Going into Sunday’s game against the Jaguars, it sounds like the Raiders were going to double down on getting Ashton Jeanty the ball and recommit to the running game.
“I have never been more sold on Pete Carroll wanting to run the ball than today,” JT said on his Raider Nation Radio show last Tuesday.
“You want to take something out of this monologue and clip it? Clip this. I have never been more sold today on Pete Carroll’s philosophy of running the football. Everything going forward moves on that. They have got to establish the run to get Geno [Smith] going. He didn’t tell me that specifically, but I’m a talk show host, and I can tell you what my impressions of the interview that I conducted. I look him in the eye, he looks me in the eye. He wants to run the ball. Everything is predicated on getting this kid Ashton Jeanty going. If it does, it opens it up for Geno.”
And JT wasn’t alone. Everyone thought this was going to be Jeanty’s week to get 20 or more carries, but it didn’t happen.
Jeanty ended up with 13 carries on the game and the Raiders fell 30-29 to the Jaguars in overtime.
Sports Illustrated insider Hondo Carpenter said he was “perplexed” Jeanty didn’t get more carries in the game and Raider Nation Radio host Q Myers shared his thoughts on Jeanty’s workload on Monday.
“I still don’t think they ran the ball enough. I still don’t think that they had a commitment to the run game. Jeanty started off the game, two carries,17 yards. There was a point where he was averaging about nine yards a carry, then fourth and one, they decided to roll Geno out and it goes incomplete,” Myers said on the Locked on Raiders Squad Show podcast.
“To me, it’s almost a resistance from Chip Kelly and I’m just saying this from the naked eye looking at it. It just almost seems like he just refuses to have a true commitment to running the ball. I mean, Jeanty to end the game with 15 carries? It’s just not enough. He’s that kind of guy. He needs more carries.”
It will be interesting to see what Carroll says about the running game on Monday because the offense played better this week, though some of that can probably be attributed to having Brock Bowers healthy again.
Whether or not Carroll or anyone else is willing to say it, it’s hard to justify taking a running back with the sixth-overall pick if that running back is only going to get 13 carries per game.
x: @raidersbeat
Chip Kelly doen’t trust his players and I understand what Kelly is going through. The offensive line play is offensive and when they do manage to open up a lane Jeanty runs by it half the time. Whenever Kelly calls a running play it’s, literally, a roll of the dice whether it will amount to anything.
I have to imagine that Kelly and Carroll discuss the offensive game plan. They were coming off a bye week, they work on the game plan during practice and have a walk through at the end of the week. I find it hard to believe Carroll didn’t know what they were going to do. Kelly shouldn’t have been hired to begin with but he looks like he’s going to be scapegoated by Carroll and the people in charge.
Yeah, the fact that all the focus from the “insiders” seems to be directed at Chip sure makes it seem like a scapegoating operation. You don’t see near the same pressure and criticism for the defense rolling out the same washed vets each week that get killed over the middle of the field all game, with many of those guys getting toasted being Pete guys? I am guessing the sources for the insider reports are coming from those aligned with the HC and defense?
Of course, who actually made the decision to hire Chip? Was it Pete, or someone higher up the ladder? In a normal organization, if an assistant coach is failing or not executing the wishes of the HC, that falls on the HC to address. Ask AP about the blame he shouldered (somewhat fairly) for Getsy’ performance last year. So why isn’t Pete shouldering any of the blame for Kelly’s offense? Pete is deflecting, either to save his skin, or because Chip wasn’t his call, and he’s trying to distance himself from an executive level decision.