Last two games: are they sustainable?

[iaafan]

MSU ran for 258 yards and 2 TDs on 48 carries against UC Davis. That's 5.4 per carry. If you take out the kneel downs and sacks (there were none) it's 5.6 per carry.
MSU ran for 376 yards and 3 TDs on 62 carries against UM. That's 5.9 per carry. If you take out the kneel downs and sacks (2-23) it's 7.0 per carry. If you take out the three long runs, that's still over 4.0 per carry.

My opinion is the run game helped the defense in both games.
UCD had a good game running the ball with 5.0 per carry, but MSU held their star Luuga to just 16 yards on 13 carries. UCD struggled passing the ball going just 19-37-0 182 yards.
UM had an average day running the ball with 4.0 per carry, but struggled passing going just 16-31-1 191 and 1 TD.

Is this identity sustainable?

[Colter_Nuanez]

MSU ran for 258 yards and 2 TDs on 48 carries against UC Davis. That's 5.4 per carry. If you take out the kneel downs and sacks (there were none) it's 5.6 per carry.
MSU ran for 376 yards and 3 TDs on 62 carries against UM. That's 5.9 per carry. If you take out the kneel downs and sacks (2-23) it's 7.0 per carry. If you take out the three long runs, that's still over 4.0 per carry.

My opinion is the run game helped the defense in both games.
UCD had a good game running the ball with 5.0 per carry, but MSU held their star Luuga to just 16 yards on 13 carries. UCD struggled passing the ball going just 19-37-0 182 yards.
UM had an average day running the ball with 4.0 per carry, but struggled passing going just 16-31-1 191 and 1 TD.

Is this identity sustainable?

Several comments about this from Choate, Messingham in this story:

PART III of our off-season Montana State series:
Choate's vision for second off-season not clouded by strong finish
http://skylinesportsmt.com/choates-visi ... ng-finish/

[iaafan]

I posted this 9 minutes before you posted that. That question was in the air apparently.

[wbtfg]

Pitre, also in his second season as MSU’s recruiting coordinator, said last week Montana State has no set number it will sign in February. Choate acknowledged two days after the Cat-Griz win that more than 16 players from last year’s Bobcats likely won’t make it until fall camp next August.

[HelenaCat95]

Pitre, also in his second season as MSU’s recruiting coordinator, said last week Montana State has no set number it will sign in February. Choate acknowledged two days after the Cat-Griz win that more than 16 players from last year’s Bobcats likely won’t make it until fall camp next August.

I noticed that quote too. Is that number in addition to those that are graduating/exhausted eligibility?

[iaafan]

16 not counting seniors. You can look at the roster and come up with 16 guys that 'might' not be back. You can do that almost any year. I wouldn't read to much into it.

[Hawks86]

The amount of scholarship dollars associated with those 16+ is the important part.

For the original question. I think that the ability to run the ball will always be our identity. Completing 2 passes is not.

[VimSince03]

I know this gets old but ask NDSU if it is sustainable.

[Colter_Nuanez]

16 not counting seniors. You can look at the roster and come up with 16 guys that 'might' not be back. You can do that almost any year. I wouldn't read to much into it.

No, 16 counting seniors. They have 16 open roster spots/scholarships with the graduation of 14, the retirement of Blake Braun and the departure of Sidney Holmes. Choate just acknowledged there might be more than 16 new players on the roster next season.

[wbtfg]

16 not counting seniors. You can look at the roster and come up with 16 guys that 'might' not be back. You can do that almost any year. I wouldn't read to much into it.

No, 16 counting seniors. They have 16 open roster spots/scholarships with the graduation of 14, the retirement of Blake Braun and the departure of Sidney Holmes. Choate just acknowledged there might be more than 16 new players on the roster next season.

Aha.....I read that with a different tone. So we have 16 open spots for sure, but due to attrition there will most certainly be more than that. Thanks for clarification.

[iaafan]

[quote="Colter_Nuanez"][quote="iaafan"]16 not counting seniors. You can look at the roster and come up with 16 guys that 'might' not be back. You can do that almost any year. I wouldn't read to much into it.[/quote]

No, 16 counting seniors. They have 16 open roster spots/scholarships with the graduation of 14, the retirement of Blake Braun and the departure of Sidney Holmes. Choate just acknowledged there might be more than 16 new players on the roster next season.[/quote]


"Choate acknowledged two days after the Cat-Griz win that more than 16 players from last year’s Bobcats likely won’t make it until fall camp next August." I think if you would've added "the" between '16' and 'players' it would've came across the way you wanted it to. The way it's written makes it sound like you talking about underclassmen, since it's obvious that the seniors won't be back. Couple that with the possibility that there really are about 16 underclassmen players that might not return despite not having their eligibility expire.

[Colter_Nuanez]

16 not counting seniors. You can look at the roster and come up with 16 guys that 'might' not be back. You can do that almost any year. I wouldn't read to much into it.

No, 16 counting seniors. They have 16 open roster spots/scholarships with the graduation of 14, the retirement of Blake Braun and the departure of Sidney Holmes. Choate just acknowledged there might be more than 16 new players on the roster next season.

"Choate acknowledged two days after the Cat-Griz win that more than 16 players from last year’s Bobcats likely won’t make it until fall camp next August." I think if you would've added "the" between '16' and 'players' it would've came across the way you wanted it to. The way it's written makes it sound like you talking about underclassmen, since it's obvious that the seniors won't be back. Couple that with the possibility that there really are about 16 underclassmen players that might not return despite not having their eligibility expire.

It now reads :

Pitre, in his second season as MSU’s recruiting coordinator, said last week Montana State has no set number it will sign in February. Choate acknowledged two days after the Cat-Griz win that more than the 16 vacated spots from last year’s team could be filled by new faces by fall camp next August.

[iaafan]

Even better. Thanks.

Back to the sustainable thing. I guess what I was looking for is if people think that MSU will continue to run the 3-back system with Vander/LaSane/Jones with about 15-20 pass plays per game and about 50 running plays. And if so, if it would work in a conference like the Big Sky. A lot people think you have to be a pass heavy team to compete in the BSC. I'm not sure we disproved that theory over the last two games, but it was a fairly convincing couple of weeks based on the numbers.

[Colter_Nuanez]

Even better. Thanks.

Back to the sustainable thing. I guess what I was looking for is if people think that MSU will continue to run the 3-back system with Vander/LaSane/Jones with about 15-20 pass plays per game and about 50 running plays. And if so, if it would work in a conference like the Big Sky. A lot people think you have to be a pass heavy team to compete in the BSC. I'm not sure we disproved that theory over the last two games, but it was a fairly convincing couple of weeks based on the numbers.

Montana rose to national prominence in the mid-1990s under Don Read and Mick Dennehy with a pass-happy offense centered upon the stellar play of Dave Dickenson and Brian Ah Yat. Mike Kramer brought Eastern Washington the Division I-AA semifinals in 1997 with a pass-oriented attack. The Bobcats in the early 2000s under Kramer, despite featuring some very impressive feature backs like Ryan Johnson, were a throw-first operation led by Travis Lulay. Dating back to the single-back days at Idaho with Dennis Erickson up through Boise State's rise to prominence, the Big Sky Conference has long had a reputation as a pass-happy league.

Over the last 15 years, however, Eastern Washington under Beau Baldwin's direction first as OC and for the last nine years as head coach has been the only team to really have success with pass-oriented offenses. The Eagles have won five of the last seven Big Sky titles thanks to an offense that has led the country in passing almost every since season since Baldwin took over as head coach in 2008.

As with most trends in football, many teams tried to mimic Eastern's plan of attack. Portland State ran the run & shoot under Jerry Glanville to almost no success. Since Mike Kramer took over at Idaho State, the Bengals have been the most pass oriented team in league history, three times breaking the record for passing attempts in a single season. But that has resulted in just one winning season (2014) in Pocatello. For Jerome Souers' first 17 years at Northern Arizona, the Lumberjacks ran a West Coast offense that features stud backs like Zach Bauman. NAU made the playoffs three times and won the Big Sky twice with this style. Since switching to a run-pass option attack that specializes in taking shots down the field, NAU has a 12-10 record. Sacramento State had some relative success with Garrett Safron playing quarterback and stretching the field with DeAndre Carter and Nnamdi Agude but are still in search of their first FCS playoff berth.

During the Rob Ash era, standout quarterbacks like DeNarius McGhee and Dakota Prukop gave the Bobcats an aura of a pass-heavy team but in reality, every single one of the teams guided by those to quarterbacks ran the ball significantly more than they threw the ball.

Under Bobby Hauck, Montana ripped off seven straight Big Sky Conference championships and went to the FCS title game three times, all while operating an I-formation run-heavy offense that rode Lex Hilliard, Justin Green and Chase Reynolds to more than 80 wins. Since Montana has reverted back to air attacks first under Robin Pflugrad and now Bob Stitt, the Griz have missed the playoffs three times in seven seasons.

Meanwhile, a new trend has started over the last seven seasons, sparked by North Dakota State's dominance and solidified within the Big Sky Conference. Montana made the playoffs twice under Mick Delaney running a pro-style offense. Montana State rode Cody Kirk, Tray Robinson and Orenzo Davis to three straight Big Sky titles, then made the playoffs with Prukop at the helm running a spread version of the triple option and rushing for almost 250 yards per game in 2014. North Dakota has won 16 games over the last two seasons, including sharing the Big Sky title this year by almost exclusively running the ball. Cal Poly shared the league in its first year in the league in 2012 and made the playoffs this year running the triple option. Portland State earned the No. 6 seed and won nine games last season using a motion-heavy variation of the pistol that ran the ball early and often. Southern Utah ran a variation of the run-pass option and rode it to the first Big Sky title in school history last season. Weber State employed two-back and two-tight end sets as much as anyone in the league en route to its first playoff berth since 2009.

TEAMS IN THE LEAGUE AND THE OFFENSES THEY RUN

Cal Poly — Triple option
Eastern Washington — single back spread mixed with air raid and RPO elements

Idaho State — Air Raid spread

Montana — Stitt's version of the spread

Montana State — a work in progress but in the last two games of the season, I would categorize it as a two and three-back offense. The best way to say it is a power run offense out of the shotgun with a lot of zone-read elements as well as some full-house formation counter and power elements.

Northern Arizona — run-pass option and when Case Cookus went down, it became run-heavy.

North Dakota — Pro-style spiced with as much pre-snap motion as anyone in the league

Northern Colorado — an interesting evolution that is actually a key to their improvement - a run-pass option team that takes as many shots as anyone in the league. I think Bobcat fans will be surprised how explosive UNC's offense is and how much speed they have in the skill positions when the teams face off for the first time since 2013 in Greeley next year.

Portland State — Hybrid of the pistol that is as run-heavy as any team in the league.

Sacramento State — spread but the Hornets ran the ball about 55 percent of the time this year (431 to 392) due to the presence of stud running back Jordan Robinson (996 yards, 13 TDS

Southern Utah — run-pass option similar to Northern Colorado. When they don't run it inside, they throw the ball down the field whether it's there or not.

UC Davis — a hybrid West Coast with some pistol elements like Portland State and a ton of pre-snap motions like North Dakota.

Weber State — the stats don't show it because Weber lost its top four running backs to injury so they only ran for 131 yards per game, but Weber runs a power run game out of the spread with multiple tight end and multiple running back sets as much as anybody. Weber made a living this year out of flipping one or both their tight ends pre-snap to confuse the defense. Choate mentioned this as a huge factor in Weber picking Montana State apart in the first half of their game in Ogden.

Unless you're Eastern Washington, you actually have a better chance in the Big Sky to make a run at the playoffs if you can run the ball, play defense, take the ball away and control the clock.

[iaafan]

That's quite the rundown of teams and historic perspective. Thanks.

I think UC Davis and I know UM came out looking to stop the run. Neither was successful. I think that's a testament to how good the OL was playing. I think the run game could be every bit as successful next year as it was those last two games. The best run D in the league was UND's. They ended up allowing just 2.9 per carry/91.3 per game and MSU averaged 3.7 against them with Newell and Brekke getting 5.0 (125 yards on 25 carries). MSU averaged 317 per game over the last two games and 5.8 per carry. I think these things bode well for MSU next season.

[GoldstoneCat]

Even better. Thanks.

Back to the sustainable thing. I guess what I was looking for is if people think that MSU will continue to run the 3-back system with Vander/LaSane/Jones with about 15-20 pass plays per game and about 50 running plays. And if so, if it would work in a conference like the Big Sky. A lot people think you have to be a pass heavy team to compete in the BSC. I'm not sure we disproved that theory over the last two games, but it was a fairly convincing couple of weeks based on the numbers.

I think yes, the look of the UC Davis and Montana games is somewhat the blueprint for this staff going forward. Now obviously, we need to complete some throws, but I think you have it close to right in your post. I think if we can get Murray/Rovig/whomever to a place in this offense where we can throw 20-24 times a game, off play action mostly but some quick outside stuff as well, that's where we would like to be. Ideally, if you're running the ball effectively, there aren't many difficult throws in those 20-24, so the true key to me is being able to hit 15+ completions per game. If we can do that, behind the o-lines these guys are building toward the next 5 seasons or so, we could be very difficult to stop on offense. I like the idea more than I thought I would at first, as it's more weather-proof, more injury-proof (specifically at QB) and gives a stiff test to other teams' depth in their front 7.

[bobcat92]

Even better. Thanks.

Back to the sustainable thing. I guess what I was looking for is if people think that MSU will continue to run the 3-back system with Vander/LaSane/Jones with about 15-20 pass plays per game and about 50 running plays. And if so, if it would work in a conference like the Big Sky. A lot people think you have to be a pass heavy team to compete in the BSC. I'm not sure we disproved that theory over the last two games, but it was a fairly convincing couple of weeks based on the numbers.

I think yes, the look of the UC Davis and Montana games is somewhat the blueprint for this staff going forward. Now obviously, we need to complete some throws, but I think you have it close to right in your post. I think if we can get Murray/Rovig/whomever to a place in this offense where we can throw 20-24 times a game, off play action mostly but some quick outside stuff as well, that's where we would like to be. Ideally, if you're running the ball effectively, there aren't many difficult throws in those 20-24, so the true key to me is being able to hit 15+ completions per game. If we can do that, behind the o-lines these guys are building toward the next 5 seasons or so, we could be very difficult to stop on offense. I like the idea more than I thought I would at first, as it's more weather-proof, more injury-proof (specifically at QB) and gives a stiff test to other teams' depth in their front 7.

I don't see us using a three back offense if we start to have success in the passing game. I saw three backs as an adjustment by the coaching staff when they realized that we weren't going to have success passing the ball this year. I can see that package coming in for certain situations but not the primary formation.

Choate indicated that he wanted a traditional two back offense when he took over and he indicated he wanted to be able to pound the ball on the ground. I see it being more balanced with the pass.

I think GoldstoneCat is correct though. If we can grind it out on the ground then I am sure that is the game plan this staff will stick with.

It will be very interesting to see what the QB play next year will be like.

[BelgradeBobcat]

It depends on who you can recruit. Montana could get those huge offensive linemen and just pound teams into submission. Same with NDSU. I don't know why the griz went away from it when Hauck left-except I heard lots of complaints that it was boring to watch. But winning should never be boring.

The Big Sky has historically been a quarterback driven league. When a team can't get those huge offensive linemen then the next best thing is to spread everybody out and throw it all over the place. Most Big Sky teams recruit California heavily. There's an abundance of good high school quarterbacks and undersized fast guys after the FBS have picked over the big fast guys.

Who can MSU recruit? That's what will determine how we play.

[GoldstoneCat]

It depends on who you can recruit. Montana could get those huge offensive linemen and just pound teams into submission. Same with NDSU. I don't know why the griz went away from it when Hauck left-except I heard lots of complaints that it was boring to watch. But winning should never be boring.

The Big Sky has historically been a quarterback driven league. When a team can't get those huge offensive linemen then the next best thing is to spread everybody out and throw it all over the place. Most Big Sky teams recruit California heavily. There's an abundance of good high school quarterbacks and undersized fast guys after the FBS have picked over the big fast guys.

Who can MSU recruit? That's what will determine how we play.

Spot on you are, and I think you're seeing a bit of evidence that this staff wants to build this program from the front to the back, on both sides. They appear, so far, to want to recruit and develop o-linemen and pass rushers, and take the occasional transfer at the speed/skill positions. It remains to be seen if they can develop these big guys into the soul crushers like UM used to run out there, and NDSU still does, but to me that looks to be the idea. Hopefully Murray and/or Rovig can develop in the next couple of years, giving us a bit of variety in the passing game as well. IMO that's the plan, guess we'll stay tuned to watch it play out!

[onceacat]

It depends on who you can recruit. Montana could get those huge offensive linemen and just pound teams into submission. Same with NDSU. I don't know why the griz went away from it when Hauck left-except I heard lots of complaints that it was boring to watch. But winning should never be boring.

The Big Sky has historically been a quarterback driven league. When a team can't get those huge offensive linemen then the next best thing is to spread everybody out and throw it all over the place. Most Big Sky teams recruit California heavily. There's an abundance of good high school quarterbacks and undersized fast guys after the FBS have picked over the big fast guys.

Who can MSU recruit? That's what will determine how we play.

Spot on you are, and I think you're seeing a bit of evidence that this staff wants to build this program from the front to the back, on both sides. They appear, so far, to want to recruit and develop o-linemen and pass rushers, and take the occasional transfer at the speed/skill positions. It remains to be seen if they can develop these big guys into the soul crushers like UM used to run out there, and NDSU still does, but to me that looks to be the idea. Hopefully Murray and/or Rovig can develop in the next couple of years, giving us a bit of variety in the passing game as well. IMO that's the plan, guess we'll stay tuned to watch it play out!

Even if Murray develops as a passer over the off-season, he's still probably a year off from being a legit BSC gunslinger. I can't imagine that Rovig or O'Reilly (or Brown or McChesney for that matter) are going to be ready to start come September.

So we better hope that its sustainable. I'd guess that you see a lot of the same diamond sets as well as some RPO type plays for Murray to start getting to 10 or so completions per game, just enough to keep the D honest. With the O-linemen we have returning and the new kids they are bringing in, I don't think the offense is going to be a conference champ, but I could see it being sustainable enough to get to 7 wins and a playoff invite.