I actually disagree with both the how and the when issues in the running game. There is actually a ton of creativity. They use pulling players at every level, read option looks, zone and power. Remember, the run game was really working well the early part of the season. And I think that was almost entirely due to scheme and timing
The dirty little secret is, however, our OL cannot beat better DL players 1:1, and BRob is good but not great.
Kliff has had to be creative to make up for these deficiencies. But some of it has been figured out and now it’s back to execution, and we aren’t great at that because the OL, specifically the tackles, aren’t great in individual matchups.
So, the question now is, what can he change to try and generate more of a run game with more smoke and mirrors.
Or can he? Or do we have to adapt even more to using the quick pass as a substitute to the run game. I get sticking with the run game, but at some point, you can’t bloody your head in the wall by banging your forehead on it.
It's not obvious or easy - especially from our vantage point - to separate this type of analysis. It can always clearly be either, we just have to have some clear evidence (at least) and even then, talking in absolutes is pretty difficult.
I can easily point to the really strange predilection for shotgun handoffs to BRob, and then running up the middle, on 3rd. It just doesn't work, the defense knows what's coming... and yet Kliff calls it. Repeatedly. In multiple games.
If that doesn't betray a problem with creativity... I don't know what to tell you. You have to change things when they aren't working, you have to be able to tell when the defense is reading certain situations. It can also be a tool - you can have a play that looks exactly like that, fake that handoff and then kill 'em deep etc. Of course - again - we always have to admit that some of those plays also may need some blocking and other factors they may not trust - but that doesn't mean they should run that play again, in certain apparently very readable situations.
There were a couple of plays (not just that one ^^) where it looked like the defense was clearly in the know on what was coming. There is a tendency problem; it's more than just "the OL is bad" and "the RB is not great" - when the defense knows it's a run, it is a completely different dynamic. Your OL and your RB are both going to look 10 times worse if your scheme is being read too easily. I am not saying either of those components are world-beaters or would win with better scheme, but I am saying I have seen a few too many instances where scheme did not help them.
I pointed out at least a couple of those cases that are clear.
By the way, I am a big fan of passing when we have to, knowing the strengths.... etc etc. However, I can say that the makeup of this team does not spell all-out passing or Air Raid. This team would do better with more balanced creativity, not just playcalling. When you say "the run game was working earlier" as evidence of creativity... no, the run game was working because it was new, and the team was playing inferior talent. (** Actually, this is not totally true; we have lost some of the twists that were being run earlier this year; I don't have the numbers, but I am pretty sure we run to the outside significantly less than before **) By the way, a lot of tendencies (significant) were broken against the Titans. It isn't a coincidence that they had a huge offensive output against a strong D there.
This Eagles game was also not bad at all. They did really well with the passing game (although again - Daniels bailed them out bigtime more than once, which is going to happen and lucky us for having him). The running game struggled, and it did not feature great creativity, and it also had some unforced errors on individual players (BRob! Come on, man).
 }})
