There are 104 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Greg Roman, is he really good?

Originally posted by jonnydel:
agreed, I wasn't saying you didn't know the difference, I had just realized I may have said something that not everyone might know and wanted to clarify.

gotcha.

going forward we should be a juggernaut. no team should be able to stop us
and if we play straight up and not zone no team score on us.
Originally posted by jonnydel:
Yeah, and I should also make sure we all know that there is a different from a "hot read" and a "sight adjust" read. A "sight adjust" read is when the receiver and the QB see the coverage and adjust the route to a better route against the coverage. New England runs a LOT of these. This is why Brady said it was so nice having Moss as a receiver because he saw defenses, "like a QB". It helped in a lot of their "sight adjustments". It puts a lot on a receiver identifying his coverage off the snap.

A "hot route" is when the play has a built in "hot read". Meaning, there's the primary progression, 1,2,3 etc. But, a route built in from an expected blitz. (e.g. a TE flaring out to the flat). The reason it's identified as a "hot route" is that the receiver needs to understand that his route is primarily a clearing route, but, if the defense blitzes, the QB may throw it "hot" to him. "hot" meaning the QB will abandon the progression due to the blitz and dump it off to his outlet. So, the receiver needs to expect the ball to be thrown to him in that situation and look for the ball quick.

Great explanation on the difference between hot route and sight adjustment. Chad Johnson's failure in NE was because he was too stupid to understand sight adjustment routes. I feel any dynamic passing attack must have sight adjustment routes. It's the only way to beat any type of coverage thrown at them. Just one WR on any given play is using sight adjustment. Jason Witten and Welker are two of the best.

Harbaugh has been on record saying he will not use sight adjustment routes. I am unsure if it was because he was not confident in the QBs he had or if that is his true philosophy.
Originally posted by thl408:
Great explanation on the difference between hot route and sight adjustment. Chad Johnson's failure in NE was because he was too stupid to understand sight adjustment routes. I feel any dynamic passing attack must have sight adjustment routes. It's the only way to beat any type of coverage thrown at them. Just one WR on any given play is using sight adjustment. Jason Witten and Welker are two of the best.

Harbaugh has been on record saying he will not use sight adjustment routes. I am unsure if it was because he was not confident in the QBs he had or if that is his true philosophy.

im leaning towards philosophy

jim is always confident he can do anything he wants.
Originally posted by thl408:
Originally posted by jonnydel:
Yeah, and I should also make sure we all know that there is a different from a "hot read" and a "sight adjust" read. A "sight adjust" read is when the receiver and the QB see the coverage and adjust the route to a better route against the coverage. New England runs a LOT of these. This is why Brady said it was so nice having Moss as a receiver because he saw defenses, "like a QB". It helped in a lot of their "sight adjustments". It puts a lot on a receiver identifying his coverage off the snap.

A "hot route" is when the play has a built in "hot read". Meaning, there's the primary progression, 1,2,3 etc. But, a route built in from an expected blitz. (e.g. a TE flaring out to the flat). The reason it's identified as a "hot route" is that the receiver needs to understand that his route is primarily a clearing route, but, if the defense blitzes, the QB may throw it "hot" to him. "hot" meaning the QB will abandon the progression due to the blitz and dump it off to his outlet. So, the receiver needs to expect the ball to be thrown to him in that situation and look for the ball quick.

Great explanation on the difference between hot route and sight adjustment. Chad Johnson's failure in NE was because he was too stupid to understand sight adjustment routes. I feel any dynamic passing attack must have sight adjustment routes. It's the only way to beat any type of coverage thrown at them. Just one WR on any given play is using sight adjustment. Jason Witten and Welker are two of the best.

Harbaugh has been on record saying he will not use sight adjustment routes. I am unsure if it was because he was not confident in the QBs he had or if that is his true philosophy.

It's because the WCO is not a sight adjusted offense. I've heard Sterling Sharpe say that, Jon Gruden says it in his playbook from the Raiders, and Brian Billick(one of Bill Walsh's first students and basically, co-author of Walsh's "the winning edge" book that is a bible for any coach.
"Do what you do best and keep doing it until they stop it".
here's an example from Gruden's playbook.



Here's a common WCO play. It's designed to get the receiver on a hitch route vs cover 3 you can see the progression noted in the play with the "1,2,3" underlined for the I("x" receiver) as the first read, the RB as the 2nd read and the TE as the 3rd read. Notice how he has an "Alert" for both plays if the defense goes cover "2" to hit the post in the middle of the field. There's also the "hot" read to the RB against a blitz as it would put the RB on a LB or a safety trying to come down from the middle of the field.
Espn reporting that he will get HCoach jobs.
Originally posted by pasodoc9er:
Thl, no harm done, and in retrospect, I reread your post, and as noted, I noted the AS reference, and we WERE talking about two entirely different things. Sorry for the confusion.

jonnydel and Adrian I respect you guys and am in the process of completely relearning football as I thot I knew it since back in the B & W 12" TV days, that broadcast the mudbowl, circa 1956. After h.s. and then college, I have just watched games and thot I knew what I was seeing...but obviously didn't .Thanks to you two and Thl, and NC, it has been a revelation, not to mention a fascinating experience. But... I certainly agree the 2nd half we were coached a lot better, or heck, even well. The first half, however, had this been an elite team, which we face from here on out, we would have been blown out of the tub. The craziness of the calls, the nutty sequences, finding a winner and then going away from it, the disjointedness of what was being called...gad, it was painful...and also, nowhere near enough to get us past our first playoff game...let alone any others.

so I ask you: just exactly what would you all recommend we do, coaching wise, to get an entire game coached coherently? I wouldn't worry as bad if this were a first time event...but it isn't. It is the antithesis of a BW coached game, with the first 25 plays written on a cardboard. Here the first half is just by gosh and by golly, no reasoning, no direction, nothing. How in the world do we win from here on if we play goofball football the first half? Frankly we were lucky to win this one, giving the first half away like it didn't matter. Maybe some of this is on the players, but #81 and #15 were ready to play...not so much some of the others. But overall,the coaching calls in first half were epically bad. Why and how is this fixed? Or, can it be?

Rereading this maybe I answered my own question. Should we be using 25 scripted plays for the first half? Can't be any worse than it is now.
Well, at that point it becomes counter-productive. On offense, you'll most likely get about 60-80 plays on offense. The purpose of scripting plays is to get the defense to show it's hand. You run multiple fronts and personnel groupings with varied route combo's to try and see how the defense is going to play certain personnel groupings/formations/routes. From there, you use that information to counter-punch. The hard part is, if the players don't execute the plays well in the first series of the game you don't get very much information(like only running 8-9 of your scripted plays by the end of the 1st quarter). From there, you either have to abandon your script and kind of fly by the handle, or continue on to get the information you need to take advantage later in the game. I think that's a lot of what happened on monday night. You see how we absolutely dominated in the 2nd half. A lot of that has to do with Roman taking advantage of the information he gathered in the first half.
  • LVJay
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 6,385
I once heard of this guy tearing up a roasted pig all by himself at an Hawaiian Luau
It is going to be coaching season soon, and there could be a chance the San Francisco 49ers' staff attracts interest.

Tuesday, ESPN analyst John Clayton mentioned San Francisco offensive coordinator Greg Roman as a potential candidate for the New York Jets if they fire coach Rex Ryan.

Expect to see Roman's name connected to other openings when coaches start to get fired next week. There could be five to nine potential openings.

It's no surprise Roman's name would be part of the coaching rumor mill. He has a strong pedigree and has the look of an assistant who is on the head coaching track. His success under Jim Harbaugh likely won't hurt his candidacy, either.

So, this may just be the beginning of Roman dot connecting.http://espn.go.com/blog/san-francisco-49ers/post/_/id/3753/will-greg-roman-get-head-coaching-looks
[ Edited by Ronnie49Lott on Dec 24, 2013 at 7:13 PM ]
Originally posted by jonnydel:
Originally posted by thl408:
Originally posted by jonnydel:
Yeah, and I should also make sure we all know that there is a different from a "hot read" and a "sight adjust" read. A "sight adjust" read is when the receiver and the QB see the coverage and adjust the route to a better route against the coverage. New England runs a LOT of these. This is why Brady said it was so nice having Moss as a receiver because he saw defenses, "like a QB". It helped in a lot of their "sight adjustments". It puts a lot on a receiver identifying his coverage off the snap.

A "hot route" is when the play has a built in "hot read". Meaning, there's the primary progression, 1,2,3 etc. But, a route built in from an expected blitz. (e.g. a TE flaring out to the flat). The reason it's identified as a "hot route" is that the receiver needs to understand that his route is primarily a clearing route, but, if the defense blitzes, the QB may throw it "hot" to him. "hot" meaning the QB will abandon the progression due to the blitz and dump it off to his outlet. So, the receiver needs to expect the ball to be thrown to him in that situation and look for the ball quick.

Great explanation on the difference between hot route and sight adjustment. Chad Johnson's failure in NE was because he was too stupid to understand sight adjustment routes. I feel any dynamic passing attack must have sight adjustment routes. It's the only way to beat any type of coverage thrown at them. Just one WR on any given play is using sight adjustment. Jason Witten and Welker are two of the best.

Harbaugh has been on record saying he will not use sight adjustment routes. I am unsure if it was because he was not confident in the QBs he had or if that is his true philosophy.

It's because the WCO is not a sight adjusted offense. I've heard Sterling Sharpe say that, Jon Gruden says it in his playbook from the Raiders, and Brian Billick(one of Bill Walsh's first students and basically, co-author of Walsh's "the winning edge" book that is a bible for any coach.


I agree that sight adjustment is a huge no no in the WCO. WCO is extremely strict with WRs running precise routes so that the QB knows exactly where the WR will be as the huddle breaks and after the ball is snapped (no sight adjustments). I think where we differ is that I don't think this is a WCO, so sight adjustments should be an option.
Originally posted by thl408:
I agree that sight adjustment is a huge no no in the WCO. WCO is extremely strict with WRs running precise routes so that the QB knows exactly where the WR will be as the huddle breaks and after the ball is snapped (no sight adjustments). I think where we differ is that I don't think this is a WCO, so sight adjustments should be an option.

I've been going over a bunch of WCO playbooks, Bill Walsh 1985, Jon Gruden 1998, Mike Shanahan 1994(49ers) and Mike Holmgren(1991 49ers and 2000 Seahawks). I'll be posting different things( I posted a couple examples over in the tampa bay coaches film thread), but, a lot of the plays we run are straight out of those playbooks.
[ Edited by jonnydel on Dec 24, 2013 at 9:09 PM ]
Originally posted by jonnydel:
Originally posted by thl408:
I agree that sight adjustment is a huge no no in the WCO. WCO is extremely strict with WRs running precise routes so that the QB knows exactly where the WR will be as the huddle breaks and after the ball is snapped (no sight adjustments). I think where we differ is that I don't think this is a WCO, so sight adjustments should be an option.

I've been going over a bunch of WCO playbooks, Bill Walsh 1985, Jon Gruden 1998, Mike Shanahan 1994(49ers) and Mike Holmgren(1991 49ers and 2000 Seahawks). I'll be posting different things( I posted a couple examples over in the tampa bay coaches film thread), but, a lot of the plays we run are straight out of those playbooks.

I feel all teams incorporate some aspects/plays of the WCO in their playbook. That's what makes the WCO so timeless. There is one distinct characteristic that I associate with a WCO and that is the QB's drop back timed directly with the break of the WRs' routes. This is why I don't think the 49ers currently run a WCO, at its root. There are also two aspects when referencing a QB's footwork. One is how to throw the ball, which I have seen you breakdown for Kap on some plays. The other is the actual drop back (not the throwing motion). The drop back is where I see Kap being 'all over the place'.

I am keeping a totally open mind as you post future stuff regarding what you mentioned above. I've stated the differences in a coverage read passing attack versus a progression read attack (TB film thread) and I feel the 49ers use a coverage read passing attack which is much more lenient on a QB's drop back as it doesn't have to be in harmony with the WR cuts in their routes. Whereas a progression read attack is WCO with emphasis on timing. One of the reasons Joe and Steve were never in the shotgun was because the footwork of the drop back (timing) would be compromised by the varying speed at which the center will get ball to the QB. We see the 49ers often in shotgun/pistol on passing plays.
Originally posted by Ronnie49Lott:
It is going to be coaching season soon, and there could be a chance the San Francisco 49ers' staff attracts interest.

Tuesday, ESPN analyst John Clayton mentioned San Francisco offensive coordinator Greg Roman as a potential candidate for the New York Jets if they fire coach Rex Ryan.

Expect to see Roman's name connected to other openings when coaches start to get fired next week. There could be five to nine potential openings.

It's no surprise Roman's name would be part of the coaching rumor mill. He has a strong pedigree and has the look of an assistant who is on the head coaching track. His success under Jim Harbaugh likely won't hurt his candidacy, either.

So, this may just be the beginning of Roman dot connecting.http://espn.go.com/blog/san-francisco-49ers/post/_/id/3753/will-greg-roman-get-head-coaching-looks

Hope too see Roman get a shot at a head coaching job this year.
Originally posted by thl408:
Originally posted by jonnydel:
Originally posted by thl408:
I agree that sight adjustment is a huge no no in the WCO. WCO is extremely strict with WRs running precise routes so that the QB knows exactly where the WR will be as the huddle breaks and after the ball is snapped (no sight adjustments). I think where we differ is that I don't think this is a WCO, so sight adjustments should be an option.

I've been going over a bunch of WCO playbooks, Bill Walsh 1985, Jon Gruden 1998, Mike Shanahan 1994(49ers) and Mike Holmgren(1991 49ers and 2000 Seahawks). I'll be posting different things( I posted a couple examples over in the tampa bay coaches film thread), but, a lot of the plays we run are straight out of those playbooks.

I feel all teams incorporate some aspects/plays of the WCO in their playbook. That's what makes the WCO so timeless. There is one distinct characteristic that I associate with a WCO and that is the QB's drop back timed directly with the break of the WRs' routes. This is why I don't think the 49ers currently run a WCO, at its root. There are also two aspects when referencing a QB's footwork. One is how to throw the ball, which I have seen you breakdown for Kap on some plays. The other is the actual drop back (not the throwing motion). The drop back is where I see Kap being 'all over the place'.

I am keeping a totally open mind as you post future stuff regarding what you mentioned above. I've stated the differences in a coverage read passing attack versus a progression read attack (TB film thread) and I feel the 49ers use a coverage read passing attack which is much more lenient on a QB's drop back as it doesn't have to be in harmony with the WR cuts in their routes. Whereas a progression read attack is WCO with emphasis on timing. One of the reasons Joe and Steve were never in the shotgun was because the footwork of the drop back (timing) would be compromised by the varying speed at which the center will get ball to the QB. We see the 49ers often in shotgun/pistol on passing plays.

This convo between you two is the first time I've read multiple posts in this thread without SMH or Rofl. Very refreshing. Thank you. Keep it up.