Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Meck
Leaving your defense on the field for long stretches of time is what wears out your defense.
It's the snap count.
To eat clock and move the chains, most teams run the ball along with a controlled, short passing game.
A tired defense probably doesn't want to have to tackle a physical back like Henry.
They're tired. He's big. It hurts.
Some of you guys are looking at this from an either/or angle, when like most things in life and football, it's BOTH.
They wouldn't want to chase Jamaal Charles in his prime in the 4th quarter either, although Charles would likely take one to the house and they'd at least get a breather.
It's about the sustained drives whether they end in points or not. (IF you have a lead already. Points are better, of course, but wearing a defense out is about snap counts and time on the field without a breather.)
If you're a 190 pound DB, and you're exhausted in the 4th quarter, you don't want to see Derrick Henry's big, fast ass coming through the hole untouched with a head of steam coming at you. You just don't. You'll do your job if you can unless you're a total pussy, but you ain't gonna like it. It's demoralizing.
Think about how you felt as a fan last season, when the other team could just ram it down our defense's throats late in games and we couldn't stop them. If you were demoralized as a fan (and I know I sure was), imagine how it felt to be on the field. Knowing what they were going to do and being powerless to stop them.
Having a Derrick Henry to do it with is just the icing on the cake.
|
I'm talking about the 'large numbers' view - if you have a guy like Henry, try that approach. But again, even with Derrick Henry, it oftentimes doesn't make a difference - the Patriots game being a perfect example.
Because let's be honest, that 190 lb CB isn't gonna wanna see Derrick Henry running at him in the open field in the
1st quarter. That DB is NEVER going to want to hit a power back. A guy like Peters is gonna make a business decision in the 1st quarter the same as the 4th. A guy like Breeland is going to try to hit him in the 4th same as the 1st. I just don't buy that they're appreciably less likely to go make a tackle UNLESS, as you've noted and as was demonstrated in that playoff game, they just cannot get off the damn field.
So again, if we're talking about that Titans game, the Chiefs were moving the ball really well in the 1st half - there was no reason at all to change that up. And then they were running the ball in early downs on the first couple of drives in the 2nd half before they got behind the sticks (where it would've made no sense to continue running). You do what you're best at to keep them on the field - you don't just mindlessly plow into them because you think you'll wear them out later.
In the Andy Reid era the Chiefs, even when they had Hunt and Smith, were a FAR more efficient team moving the ball through the air. The value of a good running game is in its simplicity - the ability to just hand a dude the ball when your passing game (which requires far more moving parts/timing) is just out of sync. It isn't in its ability to 'wear defenses down'.
The idea that the guys who get hit by SOMEBODY roughly 50 times/gm are suddenly beat up because they had to tackle the average RB who's rarely coming at them at full speed and who rarely has a size advantage on them is just not supported by facts or logic. And if your CBs are out there making a bunch of tackles on RBs, it gets back to the previous point - your defense is probably just bad against the run and you're in trouble because of THAT, not because they're tired. There are outliers, yes - but they're not common.