There are 148 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Greg Roman, is he really good?

Originally posted by sincalfaithful:
And then this gem from the Seattle game

Running plays when we had 4 guys split out - 0
Running plays when we had 3 guys split out - 0
Running plays when we had 2 guys split out - 4 (but see below)
Running plays when we had 1 guy split out - 10 (every single one of them with 8 or 9 defenders in the box)
Running plays when we had 0 guys split out - 2 (against 11-man fronts)

That's a good breakdown. Thanks for that. I have complained in the past why the 49ers will pass out of running formations but will rarely, if ever, run out of passing formations. Keeping a defense off balance is critical, especially when playing division foes where familiarity works against the offense. Combine this running out of 1WR sets with the predictability in Gore's game (mainly between the tackles) and it's no surprise the run game stalls versus teams with a good front 7. Cover3, by design, is a good defensive scheme against the run and the 49ers 'forcing the run' played right into SEA's hands.
Originally posted by Janitor:
Originally posted by sincalfaithful:
Originally posted by Ronnie49Lott:
Are the 49ers suffering paralysis by analysis under Greg Roman?
When the 49ers do manage to get the ball into scoring position, the offense struggles in the red zone despite the many weapons at our disposal. We settle for field goals. In fact, we are number one in the league with 105 made over the last three seasons. Although points are points, the lack of ability to score touchdowns on great drives is maddening. And against Seattle, the opportunities to get into the red zone will be more difficult. The 49ers cannot leave points on the field.
http://bigtimefootball.com/football/are-the-49ers-suffering-paralysis-by-analysis-under-greg-roman/

And then this gem from the Seattle game

Running plays when we had 4 guys split out - 0
Running plays when we had 3 guys split out - 0
Running plays when we had 2 guys split out - 4 (but see below)
Running plays when we had 1 guy split out - 10 (every single one of them with 8 or 9 defenders in the box)
Running plays when we had 0 guys split out - 2 (against 11-man fronts)


It looks bad, but I think those are formations. They can still have 2-3 guys out on a pattern with a run formation. For example, you can have only 1 receiver spilt out wide, but have 2 TE on the line going out on passing patterns. That's 3 guys out for a pass. Niners are running team that can have guys go out for a pass out of those run formations. It's part of building a reputation for a running team, qb protection, and still sorta keep the defense honest by not playing the run on every down.

With the speed and size of VD, he can turn into that #2 WR very quickly.
[ Edited by qnnhan7 on Feb 11, 2014 at 11:11 AM ]
Originally posted by thl408:
Originally posted by sincalfaithful:
And then this gem from the Seattle game

Running plays when we had 4 guys split out - 0
Running plays when we had 3 guys split out - 0
Running plays when we had 2 guys split out - 4 (but see below)
Running plays when we had 1 guy split out - 10 (every single one of them with 8 or 9 defenders in the box)
Running plays when we had 0 guys split out - 2 (against 11-man fronts)

That's a good breakdown. Thanks for that. I have complained in the past why the 49ers will pass out of running formations but will rarely, if ever, run out of passing formations. Keeping a defense off balance is critical, especially when playing division foes where familiarity works against the offense. Combine this running out of 1WR sets with the predictability in Gore's game (mainly between the tackles) and it's no surprise the run game stalls versus teams with a good front 7. Cover3, by design, is a good defensive scheme against the run and the 49ers 'forcing the run' played right into SEA's hands.
Would be the perfect time to work LMJ in the game. Use his and hunter's quickness to hit the hole in these situations. It's like they have change of pace backs but don't call any plays to utilize that change of pace.
Originally posted by lamontb:
Originally posted by thl408:
Originally posted by sincalfaithful:
And then this gem from the Seattle game

Running plays when we had 4 guys split out - 0
Running plays when we had 3 guys split out - 0
Running plays when we had 2 guys split out - 4 (but see below)
Running plays when we had 1 guy split out - 10 (every single one of them with 8 or 9 defenders in the box)
Running plays when we had 0 guys split out - 2 (against 11-man fronts)

That's a good breakdown. Thanks for that. I have complained in the past why the 49ers will pass out of running formations but will rarely, if ever, run out of passing formations. Keeping a defense off balance is critical, especially when playing division foes where familiarity works against the offense. Combine this running out of 1WR sets with the predictability in Gore's game (mainly between the tackles) and it's no surprise the run game stalls versus teams with a good front 7. Cover3, by design, is a good defensive scheme against the run and the 49ers 'forcing the run' played right into SEA's hands.
Would be the perfect time to work LMJ in the game. Use his and hunter's quickness to hit the hole in these situations. It's like they have change of pace backs but don't call any plays to utilize that change of pace.

And a key point in all of this is that all but IIRC, 4 plays were running plays on first downs as well. Seattle had no issue at all getting us into 2nd and longs all day long.
th and others, I wanted your thoughts/insight on this topic:

In watching some film, can someone theorize as to why we don't go with a predominant or even half-time pro style spread offense? I noticed when CK was in shotgun (ala Brady) and there were 4 or even 5 true receiving options (all running hard to get open) and he was allowed to stand back there, scan and find his man, he was terrific.

Wouldn't this suit our personnel much better as well?
QB: CK (we let BJ Daniels go)
RB: James and Hunter (maybe Lattimore out of the Q formation AND in power sets); Gore is an excellent pas protector and when used on a regular basis, has good hands
WR: Patton and Crabtree (I'm sure Boldin can play in any offense); not sure about Baldwin and others
TE: VD and esp. McDonald (Carrier)
OL: Boone, Staley, Kilgore (lighter but more mobile and athletic)
And for those thinking we're possibly going to have an easier schedule next season .....

http://espn.go.com/blog/san-francisco-49ers/post/_/id/5105/strength-of-schedule-san-francisco-49ers


Because of the 10 games against the top West competition, the 49ers have the fourth toughest 2014 schedule based on the combined 2013 records of their upcoming opponents. The 49ers' opponent win percentage is .563 and is tied with the Chargers.

Well so much for thinking we can just easily win home field. No we're going to have to really try and really earn it - and furthermore, we better have some new thoughts about offense.
Originally posted by sincalfaithful:
Originally posted by Ronnie49Lott:
Are the 49ers suffering paralysis by analysis under Greg Roman?
When the 49ers do manage to get the ball into scoring position, the offense struggles in the red zone despite the many weapons at our disposal. We settle for field goals. In fact, we are number one in the league with 105 made over the last three seasons. Although points are points, the lack of ability to score touchdowns on great drives is maddening. And against Seattle, the opportunities to get into the red zone will be more difficult. The 49ers cannot leave points on the field.
http://bigtimefootball.com/football/are-the-49ers-suffering-paralysis-by-analysis-under-greg-roman/

And then this gem from the Seattle game

Running plays when we had 4 guys split out - 0
Running plays when we had 3 guys split out - 0
Running plays when we had 2 guys split out - 4 (but see below)
Running plays when we had 1 guy split out - 10 (every single one of them with 8 or 9 defenders in the box)
Running plays when we had 0 guys split out - 2 (against 11-man fronts)

I would love to see what Seattle did as well for comparisons sake.
Originally posted by NCommand:
th and others, I wanted your thoughts/insight on this topic:

In watching some film, can someone theorize as to why we don't go with a predominant or even half-time pro style spread offense? I noticed when CK was in shotgun (ala Brady) and there were 4 or even 5 true receiving options (all running hard to get open) and he was allowed to stand back there, scan and find his man, he was terrific.

Wouldn't this suit our personnel much better as well?
QB: CK (we let BJ Daniels go)
RB: James and Hunter (maybe Lattimore out of the Q formation AND in power sets); Gore is an excellent pas protector and when used on a regular basis, has good hands
WR: Patton and Crabtree (I'm sure Boldin can play in any offense); not sure about Baldwin and others
TE: VD and esp. McDonald (Carrier)
OL: Boone, Staley, Kilgore (lighter but more mobile and athletic)

A real spread offense is something I feel can allow Kap to put up better passing numbers (fantasy football numbers), but it isn't what Harbaugh is about. A spread offense is basically the polar opposite of a power run offense and we know how much Jim likes his 2TE sets. The 49ers actually use a spread formation out of any personnel grouping as we have seen Vance, Miller, and Gore line up wide to create coverage mismatches, while keeping the defense's base personnel on the field. If you are referring to 3WR/4WR spread formations, then that is what goes against, what I think is, Jim's philosophy. If the 49ers field a 3WR+VD personnel, but bunch them together hoping to beat man coverage, would you consider that a spread look? Perhaps you are asking why don't the 49ers use more 3WR sets + VD lined up wide to give the look of a 4WR set.

I don't know if Jim has it in him to go to this type of offense (3WR + VD out wide) as base personnel. Is it an issue of philosophy, or is an issue of what he thinks is inadequate talent in the 13-14 season (WRs, OL pass pro, Kap's current level of development)? The fact that he forces the run shows he values the ground and pound game. Vance McDonald's post season quotes were telling in that Jim puts a lot of value in winning the war of the trenches, something we shouldn't be surprised to hear:

"I definitely kind of got the vibe of what we wanted to establish as an offense. We wanted to be a definite run team. We wanted to establish the line of scrimmage. And we had the players to do it and the offensive line to do it. We had the running backs to do it. I knew that was a big focus, so I definitely wasn't surprised."

The question is, as Kap gains experience as a passer and players like Crabs, QP, Vance, become more accustomed to the offense, will Jim throw the ball more, and if he does, will it be out of a 3WR set, or will it be out of a 2TE set? Does Jim love his 2TEs and Miller too much to do this? He has mentioned that he strives for balance. Not balance in run/pass ratio, but balance in being able to run and pass equally in effectiveness while being able to give a myriad of looks (22 personnel, pistol, shotgun spread). Sorry I have no answer, just more questions and it has to do with Jim's philosophy. I don't think any of us know because Jim only has 3 years NFL head coaching experience while working with 2 different types of QBs.
Originally posted by thl408:
Originally posted by NCommand:
th and others, I wanted your thoughts/insight on this topic:

In watching some film, can someone theorize as to why we don't go with a predominant or even half-time pro style spread offense? I noticed when CK was in shotgun (ala Brady) and there were 4 or even 5 true receiving options (all running hard to get open) and he was allowed to stand back there, scan and find his man, he was terrific.

Wouldn't this suit our personnel much better as well?
QB: CK (we let BJ Daniels go)
RB: James and Hunter (maybe Lattimore out of the Q formation AND in power sets); Gore is an excellent pas protector and when used on a regular basis, has good hands
WR: Patton and Crabtree (I'm sure Boldin can play in any offense); not sure about Baldwin and others
TE: VD and esp. McDonald (Carrier)
OL: Boone, Staley, Kilgore (lighter but more mobile and athletic)

A real spread offense is something I feel can allow Kap to put up better passing numbers (fantasy football numbers), but it isn't what Harbaugh is about. A spread offense is basically the polar opposite of a power run offense and we know how much Jim likes his 2TE sets. The 49ers actually use a spread formation out of any personnel grouping as we have seen Vance, Miller, and Gore line up wide to create coverage mismatches, while keeping the defense's base personnel on the field. If you are referring to 3WR/4WR spread formations, then that is what goes against, what I think is, Jim's philosophy. If the 49ers field a 3WR+VD personnel, but bunch them together hoping to beat man coverage, would you consider that a spread look? Perhaps you are asking why don't the 49ers use more 3WR sets + VD lined up wide to give the look of a 4WR set.

I don't know if Jim has it in him to go to this type of offense (3WR + VD out wide) as base personnel. Is it an issue of philosophy, or is an issue of what he thinks is inadequate talent in the 13-14 season (WRs, OL pass pro, Kap's current level of development)? The fact that he forces the run shows he values the ground and pound game. Vance McDonald's post season quotes were telling in that Jim puts a lot of value in winning the war of the trenches, something we shouldn't be surprised to hear:

"I definitely kind of got the vibe of what we wanted to establish as an offense. We wanted to be a definite run team. We wanted to establish the line of scrimmage. And we had the players to do it and the offensive line to do it. We had the running backs to do it. I knew that was a big focus, so I definitely wasn't surprised."

The question is, as Kap gains experience as a passer and players like Crabs, QP, Vance, become more accustomed to the offense, will Jim throw the ball more, and if he does, will it be out of a 3WR set, or will it be out of a 2TE set? Does Jim love his 2TEs and Miller too much to do this? He has mentioned that he strives for balance. Not balance in run/pass ratio, but balance in being able to run and pass equally in effectiveness while being able to give a myriad of looks (22 personnel, pistol, shotgun spread). Sorry I have no answer, just more questions and it has to do with Jim's philosophy. I don't think any of us know because Jim only has 3 years NFL head coaching experience while working with 2 different types of QBs.

You may have added more questions but I had the same ones myself. I guess when I picture more of a spread offense, yeah, it's 4 receivers. Remember the gif you created with McDonald being one of those legit targets and even Gore IIRC also flared out wide? So there it was...5 legit receiving options with CK standing in shot gun with a number of different options (and he hit McDonald for a nice gain). That's sort of how I picture the strength of our team esp. when you start adding in others such as Hunter, James, (Gore used to be a good receiver when used on the regular), Patton, McDonald on top of seasoned veterans in Crabtree, VD and Boldin. CK stands back there in shotgun and scans the field and picks his target.

I think you hit the nail on the head re: balance...Roman studied and incorporated the Q formation into our power run offense. McDonald's quote drove home Harbaugh's "philosophy" as well, no doubt; I bet it was a little shocked for him coming from a spread offense and playing in the slot a lot to being a FT blocker and thrown one bone a game (if lucky).

While we saw a successful spread play here as illustrated, clearly, it's the offense that needs work here to get over the hump. I took Harbaugh's comments about Lattimore right after the NFCCG as a way to ween fans off Gore and start the process of ushering in Lattimore. But given the play selection and predictability of the first down runs, could Lattimore do better than 13 yards? I doubt it...so balance.

We have seen some WCO plays incorporated, started to see RB's flare out much more as the season progressed, saw some spread, some power run (jumbo packages), Q formations, etc.

Maybe the strengths of this team (film review of successes by all coaches) will lead to some serious changes in the base offense while still maintaining our power run philosophy?
[ Edited by NCommand on Feb 11, 2014 at 5:32 PM ]
Stanford's offense - Not exactly simple, but effective Like any offense, Stanford's primary ambition is to create confusion for an opposing defense and force adjustments. Yet, in some ways, it's amazing Stanford's offensive players are able to keep everything straight.

Perhaps it's fitting. Stanford holds a reputation as one of the most eggheaded institutions of higher learning in the nation. With a playbook that includes at least 350 plays, it takes a series group of eggheads to make it work as well as the Cardinal has this season.


Greg Roman is the associate head coach, the assistant head coach for offense and tight ends and offensive tackles coach. He has spent 13 of his 15 years coaching in the NFL, including seven seasons with the Carolina Panthers as a defensive quality control coach, an offensive quality control coach, a strength and conditioning assistant, an offensive assistant and an assistant offensive line coach. He also spent four seasons with the Houston Texans, including two as tight ends coach and two as quarterbacks coach. In 2005, when he was in his final season with the Texans as the quarterbacks coach, he worked with U.Va. coach Mike London, who was then the Texans' defensive line coach. Roman arrived at Stanford last season, joining a staff that already included David Shaw.

http://weblogs.dailypress.com/sports/college/accblog/2011/01/stanfords_offense_not_exactly.html
Originally posted by Ronnie49Lott:
Stanford's offense - Not exactly simple, but effective Like any offense, Stanford's primary ambition is to create confusion for an opposing defense and force adjustments. Yet, in some ways, it's amazing Stanford's offensive players are able to keep everything straight.

Perhaps it's fitting. Stanford holds a reputation as one of the most eggheaded institutions of higher learning in the nation. With a playbook that includes at least 350 plays, it takes a series group of eggheads to make it work as well as the Cardinal has this season.


Greg Roman is the associate head coach, the assistant head coach for offense and tight ends and offensive tackles coach. He has spent 13 of his 15 years coaching in the NFL, including seven seasons with the Carolina Panthers as a defensive quality control coach, an offensive quality control coach, a strength and conditioning assistant, an offensive assistant and an assistant offensive line coach. He also spent four seasons with the Houston Texans, including two as tight ends coach and two as quarterbacks coach. In 2005, when he was in his final season with the Texans as the quarterbacks coach, he worked with U.Va. coach Mike London, who was then the Texans' defensive line coach. Roman arrived at Stanford last season, joining a staff that already included David Shaw.

http://weblogs.dailypress.com/sports/college/accblog/2011/01/stanfords_offense_not_exactly.html

Well clearly, we're only using 1 of these 350 pages!
First down: 2 yard loss on a run up the middle
Second down and 12: obvious passing situation; AR or PS one read; CK scrambles for 6
Third down and 6: complete pass to VD for 5 yards (other receivers all run go-routes)
Punt: returned 65 yards
Originally posted by NCommand:
Well clearly, we're only using 1 of these 350 pages!
First down: 2 yard loss on a run up the middle
Second down and 12: obvious passing situation; AR or PS one read; CK scrambles for 6
Third down and 6: complete pass to VD for 5 yards (other receivers all run go-routes)
Punt: returned 65 yards

this ...................................................
Originally posted by qnnhan7:
It looks bad, but I think those are formations. They can still have 2-3 guys out on a pattern with a run formation. For example, you can have only 1 receiver spilt out wide, but have 2 TE on the line going out on passing patterns. That's 3 guys out for a pass. Niners are running team that can have guys go out for a pass out of those run formations. It's part of building a reputation for a running team, qb protection, and still sorta keep the defense honest by not playing the run on every down.

With the speed and size of VD, he can turn into that #2 WR very quickly.

That's the point though...if you get any benefit to the run game by running out of pass formation it doesn't' work if you only have one wide out, but two TEs who can go out. It's an obvious run formation...and then you run. The idea proposed, if I understand it, is that you have to change up by running when it's an obvious pass formation in order to keep the D honest. Same with the occasional pass from the run formations. The TD to VD from the jumbo run formation was beautiful. No one took VD because they knew it was a run formation.
The Full Playchart: From Green Bay @ Seattle 2012 Great article too!




http://www.fieldgulls.com/2012/9/28/3419496/notes-on-the-seahawks-offensive-scheme-philosophy-and-conservative
[ Edited by Ronnie49Lott on Feb 11, 2014 at 5:57 PM ]
Originally posted by thl408:
Originally posted by NCommand:
th and others, I wanted your thoughts/insight on this topic:

In watching some film, can someone theorize as to why we don't go with a predominant or even half-time pro style spread offense? I noticed when CK was in shotgun (ala Brady) and there were 4 or even 5 true receiving options (all running hard to get open) and he was allowed to stand back there, scan and find his man, he was terrific.

Wouldn't this suit our personnel much better as well?
QB: CK (we let BJ Daniels go)
RB: James and Hunter (maybe Lattimore out of the Q formation AND in power sets); Gore is an excellent pas protector and when used on a regular basis, has good hands
WR: Patton and Crabtree (I'm sure Boldin can play in any offense); not sure about Baldwin and others
TE: VD and esp. McDonald (Carrier)
OL: Boone, Staley, Kilgore (lighter but more mobile and athletic)

A real spread offense is something I feel can allow Kap to put up better passing numbers (fantasy football numbers), but it isn't what Harbaugh is about. A spread offense is basically the polar opposite of a power run offense and we know how much Jim likes his 2TE sets. The 49ers actually use a spread formation out of any personnel grouping as we have seen Vance, Miller, and Gore line up wide to create coverage mismatches, while keeping the defense's base personnel on the field. If you are referring to 3WR/4WR spread formations, then that is what goes against, what I think is, Jim's philosophy. If the 49ers field a 3WR+VD personnel, but bunch them together hoping to beat man coverage, would you consider that a spread look? Perhaps you are asking why don't the 49ers use more 3WR sets + VD lined up wide to give the look of a 4WR set.

I don't know if Jim has it in him to go to this type of offense (3WR + VD out wide) as base personnel. Is it an issue of philosophy, or is an issue of what he thinks is inadequate talent in the 13-14 season (WRs, OL pass pro, Kap's current level of development)? The fact that he forces the run shows he values the ground and pound game. Vance McDonald's post season quotes were telling in that Jim puts a lot of value in winning the war of the trenches, something we shouldn't be surprised to hear:

"I definitely kind of got the vibe of what we wanted to establish as an offense. We wanted to be a definite run team. We wanted to establish the line of scrimmage. And we had the players to do it and the offensive line to do it. We had the running backs to do it. I knew that was a big focus, so I definitely wasn't surprised."

The question is, as Kap gains experience as a passer and players like Crabs, QP, Vance, become more accustomed to the offense, will Jim throw the ball more, and if he does, will it be out of a 3WR set, or will it be out of a 2TE set? Does Jim love his 2TEs and Miller too much to do this? He has mentioned that he strives for balance. Not balance in run/pass ratio, but balance in being able to run and pass equally in effectiveness while being able to give a myriad of looks (22 personnel, pistol, shotgun spread). Sorry I have no answer, just more questions and it has to do with Jim's philosophy. I don't think any of us know because Jim only has 3 years NFL head coaching experience while working with 2 different types of QBs.

What I would like to see for a full game is one personal package utilizing Boldin and Crabtree at WR, VD as TE with the option to split out or go in motion; Gore in the backfield to run, go in motion or block and Miller in the back field to run, block, go out, or move up to replace VD as a blocker when he goes outside. The D wouldn't be able to adjust until the last minute and they could run just about any type of play from this set. No more jumbo, or cute groupings to confuse the D.

This would be particularly effective in Seattle,where it's impossible to hear audibles and time is of the essence...no more penalties trying to get the right players in and play called before the clock runs down.