All22 analysis: Red Zone issues

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by Niners816:

Originally posted by thl408:

Thank you so much for that summary. I'm listening to it now, but that was very nice to have a 70 minute podcast available in bullet points.

I do notice that the passing concepts become simplified in the RZ. We can all see that in the cut ups. I think there are two reasons for this. One could be that Jim gets conservative in the RZ and doesn't want a turnover - he doesn't trust his QB. Because of that, the second reason is that Jim wants to give Kap simple reads (play action to VD, backs shoulder fade on a WR isolation) because windows are so much tighter and Kap just isn't quick enough and isn't using enough anticipation to throw into tight windows in the RZ. This will improve in due time, but last season it was not up to snuff.

The reason for the lopsided 70/30 run/pass split is by design to make the play action more effective. There were a number of easy throws to VD in the end zone where he was wide open. This is due to running 70%. The few times they passed out of 22, they wanted it to be a "surprise". And it worked a number of times.

Regarding the ratio, I wonder now if even a slight shift approaching 40/60 could result in just a few more yards/first downs. My thinking is that we have shown that huge bias and I think we have an opportunity to exploit it now. I just think there could be some explosion play opportunities given our heavy run bias in 22.

It's just my opinion but I feel like 30/70 is too much of a tell and you can get the same effect by using something closer to 40/60.

I guess as I write this, I wonder what it was when delanie was on the squad. Perhaps braking in a new TE had something to do with the drastic split.

(I may have got confused when you mentioned explosive plays out of 22.) It's a 30/70 split in the redzone when in 22 personnel (according to the podcast). When VD is wide open in the end zone, that's when the 30/70 split paid off. I'd go for a 40/60 split while keeping in mind that the Gore did have a lot of short TD runs from the 22 grouping.

The two huge TD bombs (ARI game 1, TB) to VD were out of 22 using play action. Those are the explosion plays I think of when you mentioned the possibility of more explosive plays.

If it's 70/30 split, then in that 30% - Vance will be open on a play pass because the defense will collapse around VD. If Vance can play better this year - this red zone offense will be that much more effective.

Originally posted by thl408:
Thank you so much for that summary. I'm listening to it now, but that was very nice to have a 70 minute podcast available in bullet points.

I do notice that the passing concepts become simplified in the RZ. We can all see that in the cut ups. I think there are two reasons for this. One could be that Jim gets conservative in the RZ and doesn't want a turnover - he doesn't trust his QB. Because of that, the second reason is that Jim wants to give Kap simple reads (play action to VD, backs shoulder fade on a WR isolation) because windows are so much tighter and Kap just isn't quick enough and isn't using enough anticipation to throw into tight windows in the RZ. This will improve in due time, but last season it was not up to snuff.

The reason for the lopsided 70/30 run/pass split is by design to make the play action more effective. There were a number of easy throws to VD in the end zone where he was wide open. This is due to running 70%. The few times they passed out of 22, they wanted it to be a "surprise". And it worked a number of times.

My pleasure...let me know if you have anything to add to it, edit if I misheard something, etc.

Agreed, when your TD is in blocking and then suddenly sprints out of a 22 he's going to be wide open! And he was. I think with the empphasis and pressure from the FO (and internally) to grow more as an offense, the personnel and depth we have and CK's expected command and growth in the offense, the sky's the limit. Everyone's work is cut out for them clearly and all excuses are thrown out the window. We should be and should expect to be a much more dynamic offense this year, no doubt.

PS: The Arizona game where Crabtree caught that TD was THE first thing I thought of when he mentioned the zero TD's on a fade. That said, his definition of a fade may be more in line of what I think of when I think of a fade. To me, a fade if a timing route where the QB throws to a spot (usually the corner of the EZ) WELL before the receiver even breaks to and around the DB and the ball drops it perfectly before the DB can adjust. To me, both those TD's you highlighted appear to be more back-shoulder passes? Maybe just semantics. No biggie.

Originally posted by Giedi:
The HaRoman offense has had redzone problems since the Alex smith days. I think I've beaten to death Colin needing to improve, Goodwin needing to be replaced, and Vance also needing to improve.

Bruce miller, Hyde, the two Martins and Lattimore will play a role in improving the redzone offense.

Having said that -- Scheme - wise I just don't think the offense deals very well with extreme coverages, whether it be zero coverage or 8 dropping back. Somehow I think a three tight end set should be incorporated in the rezone offense. It's a good formation to run or play - pass out of. Specially if we run 70% in the red zone. Also I think it's very difficult for defenses to keep track of personnel substitutions - like if the suddenly we go 3 WR or 3 o-linemen. The WR's can run the TE routs and the tight ends can run the WR routes and it's just a matter of running the particular pass play that matches up with a particular red zone defense.

In the case of zero coverage, a guy like vance, stevie or ellington can run an ally oop or a post up route against the defender. In the case of 8 men dropping back, everybody blocks and Colin runs and slides down before he takes a hit. (As an example of a Infante route adjustment)

In other words - those plays are built in *scheme-wise* to deal with extreme coverages that have been *historically* problematic for the team. So in addition to improving our redzone personnel, an analysis should be made as to what defenses have given our redzone offense trouble and install counter measures directly in the scheme to deal with them. DC's aren't stupid. They will play defenses that historically give an offense problems. So, in my opinion, the HaRoman offense should deal with those situations with schemes built in from day one In TC, so by the time regular season is here those adjustments are automatic.

No question about it. I remember when we had audio of one of the coaches instructing CK that if the first read wasn't there, that he was to take off and run. I think the next phase will be to continue the delayed check downs by the RB's (stay in to block and then flare out under the primary routes) and CK being instructed to USE them rather than run himself but I think your final point (bold) is really a critical piece to this all.

We badly need to incorporate much easier 2nd and 3rd routes in the designs. This is the thing that stood out to me the most on many of these passing designs. Either the primary read was open and it worked (that includes the high-low reads in a quadrant) or CK was in insta-scramble mode either buying time for an ad lib pass or running to pick up yards. There weren't many built in safety valves.

The INT in the NFCCG schematically is what has been wrong with our passing game to a tee...we used the wrong personnel (you use Boldin, not Crabtree on a fade to the corner of the EZ esp. on Sherman) and they flooded the left side of the field while trying to attack single coverage on the right side. Based on interviews, it "sounded" like this was an AR1 play from the huddle as the design WAS to create isolation for Crabtree on the right (all or nothing - which is why CK went there despite Dick clearly being ahead of Crabtree in his own route) and finally, the only other options CK had in this critical high pressure moment was was back on the left side(line) of the field of which he had just had a sack-strip a few plays previous (the rush was getting there). And watching the gif, it looks like if CK "had" made it all the way back to the left, it would have been another strip-sack (Davis fail). So where was his outlet if Crabtree was covered? His legs? Where was the Bill Walsh T.O. moment where Harbaugh says, "OK, we're going to the fade here but if Crabtree is covered, watch for Hunter's release under his route. Hunter, make sure you are running to the sideline and get up field and out of bounds as soon as possible. Break!"

So to recap, we need to use better personnel (to our strengths), need to assess our successes/weakness in the RZ better like you noted (includes where we struggle against certain defensive calls), design plays that have MANY more outlets built in (under the primary routes) and take a T.O. and settle your QB down in big moments esp. if you lost the Superbowl the year prior on the same type of route concept!

I like David and Oscars points about expanding on the concepts we already run...pass more to the middle of the field (easiest passes), create more built-in easy outlets, educate CK on utilizing the check-downs, attack the edges more (more edge WR screens from the bunch formation, middle RB screens, TE's in soft zones, etc.), practice the fade routes to the same spot every time until you have the right personnel and connection (timing), etc. The coaches have lots to improve upon themselves scheme-wise and coaching-up CK that can really help him and this offense take off IMHO. We have all the tools we need.

Originally posted by NCommand:
My pleasure...let me know if you have anything to add to it, edit if I misheard something, etc.

Agreed, when your TD is in blocking and then suddenly sprints out of a 22 he's going to be wide open! And he was. I think with the empphasis and pressure from the FO (and internally) to grow more as an offense, the personnel and depth we have and CK's expected command and growth in the offense, the sky's the limit. Everyone's work is cut out for them clearly and all excuses are thrown out the window. We should be and should expect to be a much more dynamic offense this year, no doubt.

PS: The Arizona game where Crabtree caught that TD was THE first thing I thought of when he mentioned the zero TD's on a fade. That said, his definition of a fade may be more in line of what I think of when I think of a fade. To me, a fade if a timing route where the QB throws to a spot (usually the corner of the EZ) WELL before the receiver even breaks to and around the DB and the ball drops it perfectly before the DB can adjust. To me, both those TD's you highlighted appear to be more back-shoulder passes? Maybe just semantics. No biggie.

Yeah there are some semantics involved here. The back shoulder throw is a fade, but it goes behind the outside shoulder (shoulder closest to the sideline). There's also the fade that goes over the WRs head. When the podcast mentioned something like a fade over the middle of the field (VD's TD catch versus GB in playoffs), it made me think that, in their definition, any type of vertical route into the endzone was a fade.

48:00 is when they start mentioning the fade. At 49:30, one of the interviewers chimes in and mentions back shoulder throws in the middle of the field. To me, this means that particular interviewer thinks any back shoulder throw as a fade. That's the context I am referring to. So because, by their definition, any back shoulder throw is a fade, I presented the two TD catches to Boldin on back shoulder throws as evidence that Kap has indeed completed a fade into the end zone.

The Crabtree TD catch versus ARI was not a fade. It was a scramble drill.

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by NCommand:
My pleasure...let me know if you have anything to add to it, edit if I misheard something, etc.

Agreed, when your TD is in blocking and then suddenly sprints out of a 22 he's going to be wide open! And he was. I think with the empphasis and pressure from the FO (and internally) to grow more as an offense, the personnel and depth we have and CK's expected command and growth in the offense, the sky's the limit. Everyone's work is cut out for them clearly and all excuses are thrown out the window. We should be and should expect to be a much more dynamic offense this year, no doubt.

PS: The Arizona game where Crabtree caught that TD was THE first thing I thought of when he mentioned the zero TD's on a fade. That said, his definition of a fade may be more in line of what I think of when I think of a fade. To me, a fade if a timing route where the QB throws to a spot (usually the corner of the EZ) WELL before the receiver even breaks to and around the DB and the ball drops it perfectly before the DB can adjust. To me, both those TD's you highlighted appear to be more back-shoulder passes? Maybe just semantics. No biggie.

Yeah there are some semantics involved here. The back shoulder throw is a fade, but it goes behind the outside shoulder (shoulder closest to the sideline). There's also the fade that goes over the WRs head. When the podcast mentioned something like a fade over the middle of the field (VD's TD catch versus GB in playoffs), it made me think that, in their definition, any type of vertical route into the endzone was a fade.

48:00 is when they start mentioning the fade. At 49:30, one of the interviewers chimes in and mentions back shoulder throws in the middle of the field. To me, this means that particular interviewer thinks any back shoulder throw as a fade. That's the context I am referring to. So because, by their definition, any back shoulder throw is a fade, I presented the two TD catches to Boldin on back shoulder throws as evidence that Kap has indeed completed a fade into the end zone.

The Crabtree TD catch versus ARI was not a fade. It was a scramble drill.

That makes senses. I thought there was a Crabtree TD as well (maybe it was two years ago) on a fade where he outmuscled an AZ DB for the TD? It may not have been a fade or perhaps Crabtree saw it was a shorter pass, jumped up and outmuscled the DB.

Originally posted by NCommand:

That makes senses. I thought there was a Crabtree TD as well (maybe it was two years ago) on a fade where he outmuscled an AZ DB for the TD? It may not have been a fade or perhaps Crabtree saw it was a shorter pass, jumped up and outmuscled the DB.

If it's the crabs back shoulder catch I'm thinking of it was in 2012 on Monday night vs zona. It was in Alex's one incompletion game.

Originally posted by Niners816:

Originally posted by NCommand:
That makes senses. I thought there was a Crabtree TD as well (maybe it was two years ago) on a fade where he outmuscled an AZ DB for the TD? It may not have been a fade or perhaps Crabtree saw it was a shorter pass, jumped up and outmuscled the DB.

If it's the crabs back shoulder catch I'm thinking of it was in 2012 on Monday night vs zona. It was in Alex's one incompletion game.

That's it!!! I believe that came up after the Superbowl...someone asked if we've EVER converted on a fade with Crabtree and that gif was illustrated. Thanks man!

Guys, I watched the NFCCG and I noticed something that was heavily touched on in the RZ podcast as well...passes to the middle of the field (as something we badly need to do more of in 2014). In the NFCCG, every single pass was completed in the middle of the field by my calculations (not sure if anyone can confirm/deny that for me with advanced stats).

If you think about it, if you remember the Sports Science episode, CK has the quickest release ever tested (IIRC) and with that arm strength and ability to throw left and right on the run and with teams constantly guarding against the sidelines (3 INT's) and trying to contain him in the pocket, there were a ton of lanes open in the middle of the field...areas where VD, Gore, McDonald, Boldin, Crabtree, etc. exploited. Add in his height and the fact he takes so many snaps from shotgun (plus it being the shortest-distance throw) and I agree with the podcast. Now we have even more experienced personnel (McDonald) and added others where that is their specialty (i.e. Johnson/Ellington).

Just a thought...

Originally posted by Niners816:

Originally posted by thl408:
I'm at the point where they (pod casters) challenged listeners to name a time where Kap threw a fade for a touchdown. Then went on to say they "watch a lot of game tape". We can go and tell them this happened.

The first Td illustrates a situation where I love the fade route. I just think there would be an opportunity to run this type a play a few more times over the course of a year.

Hey th, FYI: I was just listening to the current podcast and they cover their definition of a fade route.

Originally posted by NCommand:
Hey th, FYI: I was just listening to the current podcast and they cover their definition of a fade route.

I don't hear them actually defining it. Just talking about it in general (48:00). One of them mentions a back shoulder throw, but that's it.

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by NCommand:
Hey th, FYI: I was just listening to the current podcast and they cover their definition of a fade route.

I don't hear them actually defining it. Just talking about it in general (48:00). One of them mentions a back shoulder throw, but that's it.

They probably don't even know what a fade route is.

Originally posted by Young2Rice:

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by NCommand:
Hey th, FYI: I was just listening to the current podcast and they cover their definition of a fade route.

I don't hear them actually defining it. Just talking about it in general (48:00). One of them mentions a back shoulder throw, but that's it.

They probably don't even know what a fade route is.

LOL. No they were just defining it as a soft arching touch pass over the DB into the corner of the EZ (ala a Rogers' special) vs. the back shoulder pass to the left/right of the DB along the sideline (they saw that as almost more of an out-route). Just semantics...no biggie.

Originally posted by NCommand:
LOL. No they were just defining it as a soft arching touch pass over the DB into the corner of the EZ (ala a Rogers' special) vs. the back shoulder pass to the left/right of the DB along the sideline (they saw that as almost more of an out-route). Just semantics...no biggie.

I missed that. Can you give me a time in the podcast they said that?

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by NCommand:

LOL. No they were just defining it as a soft arching touch pass over the DB into the corner of the EZ (ala a Rogers' special) vs. the back shoulder pass to the left/right of the DB along the sideline (they saw that as almost more of an out-route). Just semantics...no biggie.

I missed that. Can you give me a time in the podcast they said that?

I'm thinking they made the mistake of saying "never" in relation to a fade-which has been discussed has a bunch of definitions. Fade-stops/back shoulders are all in the fade family

It's kinda like when mayock called kap a "one-read" guy, then all of a sudden kap can't/won't read a defense. Most young qbs rely heavily on intial reads til their mental game catches up with their physical tools. It's never as black and white as analysts try to make it out to be.

Originally posted by Niners816:

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by NCommand:
LOL. No they were just defining it as a soft arching touch pass over the DB into the corner of the EZ (ala a Rogers' special) vs. the back shoulder pass to the left/right of the DB along the sideline (they saw that as almost more of an out-route). Just semantics...no biggie.

I missed that. Can you give me a time in the podcast they said that?

I'm thinking they made the mistake of saying "never" in relation to a fade-which has been discussed has a bunch of definitions. Fade-stops/back shoulders are all in the fade family

It's kinda like when mayock called kap a "one-read" guy, then all of a sudden kap can't/won't read a defense. Most young qbs really heavily on intial reads til their mental game catches up with their physical tools. It's never as black and white as analysts try to make it out to be.

Agreed on all accounts...th, I'll start up in the background for you and let you know what minute-mark.