*****The Patrick Mahomes Thread*****

[Dante84]

IT ****ING HAPPENED



OP UPDATE:

Because of all the interest in this thread, I've place all of the video content of Patrick Mahomes II's college career, and draft day goodness into a single post that can be found here. Enjoy!

[Bl00dyBizkitz]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

I think the idea of 'establishing the run' is outdated and ridiculous.

But I think having it in your toolbox for situational football is a good thing. Maybe that's an injury to your QB or WRs. Maybe it's a late-game bleed the clock situation. Or it's defense specific where they're pulling their safeties back, sticking in Nickel and daring you to run it at them.

But it's so secondary to the passing game that I can't bring myself to give a shit about it. If anything we do to help the running game detracts from our ability to pass the football - don't do that thing.

I feel the same. Its why I think its obvious why RB's don't get paid. Why pay a top tier RB and play an inferior type of offense? It's not rocket science.

[BWillie]

Originally Posted by Chris Meck

It's still football. Go back and watch the Super Bowl. You need to be able to threaten every blade of grass, pass AND run.

You do. On 3rd and short and 2nd and short. On 1st and 10, 2nd and 7, 3rd and 8. There is no reason to ever run. Never, ever, ever.

[BWillie]

Originally Posted by ThaVirus

That’s just BWillie. He’s long beat the drum that pass plays net you higher EPA/play than run plays; therefore, you should never choose to run the ball.

It’s such a ridiculously oversimplified, uninformed take. There’s not really much point in even engaging him on it.

Andy Reid, offensive guru and notorious lover-of-the-forward-pass, still calls run plays at about a 40% clip. That’s all you need to know.

Please dispute the math.

[BWillie]

Originally Posted by TwistedChief

Yes, but if we only threw the ball, we would've also won Super Bowls 1, 2, 3, 5-53, 55, and 56 /BWillie

Anytime you have Patrick Mahomes on a football field you choose to run the ball you have deliberately tried to score less efficiently as you could have unless it is 3rd or 2nd and short or a 2-pt conversion. It really is that simple. Now, if you are playing some 3-14 team that sucks and you want to conserve some offensive playcalls and things like that, by all means. But if you are in a game you must win, have to win, there is no reason. Ever. To run the football outside of the situations I mentioned.

[Bearcat]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

I think the idea of 'establishing the run' is outdated and ridiculous.

But I think having it in your toolbox for situational football is a good thing. Maybe that's an injury to your QB or WRs. Maybe it's a late-game bleed the clock situation. Or it's defense specific where they're pulling their safeties back, sticking in Nickel and daring you to run it at them.

But it's so secondary to the passing game that I can't bring myself to give a shit about it. If anything we do to help the running game detracts from our ability to pass the football - don't do that thing.

Yeah, that's RRPP play action shit.

Theoretically with Mahomes, you probably don't need to run, but then you'd add things to the passing game to keep the defense honest, too... you'd probably end up with more screens in the middle of the field and so forth that have the same impact as a run, but of course with more options than just handing it off.

There's added risk to Mahomes, too... I'd rather RBs do RB things in the regular season than rely on Mahomes to drop back a million times every game; plus playing more vanilla in general.

In the playoffs... for sure, get rid of the "establishing" run game plays and especially running it up the gut on 2nd and long, which really grinds my gears.

[ThaVirus]

Originally Posted by BWillie

Please dispute the math.

I don’t need to. Andy Reid, who has forgotten more about the game of football than you will ever know, still runs the football in situations you say he shouldn’t.

And Andy was favoring the pass long before it was en vogue so it’s not like he’s some old school purist.

[BWillie]

Originally Posted by ThaVirus

I don’t need to. Andy Reid, who has forgotten more about the game of football than you will ever know, still runs the football in situations you say he shouldn’t.

And Andy was favoring the pass long before it was en vogue so it’s not like he’s some old school purist.

Change takes time. Look at how many 3s basketball teams took 25 years ago compared to now. They just didn't know any better and had someone came out years ago shooting as many 3s as they do now simple minded fans and owners would revolt.

[Kman34]

Patrick’s arm gets tired and that’s when we run..

[Chris Meck]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

I think the idea of 'establishing the run' is outdated and ridiculous.

But I think having it in your toolbox for situational football is a good thing. Maybe that's an injury to your QB or WRs. Maybe it's a late-game bleed the clock situation. Or it's defense specific where they're pulling their safeties back, sticking in Nickel and daring you to run it at them.

But it's so secondary to the passing game that I can't bring myself to give a shit about it. If anything we do to help the running game detracts from our ability to pass the football - don't do that thing.

Look, nobody is saying that Mahomes isn't the reason we win. But as we've seen, teams are willing to drop 7 and 8. Even the great one struggles sometimes with that. The best way to keep a defense honest is to force them to play straight up, and honor their run fits. We have a back we can do that with, and might have another. Make them pay for that shit. Don't let the pass rush just tee off on Mahomes.

It's still football, even now. 'establish the run'? If by that, you mean 'show them you can, and you will ' enough to make them play straight up, then yeah, you need to. If you mean we should run it 30 times a game, then no, absolutely not.

[RunKC]

My 7 year old son is really into flag football. His entire team shows up early to try to do "the Mahomes throws"

They all want to play short stop in baseball not even bc they like it. They want to learn to throw like Patrick bc they saw he played baseball first and their football coach doesn't know how to teach them to throw that way.

Patrick is changing everything.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by Chris Meck

Look, nobody is saying that Mahomes isn't the reason we win. But as we've seen, teams are willing to drop 7 and 8. Even the great one struggles sometimes with that. The best way to keep a defense honest is to force them to play straight up, and honor their run fits. We have a back we can do that with, and might have another. Make them pay for that shit. Don't let the pass rush just tee off on Mahomes.

It's still football, even now. 'establish the run'? If by that, you mean 'show them you can, and you will ' enough to make them play straight up, then yeah, you need to. If you mean we should run it 30 times a game, then no, absolutely not.

I've said for years that I think you have to run a bit but the baseline number is vastly overstated and the returns for running beyond that over overstated as well.

My target would be 12-15 rush attempts/gm unless the other team is just daring us to do it like the Bills did 2-3 years ago. If we had an entire season where we called 225 designed rushes and over half of those were on 3rd and short or goal to go situations, I'd be happy as a pig in shit.

Because I have essentially no use for first down runs on our side of the football field apart from using them as straight up tendency breakers designed to confuse the spreadsheets in games that you're pretty sure you'll have well in-hand by the 4th. In that case? Sure - run the ball a dozen times in a 'close' game because when the opponent starts crunching stats in December, those carries are gonna make the data fuzzy.

And yeah, I'm absolutely convinced that Reid does that.

But as a preferred means to move the football and win the game? Pft - running is wildly overrated. You don't have to do it much. You don't have to do it particularly well. A modicum of effort is good enough.

[Chris Meck]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

I've said for years that I think you have to run a bit but the baseline number is vastly overstated and the returns for running beyond that over overstated as well.

My target would be 12-15 rush attempts/gm unless the other team is just daring us to do it like the Bills did 2-3 years ago. If we had an entire season where we called 225 designed rushes and over half of those were on 3rd and short or goal to go situations, I'd be happy as a pig in shit.

Because I have essentially no use for first down runs on our side of the football field apart from using them as straight up tendency breakers designed to confuse the spreadsheets in games that you're pretty sure you'll have well in-hand by the 4th. In that case? Sure - run the ball a dozen times in a 'close' game because when the opponent starts crunching stats in December, those carries are gonna make the data fuzzy.

And yeah, I'm absolutely convinced that Reid does that.

But as a preferred means to move the football and win the game? Pft - running is wildly overrated. You don't have to do it much. You don't have to do it particularly well. A modicum of effort is good enough.

Everything should be on the table as tendency breakers to keep the defense guessing and on shaky ground at all times.

[Marcellus]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

I've said for years that I think you have to run a bit but the baseline number is vastly overstated and the returns for running beyond that over overstated as well.

My target would be 12-15 rush attempts/gm unless the other team is just daring us to do it like the Bills did 2-3 years ago. If we had an entire season where we called 225 designed rushes and over half of those were on 3rd and short or goal to go situations, I'd be happy as a pig in shit.

Because I have essentially no use for first down runs on our side of the football field apart from using them as straight up tendency breakers designed to confuse the spreadsheets in games that you're pretty sure you'll have well in-hand by the 4th. In that case? Sure - run the ball a dozen times in a 'close' game because when the opponent starts crunching stats in December, those carries are gonna make the data fuzzy.

And yeah, I'm absolutely convinced that Reid does that.

But as a preferred means to move the football and win the game? Pft - running is wildly overrated. You don't have to do it much. You don't have to do it particularly well. A modicum of effort is good enough.

I believe CEHs first ever game was the opener against the Texans and KC just ran the ball down their throats. Made it look like CEH was going to be a stud.

[RealSNR]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

I've said for years that I think you have to run a bit but the baseline number is vastly overstated and the returns for running beyond that over overstated as well.

My target would be 12-15 rush attempts/gm unless the other team is just daring us to do it like the Bills did 2-3 years ago. If we had an entire season where we called 225 designed rushes and over half of those were on 3rd and short or goal to go situations, I'd be happy as a pig in shit.

Because I have essentially no use for first down runs on our side of the football field apart from using them as straight up tendency breakers designed to confuse the spreadsheets in games that you're pretty sure you'll have well in-hand by the 4th. In that case? Sure - run the ball a dozen times in a 'close' game because when the opponent starts crunching stats in December, those carries are gonna make the data fuzzy.

And yeah, I'm absolutely convinced that Reid does that.

But as a preferred means to move the football and win the game? Pft - running is wildly overrated. You don't have to do it much. You don't have to do it particularly well. A modicum of effort is good enough.

I thought about chirping at you something about running the ball and wearing out the defense, but some troll jobs aren’t worth looking like THAT much of a complete dumbass

[TwistedChief]

Originally Posted by Chris Meck

Everything should be on the table as tendency breakers to keep the defense guessing and on shaky ground at all times.

I think some defenses and DCs these days are too creative and shape-shifting to really believe that the threat of a running game is worthless.

Even if you want to believe that a team will play perpetually light boxes and allow you to gash them for 6yds a clip, those DCs are human and eventually they wear down and get frustrated by giving up those easy gains.

I genuinely think our offensive output last season was as good or better than in the Tyreek Hill days in large part because of Pachecho and the run game. We had been so, so below average with Clyde in prior seasons that it was comically bad. Just having someone even average (or above) allowed us to unlock a complete offense that clearly paid dividends when we needed it in the postseason.