Which is more disturbing of that odd coincidence?
http://www.ncaa.com/stats/football/fbs/current/team/703
Our DumpsterFire D is pretty much beyond hope - our weakest link cornerback position needs double team help, which Mike can't/won't do (somewhat understandably due to the aforementioned #65th ranked rush D, but why is our rush D so bad and our pass rush so anemic? I'm not wasting my time there as Bob is not firing Mike - it is what it is).
But on offense, given a mobile QB, an AA-caliber TE, and MIXON and PERRINE...we should be in the top quartile running the ball, even behind the shoddiest of makeshift OLs.
In fact I see at least 4 top round draft picks on this O, in this order:
1. Mixon
2. O. Brown
3. Andrews
4. Perrine (if he regains last year's form)
Surely that kind of talent can be better utilized than the current 65th rush offense (and I mention Andrews because LBs should be peeling off the LOS and covering him, creating open lanes).
Since game 1 it is apparent Mixon is the best playmaker on this team and needs a lot more touches. If that means Perrine needs to start blocking for him, then do it Riley. Incredibly our ineffective red zone offense (against tOSU at least) does not even involve Mixon - he's typically on the sidelines in the redzone, as we telegraph Perrine is getting the ball (and stuffed).
What is the counter-argument for not making Mixon the feature back and building our entire O around him?
What is clear is that what Riley is calling is severely under-performing in regard to rushing the ball.
http://www.ncaa.com/stats/football/fbs/current/team/703
Our DumpsterFire D is pretty much beyond hope - our weakest link cornerback position needs double team help, which Mike can't/won't do (somewhat understandably due to the aforementioned #65th ranked rush D, but why is our rush D so bad and our pass rush so anemic? I'm not wasting my time there as Bob is not firing Mike - it is what it is).
But on offense, given a mobile QB, an AA-caliber TE, and MIXON and PERRINE...we should be in the top quartile running the ball, even behind the shoddiest of makeshift OLs.
In fact I see at least 4 top round draft picks on this O, in this order:
1. Mixon
2. O. Brown
3. Andrews
4. Perrine (if he regains last year's form)
Surely that kind of talent can be better utilized than the current 65th rush offense (and I mention Andrews because LBs should be peeling off the LOS and covering him, creating open lanes).
Since game 1 it is apparent Mixon is the best playmaker on this team and needs a lot more touches. If that means Perrine needs to start blocking for him, then do it Riley. Incredibly our ineffective red zone offense (against tOSU at least) does not even involve Mixon - he's typically on the sidelines in the redzone, as we telegraph Perrine is getting the ball (and stuffed).
What is the counter-argument for not making Mixon the feature back and building our entire O around him?
What is clear is that what Riley is calling is severely under-performing in regard to rushing the ball.
