Originally posted by NinerGM:
And for some reason people are debating this FACT:
So what mattered wasn't so much the mistake, as painful as the mistake might've been. What mattered was, he needed to learn.Shockingly, Kaepernick didn't. And to make matters worse, he still hasn't.A week after the Seattle game, Kaepernick asserted that his only mistake was the underthrow. As for the decision to throw it at all, he didn't show a trace of regret. He showed, instead, a stubborn defiance: "I'm going to take Crabtree every chance I get on a one-on-one matchup." No matter whether Crabtree is covered—no matter who else might be open—he "would do it the same way again."To be fair, Kaepernick spoke at least partly for show, defending Crabtree against Sherman's postgame incoherence. But nevertheless, Kaepernick merely confirmed what these last two seasons seemed to suggest. When the stakes are highest, Kaepernick is throwing to Crabtree, no matter what.
There are two different contexts to the phrase "no matter what" here. One is play design, the other is QB decision. Kap was not going to throw it to Crabs "no matter what" in terms of how the play was drawn up. On other words, this was not an AR play. Kap could have easily decided to look left towards the zone buster route combinations and found QP chillin by himself because the CB on QP's side was going to bail. I already detailed the additional reads that Kap had to make once the ball is snapped when this play was broken down in this thread. If you guys still refuse to recognize what safety help and bail technique is then it's now your fault for not trying to further understand the low level details that are required to have this discussion. There are additional keys that Kap has to read post-snap because there are many ways a CB can play man coverage (leverage/technique).
The article you cited is referring to the QB decision
of 'no matter what', not the play design aspect. I hope that you understand the difference. The article is faulting Kap for his 'no matter what' attitude when it comes to trusting in Crabs. I agree with the article in that sense. Without having to rehash everything about this play again, just refer to what I posted in the breakdown to see how I felt about the play. I go into slight detail about how Kap has to make additional reads before green lighting this throw. Kap fails on the third key. This is the same key (read) that the great Montana mentioned from the same article you linked:
"Because if you're shoulder to shoulder with the cornerback," Montana said, "I'm gonna have to come off you."
I alluded to this in the breakdown post and the article uses Montana to back it up. A QB should not throw a fade when the CB has body position and a height advantage. This is QB 101. NinerGM, you quoting the author of this article shows you're trying real hard and I commend you for that. But now you're just referencing some freelance writer. I can't help but feel you are just reading this post and laughing as I continue to defend myself against stuff you find on the internet. I am (hopefully) done debating against things you find on the web. Again, the article is making a point that the QB decision is poor, nothing about play design (AR vs non-AR).
NC, let's not take everything Harbaugh says as truth. He is defending his QB's decision. He always defends his players. We should know this by now. My guess is that, at some point in the offseason, Harbaugh drills it into Kap's head that you do not throw a fade route when the WR is a step behind
the CB, unless the CB is 5'10".