Your Thoughts on Ducks’ 5 RB Rotation?

[cartm25]

Regarding QBs, I believe the saying  goes, “If you have two QBs, you actually have none.”

 

Could something similar be said about RBs?: “If you have five RBs, you actually have none.”

 

I understand the benefit of having depth at the position, but to play all 5 RBs regularly in games is starting to feel like a disadvantage.

 

Similar to QBs, how does a RB get into a rhythm and begin to get a feel for the flow of the entire offense?

 

If RBs are used situationally based on specific skills how do they develop into an “all-around” RB? Furthermore, won’t the situational use of RBs become a “tell” for opposing defenses for what play, or set of plays, is coming next?

In Lanning’s press conferences, he makes it sound like playing 5 RBs is a feature of the offense rather than a way to establish “starters” vs “backups”.

 

I want the cream to rise to the top. I want to have a RB the likes of James, Barner, or Freeman lighting up defenses on a regular basis.

 

What are you thoughts about this? Hoping members of the OBD Forum can ease my mind on the topic.

[Pac10again]

I have heard numerous RB's asked that question.  None of them like a large rotation.  They are the Alpha Male.  Alpha males do not like sharing. 

 

 

[Smith72]

I agree with cartm25, it helps a RB to get into a rhythm and get his body into game condition.  Not giving the defense a situational "tell" is another benefit of 2 playing instead of a committee of 5.

 

My two cents worth:

Cardwell (40%), and Dollars (40%).  Then Irving (10%) and Whittington (10%) to provide a rest for fresh legs or in case of injury to first two.  In case of blow out in 2nd half rest Cardwell &Dollars and let the other 4 take turns.

 

Both Cardwell and Dollars run strong and fast.  Both have good hands for receiving passes out of backfield. This makes them my two favorites.

 

Last season playing behind Verdell and Dye, Cardwell had 61 attempts running the ball averaging 6.8 yards per carry. 

 

In the Colorado game he ran for 127 yards.  One of those showed his speed at hitting the hole and running for 34 yards.  

 

He's had very few chances to demonstrate his speed.  Last year because of MC's staff.  This year, my opinion is, Dollars and Cardwell need more opportunities.

[Mic]

On 9/13/2022 at 7:31 AM, cartm25 said:

Regarding QBs, I believe the saying  goes, “If you have two QBs, you actually have none.”

Could something similar be said about RBs?: “If you have five RBs, you actually have none.”

 

What are you thoughts about this? Hoping members of the OBD Forum can ease my mind on the topic.

The last game with EWU was a perfect opportunity to try out 3 QB's and 5 RB's.  But with the season moving on and the competition getting much stronger, this isn't a luxury the coaches can afford.  I think 2 RB's is the likely scenario and that's one that's worked well for Oregon in the past.

 

It will be a tough decision to decide who gets the ball but it's one the coaches have to make going forward.  I wouldn't even hazard a guess who that will be but one thing we do know, injuries can play a big part, too.

[Flyin Vee]

This is a pleasant problem to have. I expect the pecking order will sort it’s self out in the near future. 

[Mic]

On 9/13/2022 at 8:01 AM, Flyin Vee said:

This is a pleasant problem to have. I expect the pecking order will sort it’s self out in the near future. 

I heard on the radio this morning that Seven McGee will be able to return this weekend.  His injury wasn't serious.  

 

But as much as I favor the young man I can see Lanning using him more in a special teams or gimmick-play situation to get the kid out in space where he can use his speed and agility.  Sending him plunging into the line to grind out tough yards would not, imo, be the right role for him.

[McDuck]

On 9/13/2022 at 8:07 AM, Mic said:

I heard on the radio this morning that Seven McGee will be able to return this weekend.  His injury wasn't serious.  

 

But as much as I favor the young man I can see Lanning using him more in a special teams or gimmick-play situation to get the kid out in space where he can use his speed and agility.  Sending him plunging into the line to grind out tough yards would not, imo, be the right role for him.

The coaching staff apparently agrees as he is listed as a wide receiver this year.

[David Marsh]

Rotation can be very good and I think they might settle with something more like 4 RBs instead of 5. I think the only reason we saw a 5th last Saturday was because it was garbage time and they were throwing in a walk-on as a reward for hard work. 

 

I would like them to take on the sort of "hot hand" mantra of whoever is hot needs to stay in. But also rotating out runningbacks means we get fresh legs and that can exhaust a defense. Eastern Washington was completely exhausted for having to be on the field for so long. 

 

I don't see an expanded runningback rotation being the same detriment as the multiple quarterbacks, which I am entirely opposed to. The goal is to get as many as of the best players on the field and if there are a bunch of runningbacks who are good enough why shouldn't they see the field? They all have a slightly different skill set. Irving is a thumper, Cardwell has good size and vision and can catch the ball out of the backfield nicely, Dollars is smaller than Cardwell but is also a solid receiver out of the backfield and Whittington seems to hit the hole hard, kind of like Travis Dye if I'm honest. 

 

Oregon has had a 3 runningback rotation in the past, most notably with James, Barner and De'Anthony Thomas all at once. Thomas didn't see as many carries in 2011 as the other two but he could break a game wide open with his ability and his fresher legs. I don't see anyone as a DAT on this roster right now but being able to throw someone fresh in against a tired defense could certainly break a game open. 

 

The only downside is that we probably won't have a 1k yard rusher this year at this rate. 

[Haywarduck]

The starting RB needs to be able to do it all. If a RB struggles catching the ball out of the backfield, he doesn't just come in when that isn't going to be used, that limits the offense, and give the defense the advantage.

 

With this in mind Cardwell is the #1 RB. He should get the majority of touches, and the occasional breather. Cardwell can do it all and do it well. 

 

I realize some of the backs may have mircoskills which exceed Cardwell's but those don't add up. Cardwell has no weaknesses, and I want to see what he can do as an every down back. I hope I was clear on my take.

[Charles Fischer]

These running backs are all new to the entire staff, and it makes sense to run them all for a while to get a better sense outside of practice.  You do not want to narrow down the RBs used until you are absolutely sure...because it guarantees some transfers.

 

I'm OK with it for now.  And I am wondering about the freshman, Jordan James.  Hurt or being held out?

 

[David Marsh]

On 9/13/2022 at 8:54 AM, cartm25 said:

You read my mind about Cardwell. I want him to be the answer at RB as well, but is it telling that he seems to be coming in later in the games after Irving/Whittington? I'm going to watch more closely, but there are times where I think Cardwell can be a bit too patient (i.e. borderline indecisive). But his combination of size, speed, and power is what I want featured regularly.

I suspect there is an element here of how they practice. Who is the most consistent at practice and who puts in the most effort at practice matter to coaches and coaches will often reward them with earlier minutes and more minutes. 

 

I also don't get a sense that there is a particular single role for any runningback, I think they excel in different parts of the game. I think if Irving and manage to catch the ball out of the backfield he will be deadly. But so far I haven't seen any runningback being pigeon holed into one role. Basically we don't have a Cyrus Habibi-Likio who just came on for short yardage downs and was super predictable as to what he we going to do because his role was run in a straight line and get the 1-3 yards. 

 

The 4 runningbacks who have played in both games have been asked to do it all, though success if a different story. 

[Duckhart]

Lanny and his staff want to be nice and play players that want to play. Dan has said as much.

I dont have a problem with that as the new staff is trying to see who can be game time difference makers.

Me personally, Id like to see a couple featured backs at most and use the others as needed or during blow outs.

Top notch backs waont want to play it by committee and you run the risk of transfer.

[Duckhart]

I hope DL & KD dont favor guys they brought in versus guys like Cardwell.

I was surprised to see Cardwell not start against Dixie Dawgs.

 

I could see some young coaches trying to put their signature on things right a way to quickly strengthen their resume.

Edited September 13, 2022 by Duckhart

[Mic]

On 9/13/2022 at 8:29 AM, David Marsh said:

Rotation can be very good and I think they might settle with something more like 4 RBs instead of 5. I think the only reason we saw a 5th last Saturday was because it was garbage time and they were throwing in a walk-on as a reward for hard work. 

 

I don't see anyone as a DAT on this roster right now but being able to throw someone fresh in against a tired defense could certainly break a game open. 

 

The only downside is that we probably won't have a 1k yard rusher this year at this rate. 

First, I agree as to why we saw 5 backs, BUT it was a treat to see Haasenritter get the ball.  That kid has heart and he gives the 110% effort on every play.  O needs that.  All our RB's need to do that.

 

2nd) I do see Seven as about the closest thing O has to a 'De'Anthony Thomas'  and I think he should be used as such.  

 

3rd)  You're maybe correct, we might not see a 1000 yard rusher this year, but so what?  I know the kids all want to be in that group but doing what's best for the team should always take precedent.

[Pac10again]

On 9/13/2022 at 8:07 AM, Mic said:

I heard on the radio this morning that Seven McGee will be able to return this weekend.  His injury wasn't serious.  

 

But as much as I favor the young man I can see Lanning using him more in a special teams or gimmick-play situation to get the kid out in space where he can use his speed and agility.  Sending him plunging into the line to grind out tough yards would not, imo, be the right role for him.

BYU cannot guard him.  He could be a game changer like De Anthony was.  Just one or two deep throws, or some mis-direction, and its 6 baby.

 

 

[Mic]

On 9/13/2022 at 9:58 AM, Pac10again said:

BYU cannot guard him.  He could be a game changer like De Anthony was.  Just one or two deep throws, or some mis-direction, and its 6 baby.

 

As much as I'd like to think so, I'm not so sure about their in-ability guarding him.  Their backfield practices against some real good (and fast) athletes on that team every day.

 

That said, tho, I also think this would be a good way to use him;  Oregon needs to develop the ability to throw deep to stretch the field. He wouldn't be the only option to do that with but certainly one of 'em.

[DUCati855]

On 9/13/2022 at 9:58 AM, Pac10again said:

He could be a game changer like De Anthony was.

Seven does not appear to have the "it factor" that DAT had. Yes, he is quick and illusive. But, I have not seen anything from him yet that puts him near DAT level. I really hope he can get there at some point. But, DAT had it from day one... Seven not so much.

[Jester]

Between the daily practices and two games that are behind them, it’s not realistic to think the coaching staff needs more time to sort out a pecking order.

 

Also, I wouldn’t put any stock into the rotating backs to keep them fresh philosophy as I believe Irving and Dollars lead the way with only 13 carries a piece.  6.5 carries a game just gets you past being warmed-up.     

 

It’s nice to have a stable of backs, but I find it more beneficial to settle on a lead back and a more consistent rotation.

 

If it was up to me, I’d opt to start Cardwell.  He’s looks to be the most patient runner of the group, picks his way between the tackles nicely, can drop to another gear when the opportunity presents itself, and has the size to fall forward at the end of the run.  The other backs play well as nice compliments to the more consistent Cardwell.

 

I will admit, I’m suggesting BC get the starting nod strictly based on running/catching ability.  I have not reviewed any tape to see how these guys stack up in pass blocking.  Can anyone offer any insight as to who’s proving to be a capable protector for our QB?  I think I saw Dollars willingly sticking his nose in there.  If these guys are being viewed as equals, being the most consistent blocker may tip the scales.   

[DanLduck]

On 9/13/2022 at 10:36 AM, Jester said:

Between the daily practices and two games that are behind them, it’s not realistic to think the coaching staff needs more time to sort out a pecking order.

 

Also, I wouldn’t put any stock into the rotating backs to keep them fresh philosophy as I believe Irving and Dollars lead the way with only 13 carries a piece.  6.5 carries a game just gets you past being warmed-up.     

 

It’s nice to have a stable of backs, but I find it more beneficial to settle on a lead back and a more consistent rotation.

 

If it was up to me, I’d opt to start Cardwell.  He’s looks to be the most patient runner of the group, picks his way between the tackles nicely, can drop to another gear when the opportunity presents itself, and has the size to fall forward at the end of the run.  The other backs play well as nice compliments to the more consistent Cardwell.

 

I will admit, I’m suggesting BC get the starting nod strictly based on running/catching ability.  I have not reviewed any tape to see how these guys stack up in pass blocking.  Can anyone offer any insight as to who’s proving to be a capable protector for our QB?  I think I saw Dollars willingly sticking his nose in there.  If these guys are being viewed as equals, being the most consistent blocker may tip the scales.   

Seems to me Dollars is the back in whenever it is an important passing down. I also think he is a patient runner.

[GeotechDuck]

The practice reports in the fall, prior to the first game, had numerous references to running backs putting the ball on the ground.  
 

Without speculating on specific players, as that detail was not provided, I wonder if what we are seeing in the rotation right now is a result of some ball security issues in fall camp with the top performers. 
 

I suspect that a couple of guys will start to pull away from the rest of the pack as we go forward.  

Edited September 13, 2022 by GeotechDuck

[WiseKwacker]

The two backs that I've been most impressed with are Sean Dollars and Byron Cardwell. Cardwell is slower to the hole than the others, and, when there's nothing there, he can look particularly bad. Then, the next time there's no hole where it should be, he'll see that and bounce left or right to a place where there IS a hole. He has really good vision and some great moves once he's got a little opening. 

 

Dollars is my favorite of the RB group. Clearly, the coaching staff sees him as the best receiver among the RBs, as he's consistently in there on passing downs. Beyond that, though, he's quick and fluid as a running back. To my eye, he's been consistently effective as a runner during his brief opportunities. 

 

Irving and Whittington have been pretty solid. I just haven't seen anything special about either one so far.

 

Hopefully, we'll get more clarification with the BYU game.

[Pac10again]

On 9/13/2022 at 10:22 AM, DUCati855 said:

Seven does not appear to have the "it factor" that DAT had. Yes, he is quick and illusive. But, I have not seen anything from him yet that puts him near DAT level. I really hope he can get there at some point. But, DAT had it from day one... Seven not so much.

I am trying this new positive thinking approach.  

[Log Haulin]

I would like to see some two back sets. Confuse the defense and open up the running game. 2 or 3 successful runs then a shot over the top for a touchdown.

[Mic]

On 9/13/2022 at 4:38 PM, Log Haulin said:

I would like to see some two back sets. Confuse the defense and open up the running game. 2 or 3 successful runs then a shot over the top for a touchdown.

Actually, U might B on to something.  RPO's can work with the 2-back set if the backs are good receivers. Hand the ball to one, or pass the ball to the other coming out of the backfield.  Or, if Bo has the arm, go over the top long and deep.   Or run it wide. Or screen pass.  

 

Maybe we should give Coach Dillingham a friendly phone call...