re: Gary Danielson says Eason wasn't the issue....

quote:

---

No it didn't.We absolutely looked better running the ball in November and into the bowl game.Our rushing stats back up my point.Our red zone offense is somewhat of a different argument

---

1) it was a bad season for the running game. We ranked 12th on the season for rushing TDs in conference. 11th in conference for 3rd down converting first downs on the ground. 6th in conference in 1st downs on the ground. Smiling about improvement over our dreadful October is comical.

2) we did finish with 3 good games on the ground (after the Auburn game of course because they have a good run defense). However, neither of those three games were better than the 2 games against UNC or against USCe.

11 of our 18 rushing TDs were in the first 6 games.
1,294 of our 2,486 rushing yards were in our first 6 games.

You can say that we finished on a high note after Auburn's defense stifled us.
You can say that we improved over a dreadful month from mid October to mid November.
But you still can't say that we improved. Because we didn't (on a 13 game schedule... we were better in the first 6 games).

And even if those 3 glorious games against Louisiana Lafayette, GT, and TCU (none of which are SEC competition, so their national rankings are comparatively meaningless) showed improvement... it was a god awful season running the football. There is absolutely nothing to smile about when reviewing our ground game last season.

That was the 3rd fewest rushing TDs that we scored in the past decade. Those other 2 were teams with 5 losses or lost to every ranked team that they faced.