San Diego Chargers Running on Empty, Part Two: Beyond the Ball Carrier

After last week delving into the actual running back position and how that can be addressed, the time has come to look into the rest of the running game, from scheming to blocking, and how the team can look to improve the league’s second-worst running game for 2010.

The first step to this is understanding need. The team has evolved from its run-centric approach earlier in the decade. The Chargers are now built to put the ball in the air and take up large pieces of real estate as they do it.

This means the running game has two tasks. Complement that passing attack, and make good on what the passing game provides. The run game only needs fulfill these tasks, not be the team’s workhorse method any more.

Complementing the passing game entails putting enough yardage and being effective enough that the team can sell play action. It also is a complement to the passing game by giving the team the capacity to convert on third and a yard or two. The former should keep defenses from over-committing to coverage and pass rush; the latter opens up a whole new piece of playbook by adding viability to six- to eight-yard throws.

Making good on what the passing game provides is the other primary facet. This means that the run game can be effective enough to take advantage of defenders that will lose outside contain to the pass rush, and the extra space afforded by linebackers and safeties playing coverage.

The other element of taking what the passing game allows would be grinding the football. When a lead is taken in the second half, to have the capacity to eat clock and not force the team into still airing the ball out every time.

Unfortunately the team failed in most of these capacities last year. Tomlinson had five games with 60 or more yards, and one with more than 80. This system doesn’t require 100-yard rushers but should be netting roughly 70 yards a game. 

This diminished run game especially showed itself in short yardage. Tomlinson ran for 12 touchdowns (with another four coming from other backs). However, the team was routinely stunted in short-yardage and goal-line situations. 

When called upon to run out a lead, the team had some success. In a three-game stretch against the Eagles, Broncos, and Chiefs, the team put up some of its best rushing numbers of the year en route to holding leads. 

Tomlinson’s 96 yards against the Eagles ranked 23 yards beyond his next closest game.  That was followed by Mike Tolbert and Jacob Hester combining for 104 second-half yards against Denver to close out the game. Against Kansas City, the shared duty of Tolbert, Sproles, and Tomlinson helped seal a 43-14 victory.

Now that we know what the team should do and how the team did, it is time to look at what they can do to bring those to items much closer together. 

Offensive Line

First in the approach is the offensive line. The team’s line proved remarkably able in pass defense. They allowed 26 sacks, despite a long-range passing game that required extra time and protection, as well as a quarterback not known for his mobility. They could not translate this into any form of push from the line of scrimmage, however.

The good news is that the team should be much improved even without much change next season. Keystone to the line is former Pro Bowl center Nick Hardwick. The team essentially spent the year without him, as he went down with a broken leg during the season opener and did not return until Week 16 against the Titans.

A full (or at least near-full) season from Hardwick will be a vast improvement over his primary replacement—adequate, but unspectacular Scott Mruczkowski—a solid backup but not one you would like taking double-digit starts. 

Thirty pounds lighter and more mobile/athletic than his backup, Hardwick can be utilized to pull across the line, as well as get downfield on blocks far more effectively than the slower Mruczkowski.

Next to Hardwick should be another improvement in guard Louis Vasquez. The third-round rookie out of Texas Tech was slowed early by injury, but solidified his standing as a starter as the year went on. Another year developing under the system should improve his technique while the physical attributes are already there. 

Assuming the team can reach an accord with mammoth 6’7’’ restricted free agent tackle Marcus McNeill, the team should also return two anchors to the line’s left side in McNeill and Kris Dielman. 

Both started all 16 games during the year while keeping Rivers’ blind side safe. The two are strong, physical, and able to hold ground well. They just need to take those tall frames lower to gain more line-moving leverage against opposing lines.

The final piece of the offensive line puzzle is the weakest. Jeremy Clary is a restricted free agent and likely able to be re-signed at a bargain price. As a backup guard/tackle combination, he is a great versatile player able to help the team along several places in the line. As a starter, he is sub-par, however. 

If the team is to improve its running game, replacing Clary as a starter will be key. It will not likely come from within. When Clary went down, the end-of-the-year starter was a backup guard playing out of position in Brandon Dombrowski.

Externally, they have a few options. Pursue a free agent, utilize an early draft pick, or try to find another mid-round option like Vasquez.

The rules of this year’s restricted-heavy free agency, paired with the price of elite tackles, and General Manager A.J. Smith’s history of limited activity in free agency makes this one a difficult task. 

That said, the options available would be:

Part One: Restricted

The likelihood of an uncapped year means that many of the best options here are going to be restricted free agents. Veterans old enough not to be restricted, yet young enough to have a solid future are few and far between as teams secure them with long-term deals to keep them around.

Jared Gaither, Baltimore

Likely the biggest pipe-dream option. He is a tremendous blocker who is still young and developing. That said as a 24-year-old restricted free agent with an extra year of restricted status, Baltimore has many options to lock up Gaither and would be next-to-impossible to pry free.

Willie Colon, Pittsburgh

Hard to gauge, he is a definite upgrade from Clary, but can be inconsistent and is rarely a world beater. That said, there has been some debate in Pittsburgh over whether or not to try and replace him, which could make him an affordable option as a 27-year-old restricted free agent.

Donald Penn, Tampa Bay

Would have been unrestricted were it not for the collective bargaining agreement (or lack thereof). Tampa did a solid job running over tackle, and at 27, Penn is old enough to be developed but young enough to provide good upside. Penn would be expensive to pry free, but not the virtual impossibility of Gaither.

Jammal Brown/Jermon Bushrod, New Orleans

Brown was down on injured reserve for the Saints early and was replaced solidly by Bushrod. Both are restricted free agents and whichever player the Saints decide won’t be starting in 2010 shouldn’t be too difficult to pry out of New Orleans. Bushrod has a smaller price tag and is three years younger; Brown is more experienced (while still only 29) and has Pro Bowl experience. At this point the Saints could elect either route.

Penn and Gaither have the best upside and the worst price tags. Colon is pry-able, but his price may still outweigh his quality. The best option, should San Diego pursue a restricted free agent, would be to try and secure New Orleans’ second choice. Either would be an upgrade over Clary, are young enough to bank several years on, and should not be too difficult to acquire.

Unrestricted

The obvious upside to unrestricted free agents would be that the team can simply offer a contract and sign the player—nothing has to be given up. The downside would be that any team in the market will also be able to pursue these players, and the number of restricted free agents may inflate prices on unrestricted players, putting the market price far more than the quality of the player would warrant.

Mike Gandy, Arizona

The biggest luxury would be his unrestricted tag, allowing him to be signed without succumbing a draft pick (which would be at minimum a second for most starting quality tackles). He has good footwork and angles in run blocking, and would be affordable. The downside would be his age (31) and his capacity in pass defense. As a converted guard, he is mobile, but small and able to be beaten off the edge.

Cornell Green, Oakland

A very active run-blocking lineman. He can open holes and gets good burst off the line.  Like Gandy, however, pass protection is something of a liability. He is also 33 and would be best as a player to buy time, while other needs are addressed in the draft rather than the final piece of a great young unit.

Levi Jones, Washington

At 30, he is fairly young for the unrestricted crop. He is a mobile, athletic lineman who has good footwork against the pass rush. While still light for a tackle at 307, he gets good leverage. The knock is he can occasionally take plays off or get lazy. 

Tony Pashos, San Francisco

He is 29, yet still something of a raw player. His size and strength allows him to get great push off the line in run-blocking, and would be a definite boost to short yardage.  The knock here is poor technique and footwork, as well as being slow out of his stance.  This could make him a liability against speed rushers.

Barry Sims, San Francisco

With both unrestricted, San Francisco may let one go. At 35, he would likely be inexpensive. As a great pass blocker, he would maintain continuity there with good quickness and technique. He may be an upgrade, but a very mild one in the running game. He also can be prone to penalties and only buys a year or two.

Should San Diego elect this route, the best option would probably be Cornell Green. At 33, he’d be old enough to not demand high coin, but young enough to get at least two years before a noticeable decline, possibly more. Jones and Gandy could reap a weak market to oversized contracts while as far as Pashos, if the team needed to work on developing a guy they should go draft.

And that leads us to the draft. This is where AJ Smith would be most likely to address the line. Drafting 28th overall, the team will be at the mercy of who decides to go for tackles ahead of them. Russel Okung and Anthony Davis are pretty much locks to be snagged early; beyond that it gets tricky.

Brian Bulaga, Bruce Campbell, and Trent Williams are all fairly combine-centric. One of these players could drop far enough for San Diego to grab, all are considered mid-first round (10-25ish) material, and will spend their pre-draft jostling for position. 

The obvious choice would be whichever of these five can drop to San Diego. Campbell is a blend of dominance and injury concern. He has been picked in mock drafts anywhere from barely top-10 to late 20s.

Brian Bulaga would be a great option but likely needs a rough combine to fall far enough for San Diego to have any chance. Trent Williams could fall because he doesn’t have the left-tackle potential the others do, which suits San Diego fine as they are secure with McNeill handling that side.

Should these five all go, it gets trickier. At present, the rest of the O-line crop appears second-round material at best. Should the Chargers elect to go after a different position in Round One, however, this could benefit the team. The question then becomes which second-round talent is available that far down? 

Players like Charles Brown, Vladimir Ducasse, and Selvish Capers would probably require some trading up to acquire barring a bad combine, as both are upper second-round talents. Are they worth chancing with a late first however? Beyond that, the names spread thinner. 

Ciron Black or Jason Fox could be the best options. Fox is an upper second-round talent who can drop because of some medical concerns, including an irregular heartbeat. 

Black is a solid, if slightly undersized lineman who may end up shifting to guard eventually. If teams get concerned enough (paired with a few others rising in the draft), Fox or Black could slip into the third and be a great bargain.

With the plethora of options available, the two scenarios best serving likely would be either snagging a first-round dropper (Trent Williams) and if that does not play out, waiting out the second and grabbing one of the better third-round choices (Fox or Black).

Ultimately, from the free agent and draft possibilities, given AJ Smith’s history the most likely would be a third-round offensive tackle prospect.

How Else?

So Part One addressed the running back position, Part Two A the offensive line. With both cemented, how else can the team go about looking to fulfill needs within the running game?

Lead Blocking

The knee-jerk answer is a bowling-ball fullback who will put his head down and pound open holes in opposing lines. This is something useful but not probable. The attempts at a road-grader would be thwarted by:

1. Roster

Jacob Hester and Mike Tolbert are both already young fullbacks on roster. One is signed, the other is an exclusive rights free agent, meaning both should be Chargers in 2010.

2. Availability

There just aren’t that many anymore. In free agency, the best options at fullback don’t really center around big smash-mouth guys. Justin Griffith looks like Mike Tolbert with two to three years development, Tony Richardson and Lorenzo Neal are ancient, and Leonard Weaver is a restricted free agent (as well as a Pro Bowler, despite the Eagles short-yardage woes).

The draft may fare better, with solid blockers like Cory Jackson or Willie Rose likely still available in the seventh round. One would likely have to go undrafted for Smith to pursue, however, given his backing of the underwhelming Hester.

3. Need

Frankly the way the team plays and what it needs out of the running game does not require a big road-paver. They team needs to be able to add three to four carries a game for about 15 more yards a game to be where they want to be. That can be achieved without putting a roster spot into this position.

So that means at fullback the team is very unlikely to deviate from Tolbert and Hester.  Where does the solution lie? The depth chart.

Tolbert is still not entirely refined as a blocker, but has the frame Hester lacks. At 5'9" and 243 pounds if he can learn better technique, he can be a solid blocker. Hester is attempting to play the fullback position at 5'11" and 225 pounds (in other words, virtually the same as mid-sized running back Ladainian Tomlinson). Hester needs at least eight to 10 pounds of muscle added to his frame to be an effective fullback.

Tolbert can also open up the running game with his versatility. In limited attempts, he proved a superior ball carrier to Hester, turning out nearly six yards per carry on 25 attempts. He proved a good receiving back as well, with nearly 200 yards on only 17 receptions while Hester managed fewer yards per catch than carry (2.4 to 3.5).

The capacity for increasing his workload adds one more dimension to what defenses would have to game-plan for. Fullback runs behind a healthy offensive line can be excellent short-yardage chain-movers, while his abilities as an outlet receiver would help against the pass rush.

Beyond the Roster

So a running back is signed/drafted and a right tackle brought on board. The team is more experienced and healthy up the middle of the line, and Tolbert has taken the helm at the fullback position. What now? The answer would lie in scheming the runs.

Some of this is tempered by what kind of new back and tackle are added, as size and strength of each play a big part. That said, a few basic looks can be considered to improve the overall result.

The team is built around a line that stands its ground well, but does not drive forward all that well. This means traditional holes straight up the middle are going to be fewer and smaller than a more agile line that is lightning off the ball can produce.

The exception would be Hardwick, who consequently becomes the X-factor. He is the only lineman with a zone-blocker’s body. This means that the guards should be counted upon to engage defensive tackles, while Hardwick handles the double-teaming duties, pushing open the middle by adding help against one tackle, while being free enough to disengage and take on linebackers as they try to fill gaps.

Against 3-4 defenses allow the guards to engage the lane-clogging nose tackle while Hardwick pulls down. Put the ball carrier off-tackle while the lineman turns his man inward, running behind the fullback and center.

The other system the team should look to would be inside-dive plays. As a pass-first team, the Chargers can put three wide with only one back and Gates at tight end.  Defenses will naturally spread to engage the team’s multiple targets, and give less respect to the run.

With the handoff have the back prepared for the cutback while running just outside the play-side guard’s foot. If Vasquez shows good development, then his better mobility makes him the likely candidate. 

Instead of easier-to-read delayed handoffs (which the team appeared to use far too often), this requires the back to dive towards his location as soon as the ball is snapped, taking the handoff as deep as Rivers can get it to him so as to provide maximum cutback opportunity. 

In San Diego’s system, this type of quick play can provide effectiveness by getting the ball two to three yards before linebackers have the opportunity to react and plug the holes developed, and makes blitzers pay by over-pursuit.

It lacks the big-gain potential that a draw or other slow-developing run can sometimes yield, but with a bigger, slower line, it should punch out yardage before defenders can slip blocks and clog lanes. Should the team land the desired big running back, it can also force the opposing linebacker into isolation situations that sometimes the back can bulldoze through.

In two back sets, the team landing an athletic right tackle also opens up the capacity for off-tackle pitches. McNeill stunts the rush but is not the best at turning his man inward to cut off outside-contain. A tackle who isn’t 6'7", 340 pounds on the other side should fare better at this, and allow Hardwick to engage oncoming linebackers while Tolbert’s modest lead block skills would only be required to chip Hardwick’s man and engage smaller defenders.

Again, the play would likely isolate the back, this time with a safety or faster (hopefully meaning smaller) linebackers streaking from the opposite side. Going for a bigger back, the advantage should hopefully turn again to the back.

The team’s strengths and weaknesses will be easier to read and adapt plans to once the team knows who its feature back and right tackle will be. Until that time, only general examples can be used, but the basic premise is to plan to the team’s assets and liabilities, and not ask players to execute within a less flexible system.

Nearly every time San Diego ran draws or delayed handoffs up the middle, a defender would have enough time to read the play, react, and stuff the attempt. The line was simply not mobile enough to open alternatives to the intended lane. Adapt and react, plan out cutbacks, and put the back a yard or two past scrimmage before the time to close anything presents. 

It is a system built to what San Diego needs out of its running game. It won’t result in many big plays, it generally puts the back past any blocking help by the time he has gained four yards, but will be more capable of producing sustained, consistent yardage, as well as helping improve short yardage.

San Diego needs 80 yard 3.8-4.5 ypc days from its backs, not big plays, emphasize this and put the ball in a position for Rivers to finish the job. That job will be much easier to do when the team is facing 2nd-and-6 rather than 3rd-and-8, and should translate much better to the grittier playoff environment.