know there is ZERO chance that he runs with it so they key in on the running back. I think that is why the wildcat is so successful with Seth Green in there at QB, just because there is actually a threat of him keeping the ball.
 

He isn't exactly the right QB for running a RPO. We need a dual threat QB to run an efficient RPO.
 

The only time Morgan should run is if he's running for his life to get away from a sack and trying to get a first on 3rd or 4th down.
 



MNSpaniel said:
I think they should call Morgan's number once in a while in that RPO. It just shouldn't running back or pass. He always carries the fake out and you can see that nobody even gives him a look. They all just crash in on the running back. I think if he kept it once in a while like Leidner used to it would open the run more. Just keep the defense honest.
Click to expand...
They should probably call his number 1-3 times per game.

I do get annoyed when people say he should keep it on RPO (that isn’t part of the play) or keep it on zone read (we aren’t running zone read)


maybe we should call zone read though.
 

Some guy said:
You clearly don’t know what RPO means
Click to expand...
Then why do we run so many plays where Morgan has the "option" to keep? Maybe that's not a classic RPO play, fine, but Sanford has directly addressed the OP topic.


Some guy said:
They should probably call his number 1-3 times per game.

I do get annoyed when people say he should keep it on RPO (that isn’t part of the play) or keep it on zone read (we aren’t running zone read)


maybe we should call zone read though.
Click to expand...
Bolded: it sure looks like it sometimes ....

Unless you're certain Morgan is just faking that "look" for the look of it?
 

Most good running QBs that aren't super athletes do so after they drop back and the secondary starts to clear out a bit. But that takes an OL to be pretty consistent with their blocks.

I don't think our OL is consistant enough to allow that to happen.
 



MNSpaniel said:
I think they should call Morgan's number once in a while in that RPO. It just shouldn't running back or pass. He always carries the fake out and you can see that nobody even gives him a look. They all just crash in on the running back. I think if he kept it once in a while like Leidner used to it would open the run more. Just keep the defense honest.
Click to expand...

Part of the issue in comparing Leidner and Morgan in terms of carries is that we ran a completely different offense when Leidner was here, one in which the QB keeping the ball was one of the main options in the decision tree. Even though we've had this discussion many, may times on this board I guess we haven't had it for a few months now.
 

Some guy said:
They should probably call his number 1-3 times per game.

I do get annoyed when people say he should keep it on RPO (that isn’t part of the play) or keep it on zone read (we aren’t running zone read)


maybe we should call zone read though.
Click to expand...
Yes, exactly. Instead of starting a new thread about this every few months, people should just rent a billboard stating, "I Don't Understand Football Strategy and Terminology".
 

https://247sports.com/college/minne...l-News-Purdue-Preview-Mike-Sanford-154822087/

Can you walk us through some of the read option stuff that you're doing and why we haven't seen any quarterback keeps this year?

Sanford: "I think there's just such tremendous respect for Tanner's ability to put together his 4.40 40 yard time that he runs. But realistically, in the Big Ten it's a gap sound league. Especially when you play against a team like Iowa, where everything is about being sound in your gap. They're going to account for that off that edge.

Some of this stuff might look like "zone read", and some of it is, but also some of it is a wider outside track play in which we're getting away from that true type downhill run, and kind of running away from that "read" if that makes any sense. There's an element to that.

Certainly, we're always ready for the ability to run Tanner and that's something that I believe he's more than capable of doing. And to be honest, it hasn't really lent itself to him pulling the football yet, because of some of the gaps sound natures of how people play this us."
 

A_Slab_of_Bacon said:
Most good running QBs that aren't super athletes do so after they drop back and the secondary starts to clear out a bit. But that takes an OL to be pretty consistent with their blocks.

I don't think our OL is consistant enough to allow that to happen.
Click to expand...

Without Dunlap and Faalele this is definitely an issue.
 



gopherfan007 said:
Oh really? Humor me on what I don't know evidently.
Click to expand...
RPO is a read where the quarterback decides whether to hand it or pull it an throw it (at least ours is)

there are a few teams who run a post snap QB run RPO but that doesn’t involve a running back option of getting the ball
 

Some guy said:
RPO is a read where the quarterback decides whether to hand it or pull it an throw it (at least ours is)

there are a few teams who run a post snap QB run RPO but that doesn’t involve a running back option of getting the ball
Click to expand...

I realize that.. I was trying to say that we need to add a QB counter to the RPO to open up the offense and make it less predictable. But we need a more athletic (dual threat QB) as a running threat to make it work. I know in the current system that's not how it is.
 

MplsGopher said:
Then why do we run so many plays where Morgan has the "option" to keep? Maybe that's not a classic RPO play, fine, but Sanford has directly addressed the OP topic.



Bolded: it sure looks like it sometimes ....

Unless you're certain Morgan is just faking that "look" for the look of it?
Click to expand...
I don’t think Morgan keeping it is really an option. I don’t think he is reading the defense and deciding whether to hand off or not. Seems like he is just faking it.
 

As we learned in the Play Calling thread. Ahem:

"Fans are NEVER allowed to question any decision made by the Coaching Staff. Never ever! Not even a single play call! Why? Because all fans are just ignorant hillbillies who couldn't possibly see how a single decision made by the lower "g", gods of football decide! If they tell Morgan not to run, even if the other team turns and runs like they are covering a punt, who are we to suggest otherwise!

Nope, we are to pay our $300, $500, $800, $1000 per seat and just sit there and cheer! Never ever question anything!

Unless and until the present staff is fired.

Then all rules are off.

Hope I got that right? :unsure:
 
Last edited:

gopherfan007 said:
Without Dunlap and Faalele this is definitely an issue.
Click to expand...

Yeah it just seems like Morgan is scrambling to stay alive in the first place, not scrambling to run / the gaps in the line he might see aren't going to be there after he takes a step to get through them.
 

gopherfan007 said:
I realize that.. I was trying to say that we need to add a QB counter to the RPO to open up the offense and make it less predictable. But we need a more athletic (dual threat QB) as a running threat to make it work. I know in the current system that's not how it is.
Click to expand...
If we ran a quarterback run off of the RPO we wouldn’t add it to the same play.We would run a different play. Which I already suggested.

You can’t ask a quarterback to run an RPO and a read option on the same play. He would have to read two keys at the same time.
 

Iceland12 said:
As we learned in the Play Calling thread. Ahem:

"Fans are NEVER allowed to question any decision made by the Coaching Staff. Never ever! Not even a single play call! Why? Because all fans are just ignorant hillbillies who couldn't possibly see how a single decision made by the lower "g", gods of football decide! If they tell Morgan not to run, even if the other team turns and runs like they are covering a punt, who are we to suggest otherwise!

Nope, we are too pay our $300, $500, $800, $1000 pre seat and just sit there and cheer! Never ever question anything!

Unless and until the present staff is fired.

Then all rules are off.

Hope I got that right? :unsure:
Click to expand...
I don’t think anyone said any of that.

But we did say if you think Morgan should keep it on an RPO when keeping isn’t even a choice on our RPOs that you should stop saying that.
 

btowngopher said:
I don’t think Morgan keeping it is really an option. I don’t think he is reading the defense and deciding whether to hand off or not. Seems like he is just faking it.
Click to expand...

Purely anecdotally:

I swear to god when I see Morgan look to the sideline and then shout out what looks like a change ... it's RUTM for 2 yards.

That's not a knock on Morgan, I've got no idea what is really happening there (if anything) but damn it.
 

MplsGopher said:
Then why do we run so many plays where Morgan has the "option" to keep? Maybe that's not a classic RPO play, fine, but Sanford has directly addressed the OP topic.

Bolded: it sure looks like it sometimes ....

Unless you're certain Morgan is just faking that "look" for the look of it?
Click to expand...
I would guess we have run plays where Morgan has the option to keep less than 10 times this season as we are blocking the backside end (who would be the “read” guy) on almost every play.

only Sanford could answer the question of exactly how many times we have.


I just say less than 10, because I haven’t noticed a single instance of an intentionally unblocked backside end. I could be totally wrong. Again only Sanford could accurately answer the question.
 

Some guy said:
I would guess we have run plays where Morgan has the option to keep less than 10 times this season as we are blocking the backside end (who would be the “read” guy) on almost every play.

only Sanford could answer the question of exactly how many times we have.


I just say less than 10, because I haven’t noticed a single instance of an intentionally unblocked backside end. I could be totally wrong. Again only Sanford could accurately answer the question.
Click to expand...
Thoughts on post #12, where he did provide an overall answer (but not to the specific question you pose here)?
 

Some guy said:
I don’t think anyone said any of that.

But we did say if you think Morgan should keep it on an RPO when keeping isn’t even a choice on our RPOs that you should stop saying that.
Click to expand...

You're wrong. Read it again.
 


MplsGopher said:
Thoughts on post #12, where he did provide an overall answer (but not to the specific question you pose here)?
Click to expand...
Yeah. That tells me he has called it at least twice!
Would be interesting to know.
Would be interesting to know if Morgan made the right reads on the play he had the option to keep.
 

btowngopher said:
I don’t think Morgan keeping it is really an option. I don’t think he is reading the defense and deciding whether to hand off or not. Seems like he is just faking it.
Click to expand...

From what I can remember being involved with the team a few years back, when running read option plays, coaches were strongly against Tanner keeping it. I don't remember the reasoning but even in practice he rarely kept the ball.
 

QB keeping the ball on a true RPO is not a designed option, and Tanner Morgan is not Mitch Leidner....
 

We are the opposite of Nebraska which, against Illinois, ran the QB 28 times! Putting aside what Fleck’s RPO means (option is to hand off or to pass) as an offensive strategy, I believe that the front seven of defenses confidently collapse on our RBs on plays that look like inside zone because it is a 100% certainty that the QB won’t fake a hand-off and run outside or counter. If we ran a few plays where the QB faked the hand off and ran, it would give the contain guys on defense one more variable to think about, and might increase slightly the chance for some momentary defensive confusion. This MIGHT help our RBs as the game wears on. QB keeper needn’t be for big gains; just need enough of a potential threat to keep the defense wary of collapsing prematurely on the RB. Since this is such a simple concept and we steadfastly refuse to employ it, I think that our coaches have concluded that the risk of injury to Tanner (and concomitant disruption of our very good offense) outweighs the putative benefits of letting Tanner free-wheel in space. He isn’t a big guy.
 

I prefer the RPO to the read option in keeping the safeties and LBers honest. This is especially true if we start running more slants out of the RPO again.

They both sort of have the same purpose. They want to punish the defense for flying to the RB. In that situation, I'd rather see the ball in Bateman's or CAB's hands than Morgan's. They are just more dynamic, I'd prefer our QV to get less hits, etc.

I get it though, we run plays and it looks like the QB keep is wide open and those two plays aren't mutually exclusive.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom