Looking For The “Tough, Violent Offense”September 27th, 2010
Count on former Bucs defensive end Steve White (1996-2001) to shoot you the “Good, Bad and Ugly” from every Bucs game on his blog.
Of course, there was a hefty portion of ugly out of Sunday’s blowout loss to Pittsburgh. Joe’s got a snippet here for you, and the rest you can find on White’s site.
Reminiscent of 2009, the Bucs abandoned their commitment to the running game — impressive in weeks 1 and 2 — and White’s no fan of that approach.
Offensive game plan: The Bucs were in the shotgun wayyy too much yesterday and I believe we didn’t run the ball nearly enough. I know that the were down early, but I still felt like we could have and should have continued to pound the rock until it cracked. I know we had a few penalties, but to me a commitment to running the ball means running on first AND second down more often than not during a game. It also means going from under center most of the game so the defense can’t be sure what you’re going to do. It also allows the quarterback to see the coverage as it changes. Not only that it opens up play action because it allows the quarterback to fake the run in a way that might actually get the secondary to react or at least hesitate. If we are really going to have a tough, violent offense I would really like to see it rather than just hearing about it constantly.
White’s got a lot of great analysis in his breakdown.
Joe, too, would have liked to see the Bucs stick with that commitment to the run, especially after LeGarrette Blount had success on the Bucs’ third series of the game. Joe can’t get too caught up in that at this point, though, because it was obvious the Bucs were completely overmatched regardless.
As Raheem Morris said, they “played a heavyweight.”
Unfortunately, the Bucs played the role of Henry Tillman against Mike Tyson. They got some shots in early, but the more violent side won.