There are 138 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Greg Roman, is he really good?

Originally posted by NCommand:
Originally posted by Mr.Mcgibblets:
Originally posted by NCommand:
OK, 7:21 on the play clock, 1Q.
there is only ONE passing option to the left (Crabtree). Yet, CK's head/body positioning doesn't even GLANCE to middle or right (where in theory, you'd have more receiving options). It's Crabtree @ 3 seconds from start to finish, no question.

IF CK doesn't pull the trigger here to Crabtree, the only ad lib option he has to that side is Gore and #54 closing (not a bad take but certainly not #2 or #3 in a progression read - he'd be an outlet/check down).

First, you say that Crabtree is the ONE passing option. Then, you go on to suggest that because Gore is an.. "ad-lib, outlet/checkdown" option...

So we seem to be disconnecting on the verbiage. I say Gore IS a receiving option. A checkdown is always a receiving option.

I agree that on some plays, there sometimes are decoy routes and clear outs... they existed in that very play. I agree that at times, the pass designs only extend to 2 or 3 viable options... but to say that there is "only one option" in the majority of pass plays? That, I will continue to disagree with, if that is i fact your stance. I think on most plays, there is a primary read... and at least one if not 2 or 3 progressive reads.

A check down is not a progression receiver...it's a last resort and something implemented this game more than I have ever seen. And one we could have changed to AR's as the middle of the field was WIDE open all day. But we're talking about CK and his progression reads. As you can see, there were NO progression reads. It's AR all the way and if not an option, CK is now in ad lib mode...it doesn't mean CK wouldn't or couldn't pull the trigger on his check down (Gore), or run or throw it away...OR even scramble back right and hit Boldin again over Sherman for 27 yards again. But those non-AR's are not true progression read receivers.

And in this team passing offense, you don't need EVERYONE to be a decoy to help the AR. Sometimes all you need is 1 or 2 guys helping out. The design, called by Roman, assists the AR.

Here is an example using a gif (Post #192): http://www.49erswebzone.com/forum/niners/176105-analysis-seahawks-game-coaches-film/page13/

And when has CK EVER regularly checked down to Gore or Hunter? Good lord, I've been praying for them to feature the RBs as receivers all year. Gore (or and RB not FB) as a viable receiver actually running a pass pattern has been completely eliminated from this year's playbook.
[ Edited by NinerGM on Dec 12, 2013 at 1:55 PM ]
Originally posted by NinerGM:
Originally posted by NCommand:
Originally posted by Mr.Mcgibblets:
Originally posted by NCommand:
OK, 7:21 on the play clock, 1Q.
there is only ONE passing option to the left (Crabtree). Yet, CK's head/body positioning doesn't even GLANCE to middle or right (where in theory, you'd have more receiving options). It's Crabtree @ 3 seconds from start to finish, no question.

IF CK doesn't pull the trigger here to Crabtree, the only ad lib option he has to that side is Gore and #54 closing (not a bad take but certainly not #2 or #3 in a progression read - he'd be an outlet/check down).

First, you say that Crabtree is the ONE passing option. Then, you go on to suggest that because Gore is an.. "ad-lib, outlet/checkdown" option...

So we seem to be disconnecting on the verbiage. I say Gore IS a receiving option. A checkdown is always a receiving option.

I agree that on some plays, there sometimes are decoy routes and clear outs... they existed in that very play. I agree that at times, the pass designs only extend to 2 or 3 viable options... but to say that there is "only one option" in the majority of pass plays? That, I will continue to disagree with, if that is i fact your stance. I think on most plays, there is a primary read... and at least one if not 2 or 3 progressive reads.

A check down is not a progression receiver...it's a last resort and something implemented this game more than I have ever seen. And one we could have changed to AR's as the middle of the field was WIDE open all day. But we're talking about CK and his progression reads. As you can see, there were NO progression reads. It's AR all the way and if not an option, CK is now in ad lib mode...it doesn't mean CK wouldn't or couldn't pull the trigger on his check down (Gore), or run or throw it away...OR even scramble back right and hit Boldin again over Sherman for 27 yards again. But those non-AR's are not true progression read receivers.

And in this team passing offense, you don't need EVERYONE to be a decoy to help the AR. Sometimes all you need is 1 or 2 guys helping out. The design, called by Roman, assists the AR.

Here is an example using a gif (Post #192): http://www.49erswebzone.com/forum/niners/176105-analysis-seahawks-game-coaches-film/page13/

And when has CK EVER regularly checked down to Gore or Hunter? Good lord, I've been praying for them to feature the RBs as receivers all year. Gore (or and RB not FB) as a viable receiver actually running a pass pattern has been completely eliminated from this year's playbook.

It would be HUGE and esp. in this game. Same with McDonald. He was open all day in the middle of the field. This was my original game plan TBH b/c of all the attention VD, Manningham, Boldin and Crabtree would be taking up.

And as more evidence to this specific play, watch Gore. He isn't even through the OL/DL before the ball is already out to Crabtree. Clearly, he was not a true receiving option. He "could" have been an outlet though if CK didn't pull the trigger. I hate to say it but I'd almost PREFER he takes these check downs to initially loosen up the defense and get them leaning forward a bit. THEN you come back to these intermediate AR routes. Even deeper routes. Our AR's have to work SO hard sometimes and make some insane catches. These check downs and the middle of the field? Simple pass and defenders weren't even in the same area code on most of them (esp. the delayed flare outs).
OMg, the fact this thread is still here must mean roman is too. OH no, oh no, oh no.
Pas!!! You're timing always cracks me up!
Whether you are with NC, Thl, GM,dtg, et al, I think all agree (as I do) that regardless of whether ARs or PS, the middle continues to be open and we avoid it as if it were the Bermuda triangle. Man, Vance, hunter, Baldwin, LMJ could camp out there for all game and wouldn't be touched. Kap would have to take a remedial course on throwing more 4-6 yd passes with way less heat however. Still, he is talented and I am sure he can learn it.

Also, running frank into the box 8-10 is just flat ass goofy. 8 on 5 guys just doesn't work so throw dinks and dunks over the middle, slant, crossing patterns,whatever, and watch the completions pile up. Then when D move 3 or more guys off LOS, then turn frank loose, and watch the yrds pile up. Frank into a box 8-10 is just a wasted play...every dam time.
Originally posted by pasodoc9er:
Whether you are with NC, Thl, GM,dtg, et al, I think all agree (as I do) that regardless of whether ARs or PS, the middle continues to be open and we avoid it as if it were the Bermuda triangle. Man, Vance, hunter, Baldwin, LMJ could camp out there for all game and wouldn't be touched. Kap would have to take a remedial course on throwing more 4-6 yd passes with way less heat however. Still, he is talented and I am sure he can learn it.

Also, running frank into the box 8-10 is just flat ass goofy. 8 on 5 guys just doesn't work so throw dinks and dunks over the middle, slant, crossing patterns,whatever, and watch the completions pile up. Then when D move 3 or more guys off LOS, then turn frank loose, and watch the yrds pile up. Frank into a box 8-10 is just a wasted play...every dam time.

Good points Paso--John Elway was the same way as a young QB. It took him years to learn how to take a bit off his passes without throwing lame duck interceptions. Montana was the best I've seen in the short passing game and I believe it is largely due to his tutor--B. Walsh. When you have a coach insist on you practicing every aspect of QBing to the point where it becomes totally ingrained, you have a chance to become your potential.

My worry is that, even though Harbaugh is a very knowledgeable QB coach, CK won't get that insistent training every year. I know he goes to that Atlanta clinic, but that's not a 9er QB coach using 9er plays and precision, with all 9er players around you. The chemistry didn't happen, or not to a great extent, to make Lockette a keeper; so his training with receivers in the off-season did not do much to help the team. I do commend him for trying but wouldn't it have made more sense to train at the SF facilities where more players would have been available?

NC--as for the difference between you, Mac and myself (or anyone else)...I think one key is defining a receiving option. To me, a receiving option is any receiver running a route...whether that route is 80 yards down the field or behind the LOS on either side. It's clear that you are using a different definition and that clears things up quite a bit. I'm not sure where the AR idea originates but if you can post a history I would greatly appreciate it. I'm always open to remedial tutoring!
[ Edited by dtg_9er on Dec 13, 2013 at 7:01 AM ]
Originally posted by dtg_9er:

NC--as for the difference between you, Mac and myself (or anyone else)...I think one key is defining a receiving option. To me, a receiving option is any receiver running a route...whether that route is 80 yards down the field or behind the LOS on either side. It's clear that you are using a different definition and that clears things up quite a bit.

.. and it's not just some eligible receiver running around beyond or behind the LOS. It's an eligible target running a route AND making himself a viable target for his QB to throw to. (meaning, runs route and turns back to the QB to look for a potential pass) Like I said, I know there are times when a "target" or two is running downfield and keeps his back to the QB... meaning that he is out there as a pure decoy +/or potential blocker... but I contend still that on most plays.. 90+% perhaps.. that our QB has more than just one VIABLE receiver looking to see a possible ball come his way.




Just finished the Broncos/Chargers game.... yay!
Originally posted by Mr.Mcgibblets:
.. and it's not just some eligible receiver running around beyond or behind the LOS. It's an eligible target running a route AND making himself a viable target for his QB to throw to. (meaning, runs route and turns back to the QB to look for a potential pass) Like I said, I know there are times when a "target" or two is running downfield and keeps his back to the QB... meaning that he is out there as a pure decoy +/or potential blocker... but I contend still that on most plays.. 90+% perhaps.. that our QB has more than just one VIABLE receiver looking to see a possible ball come his way.




Just finished the Broncos/Chargers game.... yay!

Good morning Mac! When I see receivers not looking back...even if they are running a decoy route...it kills me! What if the QBs in trouble, scrambling, and needs your help? You just keep running, blind to the world? This means the team has horrible WR coaching!

I recall Freddy Solomon doing this and I'd be screaming at the TV screen! He'd be standing on the sideline next to a CB watching Montana scramble like crazy keeping the play alive. Bad, bad, bad, bad!

In this regard, NC may be correct if that's how the play is being coached and practiced. I've never seen Boldin do this so it must be coaching, not the scheme...OK...as you can see, this is a hot button for me and I'm rambling...but for heaven's sake! They've got a QB who can throw the ball 80 yards and no one breaks deep on a broken play? Really?
  • cciowa
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 24,143
Originally posted by pasodoc9er:
OMg, the fact this thread is still here must mean roman is too. OH no, oh no, oh no.

the sad thing is that this question is still being asked after all this
An NFL team needing a HC won't want to wait for the playoffs thru the SBowl to be over.

Unless they really want Roman and they work out a deal behind closed doors that nobody knows about but them.

Until then we're stuck. Hopefully some college team makes him an offer he can't refuse.
Originally posted by dtg_9er:
Originally posted by pasodoc9er:
Whether you are with NC, Thl, GM,dtg, et al, I think all agree (as I do) that regardless of whether ARs or PS, the middle continues to be open and we avoid it as if it were the Bermuda triangle. Man, Vance, hunter, Baldwin, LMJ could camp out there for all game and wouldn't be touched. Kap would have to take a remedial course on throwing more 4-6 yd passes with way less heat however. Still, he is talented and I am sure he can learn it.

Also, running frank into the box 8-10 is just flat ass goofy. 8 on 5 guys just doesn't work so throw dinks and dunks over the middle, slant, crossing patterns,whatever, and watch the completions pile up. Then when D move 3 or more guys off LOS, then turn frank loose, and watch the yrds pile up. Frank into a box 8-10 is just a wasted play...every dam time.

Good points Paso--John Elway was the same way as a young QB. It took him years to learn how to take a bit off his passes without throwing lame duck interceptions. Montana was the best I've seen in the short passing game and I believe it is largely due to his tutor--B. Walsh. When you have a coach insist on you practicing every aspect of QBing to the point where it becomes totally ingrained, you have a chance to become your potential.

My worry is that, even though Harbaugh is a very knowledgeable QB coach, CK won't get that insistent training every year. I know he goes to that Atlanta clinic, but that's not a 9er QB coach using 9er plays and precision, with all 9er players around you. The chemistry didn't happen, or not to a great extent, to make Lockette a keeper; so his training with receivers in the off-season did not do much to help the team. I do commend him for trying but wouldn't it have made more sense to train at the SF facilities where more players would have been available?

NC--as for the difference between you, Mac and myself (or anyone else)...I think one key is defining a receiving option. To me, a receiving option is any receiver running a route...whether that route is 80 yards down the field or behind the LOS on either side. It's clear that you are using a different definition and that clears things up quite a bit. I'm not sure where the AR idea originates but if you can post a history I would greatly appreciate it. I'm always open to remedial tutoring!

Well the good news is that we use both AR and PS plays (with quite a bit of ad lib thrown in there). One camp thinks we run a pre-dominant PS offense with a few AR's (specifically AR2's) thrown in there while I believe we run a pre-dominant AR (mostly AR1 with a few AR2's) with a few more PS plays added each game (now that we have a "full arsenal" ~ Roman). Either way, we're both right and getting down to semantics at this point. We should all be proud of the time and effort we all put into this JUST to understand what kind of offense we're trying to run here b/c lilke Chucky said, "I don't know what the heck this (our offense) is!"

Like all my "theories" they typically come from researching what we do closely, lots of video breakdowns, rewinding, etc. and from there, patterns start to emerge and then suddenly, you see a philosophy. Based on the Bo Schemblacher philsophy HaRoMan subscribes too, both were succesful with it in college, it being counter to the NFL (and therefore, it worked), CK stilll being green, personnel injuries, comments made by players such as Moss, Alex, CK, Boldin, etc. and HaRoMan, etc. you start to see a true philosophy here. Nobody would dispute much of it esp. when you bring in the more common descriptives such as "one read," "remedial," "conservative," "smoke and mirrors," "trickery with personnel packages, misdirections, pre-snap motions," etc.. In fact, this film study lead me to call this offense the Anti-WCO.

So to be honest, it's just a theory through video analysis coupled with our coaching M.O. In short, the passing game is more similar to a common college "team passing attack" vs. a pro-style passing attack like what you see in the majority of the NFL whether that's grounded in a version of the WCO or the Spread, it's VERY different from offenses we typically see in Chicago, GB, Denver, Detroit, Cleveland, NE, etc.

I think the more time people take to watch their own film (the play from start to finish) and esp. what the Non-AR's are doing to assist that AR in getting open (or isolated), the more you'll "see it." And by "it" I mean, our "passing philosophy." The comments made recently by CK and Boldin (and Moss last year) are VERY telling to me; Harbaugh too on why we don't use the RB's for screens or as outlets more (if we ran ANY version of a WCO, the RB's would be a staple of the offense - a true focus).

Quite simple, just watch the design of the play in real time. You'll see all of the receivers save for one over on the right to get isolation for the AR1 over on the left...you'll see literally, WR's blocking out CB's and LB's to free up the AR2...you'll see routes where cuts by a deeper receiver are done to freeze a DB to get the underneath AR1 open...you'll see Moss running constant sideline go and post routes to draw 2 defenders for underneath passes to the AR1...you'll see the non-AR's done with their part of the play, walking around, standing there (knowing they are not the target)...you'll see the AR coming out of his break WAY faster than anyone else...you'll see VD running constant deep go and corner routes to get the underneath AR1's the ball...I could go on and on.

Don't focus on the coverage of the defense or even pre-snap reads. Just watch the passing play from start to finish, CK's head/body positioning, watch the AR catch it and THEN go back and watch how the others aided in getting him open. It's pretty easy to see after just a few passing plays. Watch the play designs. You'll get to the point you can ID who the AR is very quickly. You'll see it!

PS: Yes, I don't define a late, flaring out Gore as a true receiver. He's an outlet in case the progressions or the AR play didn't work. Even if we ran a WCO (high-to-low progressions, the RB is still not a true receiver). In the WCO, the QB looks to deeper routes (progression 1) and then to his next intermediate routes (p2) the to his TE (p3) and finally, his check down RB/FB (outlet). What some are claiming here is that every receiver is a true progression read option by design (like we're running a WCO here) and that simply is not the case IMHO. The "design" demonstrates just the opposite.

Remember, when an AR pass play is unsuccessful, it instantly becomes an ad lib play. At THAT point, then the receivers ad lib and can become "viable" options. This is how we scored 2 TD's against the Rams (VD & Boldin) and the big 27 yarder over Sherman (Boldin). These targets were NOT part of a natural progression read passing play (i.e. a PS play called in by Roman; like what we see when we go Spread with CK in shotgun and with 3 and 4 WR's al running routes and looking back to the QB as true, viable options.).
[ Edited by NCommand on Dec 13, 2013 at 8:53 AM ]
Originally posted by Mr.Mcgibblets:
.. and it's not just some eligible receiver running around beyond or behind the LOS. It's an eligible target running a route AND making himself a viable target for his QB to throw to. (meaning, runs route and turns back to the QB to look for a potential pass) Like I said, I know there are times when a "target" or two is running downfield and keeps his back to the QB... meaning that he is out there as a pure decoy +/or potential blocker... but I contend still that on most plays.. 90+% perhaps.. that our QB has more than just one VIABLE receiver looking to see a possible ball come his way.




Just finished the Broncos/Chargers game.... yay!

Agreed. Only the bolded is where we fundamentally disagree (I'm in the opposite camp). But that's cool...we're getting HaRoMan figured out here either way! And THAT is way ahead of the rest of the NFL (minus the quality DC's).
  • cciowa
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 24,143
no one still has any clue what our mission, identity , strength , clue whatever word you want to use, on offense is
Originally posted by cciowa:
no one still has any clue what our mission, identity , strength , clue whatever word you want to use, on offense is

We don't, it's the truth. We run a bunch of AR1 and 2's, some PS, jones found a WCO play yesterday, a bunch of Q-formations from Chris Ault (read-option as well),some Spread etc. It's a cluster eff of mashed potatoe.
Nonetheless, NC, HaRo continue to keep the middle of the field wide open for 4-6 yd pass plays all game, and for whatever goofy reason, roman thinks running frank into a box 8,9 or 10 is a "good" running play. To me, that is just giving one play to the D for a 1 yd gain. Whether we are running PS or AR, those are two really big screw ups by HaRo.