There are 154 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Analysis from the Tampa Bay coaches film

And right after I posted that questions, I see it answered up above. Tis always the way.
Originally posted by NCommand:
Dilfer: "If you're a skill position guy for the Niners, you're only getting the ball if the play was designed to get you the ball."

Does someone want to call B.S. on my theory now? Dilfer essentially went one level deeper (where I'm at) from calling CK a "remedial" QB if the first read isn't there to what I have been highlighting with the AR (team designed) passing game.

In the end, I'm not saying we NEVER run team designed passing plays. It's that it's not the majority of passing plays we run. I think our offense(at least from the passing game) is closer to the Packers than anyone else(who run a WCO). What I mean by that is, the Packers run a mix of AR and PS, like we do. whereas the Chief's with Andy Reid(WCO), run more PS heavy and use screen's as their AR plays. Holmgren(WCO) ran a lot of half field read plays. Where there were options on one side of the field for one coverage, and options on the other side of the field for a different coverage. The progression would change depending on the coverage read.
Originally posted by jonnydel:
Originally posted by NCommand:
Dilfer: "If you're a skill position guy for the Niners, you're only getting the ball if the play was designed to get you the ball."

Does someone want to call B.S. on my theory now? Dilfer essentially went one level deeper (where I'm at) from calling CK a "remedial" QB if the first read isn't there to what I have been highlighting with the AR (team designed) passing game.


when was that quote given? Plus, Dilfer only played backup QB in a WCO under Holmgren, every other offense was a digit system offense - like Jimmy Raye's. And that's the opposite of what I've heard from Steve Young, a man much more familiar with the WCO. Steve Young has said:

"That's the same play we used to run when I was here, that throw was the 5th read in the progression"

From Dilfer's transcript here: http://49ers.pressdemocrat.com/2013/12/inside-the-49ers/dilfer-if-youre-a-skill-position-guy-for-the-niners-youre-only-getting-the-ball-if-the-play-was-designed-to-get-you-the-ball/
Originally posted by NCommand:
Originally posted by jonnydel:
Originally posted by NCommand:
Dilfer: "If you're a skill position guy for the Niners, you're only getting the ball if the play was designed to get you the ball."

Does someone want to call B.S. on my theory now? Dilfer essentially went one level deeper (where I'm at) from calling CK a "remedial" QB if the first read isn't there to what I have been highlighting with the AR (team designed) passing game.


when was that quote given? Plus, Dilfer only played backup QB in a WCO under Holmgren, every other offense was a digit system offense - like Jimmy Raye's. And that's the opposite of what I've heard from Steve Young, a man much more familiar with the WCO. Steve Young has said:

"That's the same play we used to run when I was here, that throw was the 5th read in the progression"

From Dilfer's transcript here: http://49ers.pressdemocrat.com/2013/12/inside-the-49ers/dilfer-if-youre-a-skill-position-guy-for-the-niners-youre-only-getting-the-ball-if-the-play-was-designed-to-get-you-the-ball/

personally, I think Dilfer is oversimplifying things a little bit. He means that, if you're not the receiver designed against a certain coverage, and that certain coverage appears, you're not getting the ball - which is what I've seen. But, that doesn't mean that he's not an option on other plays where the primary read wasn't there. We set up a lot of half field reads(as I've shown) but, I've also shown(rams game with the flood route combo) that there are options for other receivers to get the ball based on Colin's read. On that play, Boldin was the 3rd read, and, if Colin were simply, "running the play as he's told" Vernon gets the ball on that play every time.
[ Edited by jonnydel on Dec 18, 2013 at 12:38 PM ]
Originally posted by jonnydel:
Originally posted by NCommand:
Originally posted by jonnydel:
Originally posted by NCommand:
Dilfer: "If you're a skill position guy for the Niners, you're only getting the ball if the play was designed to get you the ball."

Does someone want to call B.S. on my theory now? Dilfer essentially went one level deeper (where I'm at) from calling CK a "remedial" QB if the first read isn't there to what I have been highlighting with the AR (team designed) passing game.


when was that quote given? Plus, Dilfer only played backup QB in a WCO under Holmgren, every other offense was a digit system offense - like Jimmy Raye's. And that's the opposite of what I've heard from Steve Young, a man much more familiar with the WCO. Steve Young has said:

"That's the same play we used to run when I was here, that throw was the 5th read in the progression"

From Dilfer's transcript here: http://49ers.pressdemocrat.com/2013/12/inside-the-49ers/dilfer-if-youre-a-skill-position-guy-for-the-niners-youre-only-getting-the-ball-if-the-play-was-designed-to-get-you-the-ball/

personally, I think Dilfer is oversimplifying things a little bit. He means that, if you're not the receiver designed against a certain coverage, and that certain coverage appears, you're not getting the ball - which is what I've seen. But, that doesn't mean that he's not an option on other plays where the primary read wasn't there. We set up a lot of half field reads(as I've shown) but, I've also shown(rams game with the flood route combo) that there are options for other receivers to get the ball based on Colin's read.

Agree to disagree on this one as the second part of his quote was this; "They don't have the type of offensive structure and Colin isn't the type of quarterback that there are five eligible receivers and anyone can get the ball."

He is looking at the design of the plays in a whole. I think we're overcomplicating things here...
Originally posted by NCommand:
Originally posted by jonnydel:
Originally posted by NCommand:
Originally posted by jonnydel:
Originally posted by NCommand:
Dilfer: "If you're a skill position guy for the Niners, you're only getting the ball if the play was designed to get you the ball."

Does someone want to call B.S. on my theory now? Dilfer essentially went one level deeper (where I'm at) from calling CK a "remedial" QB if the first read isn't there to what I have been highlighting with the AR (team designed) passing game.


when was that quote given? Plus, Dilfer only played backup QB in a WCO under Holmgren, every other offense was a digit system offense - like Jimmy Raye's. And that's the opposite of what I've heard from Steve Young, a man much more familiar with the WCO. Steve Young has said:

"That's the same play we used to run when I was here, that throw was the 5th read in the progression"

From Dilfer's transcript here: http://49ers.pressdemocrat.com/2013/12/inside-the-49ers/dilfer-if-youre-a-skill-position-guy-for-the-niners-youre-only-getting-the-ball-if-the-play-was-designed-to-get-you-the-ball/

personally, I think Dilfer is oversimplifying things a little bit. He means that, if you're not the receiver designed against a certain coverage, and that certain coverage appears, you're not getting the ball - which is what I've seen. But, that doesn't mean that he's not an option on other plays where the primary read wasn't there. We set up a lot of half field reads(as I've shown) but, I've also shown(rams game with the flood route combo) that there are options for other receivers to get the ball based on Colin's read.

Agree to disagree on this one as the second part of his quote was this; "They don't have the type of offensive structure and Colin isn't the type of quarterback that there are five eligible receivers and anyone can get the ball."

He is looking at the design of the plays in a whole. I think we're overcomplicating things here...

Fair enough, I think we do have to agree to disagree for the betterment of the community thread. I just don't trust Dilfer that much myself. It's like listening to Matt Milliner talking about personnel evaluation.....
  • GORO
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 1,802
Has Boldin played more in the slot since the return of Crabtree?
You're the new Marvin.
Originally posted by GORO:
Has Boldin played more in the slot since the return of Crabtree?

I think he has, but, Crabs has also been in the slot some, not sure of the percentages and numbers of that though.
Originally posted by NinerG94:
Originally posted by jonnydel:
Snyder ruined the handoff to Boldin, I'll show you, if Snyder makes a simple block, boldin walks in, also, the TD to Vernon was made because he pulled Crabs off the field. I will show it all through the film in a little bit, I'm first comparing our Run D to Tampa's

This!! I saw that when it was live. It was a great play and a great time to call it. Had it been executed right it would have been an easy TD. I hate that bashing Roman in Niner talk has become the trendy topic. Just like how Whitner sucked last season and Dashon did nothing but hit hard and get penalties. Some spoiled ass low information arm chair wannabe gm's in here. I'm sorry but I'm sick of reading the same regurgitated garbage about how bad Roman is. I really hate reading from people who have no idea what they're even looking at on gameday.

You speak the truth dude. Jonnydel has totally made people on here look like fools who have absolutely no idea in what they're talking about. The gameday thread is atrocious. Everyone's emotional, and oblivious to what is the real reason for mishaps and such. Fresh perspective, REAL analysis. Not some vague finger pointing re-hashed b******t. I think Marvin's posting is great. Still is, but doesn't have the detailed intricacy's with break downs in film snippets.
[ Edited by defenderDX on Dec 18, 2013 at 1:19 PM ]
Originally posted by 49erCanuck:
And right after I posted that questions, I see it answered up above. Tis always the way.

From the Roman thread:

My theory: Just a reminder of what an (Annointed Revceiver - AR1 or AR2) passing game means. Essentially, it's a pre-determined passing play designed to get ONE receiver the ball from the plays called in to the huddle by HaRoMan. It is typically designed to get this one receiver the ball under 3 seconds for obvious reasons. IF that AR is covered, CK is instructed to be off and running. Once the AR is covered (or CK doesn't pull the trigger), it instantly becomes an ad lib play. In both types of passing plays HaRoMan determines the play calls, not CK. While he may be able to audible out of one pass play to another, both typically have the AR pre-determined. CK's job (and esp. that of the AR and the non-AR's) is merely to "execute" the play. It's a team-receiving concept (like college). Like in the run game, if one chain breaks, the whole play blows up. It leans heavily on skill players winning their 1on1 battles; we've seen the results when Boldin & VD were doubled this year. In 2012, the AR's were Crabtree and VD. In 2013, it's been Boldin and VD. Now we're starting to see more Crabtree but clearly, like Dilfer referenced, his # isn't being called enough to make him happy.

AR1 (most common) - This is a play designed to get the AR the ball via non-physical support from the others (e.g. decoy routes). For instance, we run 3 straight go-routes occupying 4 DB's to hit the AR underneth in a 1on1 matchup. Think Randy Moss running deep sideline and post routes to open up VD and Crabtree underneath all year long. It includes cutting off routes to draw defenders (or making them hesitate just for a second) to free up the AR who cuts the other direction. It includes designed flows as well...getting the defense to flow one way to pass back to the other side; misdirections, crossing patterns, etc. The non-AR's are NOT viable receiving options in the play UNTIL it becomes an ad lib play. They must execute their part to help the AR get the ball. This is common in a college offense vs. pro-style.
AR2 (rare) - This is a play designed to get the AR the ball with physical help from the others (literallly, blocking up field while the ball is in the air to the AR underneath). This is a play where Boldin received a P.I. call inside the RZ recently.
Ad lib (common) - This is a play where CK doesn't pull the trigger on the AR (hesitates) or the AR is effectively covered and the play instantly becomes a broken ad lib play. CK is instructed to buy time with his legs and look to ad lib pass or pick up yards with his legs. We've scored 3 of our last 4 TD's on this one.
Pro-Style (PS) (rare) - This is a passing play called where all receivers (usually 4) plus the backs are ALL viable passing options. It's on CK to find the most open and pull the trigger.

See post #1972 to see a breakdown of the 1st half of the Bucs game from this theory: http://www.49erswebzone.com/forum/niners/168162-greg-roman-really-good/page132/

Here is how you simply break it down:
Step 1. Ignore: the personnel groupings, who lines up where, their routes, defensive alignments, etc. Focus ONLY on who caught the ball.
Step 2. Rewind and watch CK's head angle and body positioning (is he looking at this AR all the way)? Is he looking off defenders to assist the AR1/2?
Step 3. Rewind again. Now watch the non-AR's to see what part they played in getting that receiver open.
Step 4. Fill in the details and results
[ Edited by NCommand on Dec 18, 2013 at 1:53 PM ]
Originally posted by jonnydel:
Fair enough, I think we do have to agree to disagree for the betterment of the community thread. I just don't trust Dilfer that much myself. It's like listening to Matt Milliner talking about personnel evaluation.....

dilfer is clueless...he was AT BEST a remedial qb..
Originally posted by iLL49er:
Originally posted by jonnydel:
Fair enough, I think we do have to agree to disagree for the betterment of the community thread. I just don't trust Dilfer that much myself. It's like listening to Matt Milliner talking about personnel evaluation.....

dilfer is clueless...he was AT BEST a remedial qb..

LOL. He was right about CK being a one-read QB so you dismiss his whole notion as well? Listen, I don't like Grant Cohen either but sometimes he's right on point and you have to respect that (not him).
[ Edited by NCommand on Dec 18, 2013 at 1:43 PM ]
  • fryet
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 2,860
Originally posted by NCommand:
Originally posted by iLL49er:
Originally posted by jonnydel:
Fair enough, I think we do have to agree to disagree for the betterment of the community thread. I just don't trust Dilfer that much myself. It's like listening to Matt Milliner talking about personnel evaluation.....

dilfer is clueless...he was AT BEST a remedial qb..

LOL. He was right about CK being a one-read QB so you dismiss his whole notion as well? Listen, I don't like Grant Cohen either but sometimes he's right on point and you have to respect that.
Oh no, you just killed the thread.
Originally posted by fryet:
Originally posted by NCommand:
Originally posted by iLL49er:
Originally posted by jonnydel:
Fair enough, I think we do have to agree to disagree for the betterment of the community thread. I just don't trust Dilfer that much myself. It's like listening to Matt Milliner talking about personnel evaluation.....

dilfer is clueless...he was AT BEST a remedial qb..

LOL. He was right about CK being a one-read QB so you dismiss his whole notion as well? Listen, I don't like Grant Cohen either but sometimes he's right on point and you have to respect that.
Oh no, you just killed the thread.

/ thread