We'll never know it worked for Iowa last year. At no point was the run game ever committed to. Other than closing out a win late in the 4th, it could be counted on one hand how many times all season Iowa actually handed off three times in a row.
The line should be a little better this season. But even if it's poor, the way to help out an offensive line is to hand it off a few times in a row. Let them continue to fire out and hit somebody, rather than having to catch a charging defense every other play.
Even for good offensive lines it can be hard to get a push early in a game. But as the wall continues to get pounded at, it starts to crack. There is a cumulative benefit that emerges later in games when the run is committed to.
The run must be established. I don't care if it takes 3 tackles, 3 tight ends, wildcat, or QB sneaks every play. Whatever it takes.
If a line isn't good enough to run the ball, how the hell is it supposed to hold up in the passing game? If the goal is to be productive on offense, establishing the run is the priority. If the offense is so bad that the goal becomes limiting turnovers and running clock, so as not to jeopardize the defense's chance to control the game, then the run game is also a must. Iowa pretty much proved last season that games can be won with almost zero offense. To me, that wasn't that surprising. But that fact that they did it without a run game was unbelievable. An offense virtually unable to impact field position, combined with the clock stopping every other play for an incomplete pass made the performance of the defense and punter that much more amazing.
Similar defense and punter will remain this season. Let's hope the offense and offensive line can be a little better. Either way the run must be committed to.
Simple, stubborn, and angry has worked for 150 years. That's why I put a period after each word of "run the ball". No ifs or buts. No this or that. Just RUN. THE. DAMN. BALL. PERIOD.