as it should be.

results from the type of plays UT runs out of the shotgun. The zone read play tries to string out the defenders and let the RB pick out a hole. When teams blitz, which they seem to do a lot against Texas this year, inevitably and often a LB or DE will shoot through one of these gaps in the string and mess up the play. When this happens, Charles has to be a hero just to get the 0 yards. When the blitzer doesn't come through, then Charles is through to the secondary before the LB's can make a play, giving you 5-12 yard runs. If the secondary overruns the play, like TCU and UCF did in the fourth quarter, Charles breaks against the grain for 20+ yards and TD's. The problem, as has been pointed out ad nauseum in this blog, is that Colt is no threat to run, so every blitzer and defensive lineman can attack him and ignore Colt, making the running game work like card-playing in Las Vegas.

Many have suggested reverting to the I formation, but that offense is designed for the back to run through one of two holes or to take a pitch to the outside. With our current OL and Finley only OK as a blocking TE, the distribution of runs would devolve to 0 - 3 yard runs because there are simply fewer places the defense has to attack. That's why you won't see Greg Davis go to the I, even if it protects Colt more, and why our red zone running game is such an adventure.

One option to consider, but then reject, is to play Parcells-ball. Run out of the I on first and second down, even if that only nets you 5 yards and almost no chance for explosive plays, and then move the chains with 5-7 yard passes to possession receivers out of a max-protect scheme in the shotgun on third down. The play-action pass after the occasional 5-7 yard run or on first down is the only chance for big plays, and I'm not sure Colt has the arm to throw those. This would be simple, safe for Colt (he would only throw 25 passes instead of 35-45 like he does now). This is the strategy employed by Wisconsin, and they are an accident waiting to happen. It would be frustrating because it means your linemen can't make any penalties (that leaves UT out), and all that speed and elusiveness at WR would largely go to waste. I think this is just not an option for UT.

A big difference between 2006 and 2007 is that the experienced OL in 2006 allowed more consistent gains on the shotgun runs (even if it was frustrating to watch Selvin Young and Charles pick their way through holes like a bluegrass banjo player and never able to generate explosive speed). This kept the safeties closer to the line of scrimmage and allowed Colt to throw the ball farther upfield. Teams began to attack the shotgun - zone read with more run blitzes as the year went on, leading us to this year's version of dink and dunk passing game, and boom and bust running game.

Our post-VY identity is what it is because the QB can't run (Colt) or they can't pass well enough to keep the safeties back (Harris, Chiles), yet the zone read still gives the RB the best chance for an explosive run. I think the coaching staff needs to have plays with two real run options, however generated (see my comment on Fixing the Offense Part 2 for one idea), with two players with speed (like West Virginia with Slaton and White or Slaton and Reynard) plus a real threat to pass (Colt at QB). If they did this, I think JC could have his first 200 yard rushing day, against OU or anybody.