There are 71 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

disturbing play in the cardinals game

Believe it or not, some plays are designed to give you YAC. Just ask a guy named Bill Walsh
complain about winning
Originally posted by marshniners24:
complain about winning

Originally posted by 49erfaithful49:
What I am suggesting is that our play calling is very conservative

If conservative play wins games then what's wrong with that?

There seems to be an attitude among some people that conservative play calling is automatically a bad thing.

Non-conservative play calling is riskier. Sometimes that is a good thing, taking risks. However, if Harbaugh has developed a team formula that wins games without taking an extraordinary number of risks, what is wrong with that?

Like you said, we all want to win a SB ring. I question the perception that conservative play calling cannot do so.
Originally posted by MrTruth:
Originally posted by 49erfaithful49:
What I am suggesting is that our play calling is very conservative

The only person that can go down field on the offense is VD and maybe Moss, but the latter is over the hill...
IMO, put Jenkins in there and see what he has...

Originally posted by 49erfaithful49:
Originally posted by saj4423:
That none of them were in the end zone?

exactly, I don't get that at all

I get what you are saying... I wish some would pay alittle more attention.

we were up by 10pts...a TD would put us up by 3 scores.....but a FG would only put us up 2 scores.

It was 3rd and Goal.....yet we had everyone run routes that had them 4-5 yards short of the Goal line..(Crabtree was 7 yards out when he got the ball) it seems like we were playing for a FG that whole time.

it just helped that Peterson fell down. (it seemed like Crabtree did alittle jump to the left before the ball got to him on purpose to make Peterson go to the left, very smart imo)


fake edit- although it seems like Manningham did run into the endzone and took #22 with him.....still it was weird to have the rest of the receivers run routes that ended almost 5 yards from the Goal line when it was 3rd and Goal.

it seems like they were happy with the lead and didn't want to have a chance at a Turnover...and were ready to settle for a FG....even though it would still be only two scores up.
For those that need some help...here you go...

Red zone plays like this are designed exactly for the result that happened.


- Davis is on the opposite side of the bunch (left side on the LOS)...his route draws the outside safety, the OLB AND the ILB drift to his side after the snap...

- Then Manningham runs a pattern toward the endzone to draw his man AND the weakside safety back just in case its an inbreaking EZ route...

- Williams runs a short stick pattern to take his man toward the numbers...

- All while Crabtree is left one on one with Peterson and NO ONE in the middle of the field because they're all drawn by the threats on each outside route...

- Smith finds Crabs...he makes one move...and there is no one within 3-5 yards able to tackle him because their attention had been drawn elsewhere.


Was that a bit too complicated for you guys b***hing about a TD?? Or does it even matter because they didn't flood the endzone with receivers???

Unbelievable...
[ Edited by reasonable1 on Nov 1, 2012 at 10:12 PM ]
Originally posted by 49erfaithful49:
What I am suggesting is that our play calling is very conservative

haters gonna hate i know...

anyway just enjoy the free condensed version of the game if you dont like my complaint!

also, we all want the same thing a ring... so stop ruining our karma by berating me (a 49er fan!)

Actually Ted Robinson addressed this in his spot in 49er central in CSN Bayarea.

The play was design to confuse the Tards with the formation. And the Tards were confused and talking to each other. To take advantage of the confusion tthey send everybody short to get the ball fast to the play makers.


Its cool though... Fans speculate, fans conclude but we rarely know the intent or the plan on why they do things. Coaches might see things that we can't. I believe the coaches know that the Tards don't tackle well. So the game plan was get the ball to the receivers fast. Also, if they are putting 8 in the box, the short passing is the version of a slant, hoping to break a tackle and get YACS.

There is also good take by Robinson about our receivers (and New England receivers).. He says that Brady is good but boy does his receivers make it really easy for him. We finally saw our receivers do the same in the Tards game. Ted was happy.

http://www.knbr.com/Podcasts/tabid/1065/Default.aspx - 10/30 Mac & Murph
Didn't Harbaugh say that it was a broken play, and gave credit to Smith and Crabtree for finding a way to score?
Originally posted by 49erfaithful49:
What I am suggesting is that our play calling is very conservative

haters gonna hate i know...

anyway just enjoy the free condensed version of the game if you dont like my complaint!

also, we all want the same thing a ring... so stop ruining our karma by berating me (a 49er fan!)

berates the 49ers but doesn't want to be berated himself

makes sense!
Originally posted by fastforward:
Didn't Harbaugh say that it was a broken play, and gave credit to Smith and Crabtree for finding a way to score?

Yes...but the design was still very good...

The play...I believe was going to Manningham or Davis based on Smith's head movement...outside the numbers...when that brokedown the middle of the field, by design, was wide open...easy pitch and catch.
Originally posted by StOnEy333:
Originally posted by MrTruth:
Originally posted by 49erfaithful49:
What I am suggesting is that our play calling is very conservative

The only person that can go down field on the offense is VD and maybe Moss, but the latter is over the hill...
IMO, put Jenkins in there and see what he has...


ouch..burn
Originally posted by reasonable1:
For those that need some help...here you go...

Red zone plays like this are designed exactly for the result that happened.


- Davis is on the opposite side of the bunch (left side on the LOS)...his route draws the outside safety, the OLB AND the ILB drift to his side after the snap...

- Then Manningham runs a pattern toward the endzone to draw his man AND the weakside safety back just in case its an inbreaking EZ route...

- Williams runs a short stick pattern to take his man toward the numbers...

- All while Crabtree is left one on one with Peterson and NO ONE in the middle of the field because they're all drawn by the threats on each outside route...

- Smith finds Crabs...he makes one move...and there is no one within 3-5 yards able to tackle him because their attention had been drawn elsewhere.


Was that a bit too complicated for you guys b***hing about a TD?? Or does it even matter because they didn't flood the endzone with receivers???

Unbelievable...

I am a Webzoner, and I aprove this message!
Originally posted by reasonable1:
For those that need some help...here you go...

Red zone plays like this are designed exactly for the result that happened.


- Davis is on the opposite side of the bunch (left side on the LOS)...his route draws the outside safety, the OLB AND the ILB drift to his side after the snap...

- Then Manningham runs a pattern toward the endzone to draw his man AND the weakside safety back just in case its an inbreaking EZ route...

- Williams runs a short stick pattern to take his man toward the numbers...

- All while Crabtree is left one on one with Peterson and NO ONE in the middle of the field because they're all drawn by the threats on each outside route...

- Smith finds Crabs...he makes one move...and there is no one within 3-5 yards able to tackle him because their attention had been drawn elsewhere.


Was that a bit too complicated for you guys b***hing about a TD?? Or does it even matter because they didn't flood the endzone with receivers???

Unbelievable...

Yeah we get the play design. It was a well designed play.

But its still a conservative play which leaves little chance for error. Thats not a bad thing. We are banking on YAC to get the TD and they won't tackle us before we get there.

Remember the play against the saints? That was a more aggressive play call. We went VD and Crabs in there. Fades in the corner or slants over the middle like Cruz did to us this year...those are more aggressive.

I'd rather go with the YAC then risk an INT.
Originally posted by reasonable1:
For those that need some help...here you go...

Red zone plays like this are designed exactly for the result that happened.


- Davis is on the opposite side of the bunch (left side on the LOS)...his route draws the outside safety, the OLB AND the ILB drift to his side after the snap...

- Then Manningham runs a pattern toward the endzone to draw his man AND the weakside safety back just in case its an inbreaking EZ route...

- Williams runs a short stick pattern to take his man toward the numbers...

- All while Crabtree is left one on one with Peterson and NO ONE in the middle of the field because they're all drawn by the threats on each outside route...

- Smith finds Crabs...he makes one move...and there is no one within 3-5 yards able to tackle him because their attention had been drawn elsewhere.


Was that a bit too complicated for you guys b***hing about a TD?? Or does it even matter because they didn't flood the endzone with receivers???

Unbelievable...
thank you. i was coming in to say it appeared manningham ran a fade/corner route. and i thought crabs was running a (drawing a blank) fakeout with a in (similar to 7) with the wide open center.