Originally posted by BrianGO:
Man that Tampa game, it looks like all the disruption was from the center position. I really hope Martin can fix that up for us.
It was Adam Snyder on the play breakdown in this thread.
There are 221 users in the forums
Originally posted by BrianGO:
Man that Tampa game, it looks like all the disruption was from the center position. I really hope Martin can fix that up for us.
Originally posted by thl408:
#27 (#2 POs)
Originally posted by thl408:#26 (#1 of playoffs)
1st & Goal
Play action roll right
The blue defender does not bite on the play fake by Kap, or the run block fake by VD.
Kap throws it to VD as VD works his way back towards the middle. CB breaks it up.
Incomplete
2nd & Goal
Play fake, rollout right. Triangle concept
Osgood and VD are held up at the line as Kap completes a play fake and rolls right.
Gore's block gets the defender on the ground. Kap has time, but no one becomes open as he runs out of field to roll right. Thrown away for an incomplete pass.
3rd & Goal
Back shoulder fades on each side.
Kap selects the matchup of Crabs versus House.
Bring on the FG unit.
Originally posted by Paul_Hofer:Personally, the main problem is play-calling. That is, plays are telegraphed by personnel and formation. Blocking and other assignment breakdowns occur mostly due to defenders getting to spots sooner than expected. This is because the Niners' formations are read too easily by the defense. For instance, why not pass out of two back formations? Pass up the middle to the FB? Go four wide and run? Another poster mentioned passing more often on first down. The one time I remember throwing out of a run formation was a wide open TD to Vernon.
Originally posted by Niners816:Originally posted by Paul_Hofer:Personally, the main problem is play-calling. That is, plays are telegraphed by personnel and formation. Blocking and other assignment breakdowns occur mostly due to defenders getting to spots sooner than expected. This is because the Niners' formations are read too easily by the defense. For instance, why not pass out of two back formations? Pass up the middle to the FB? Go four wide and run? Another poster mentioned passing more often on first down. The one time I remember throwing out of a run formation was a wide open TD to Vernon.
I would love to see us come out in an Iform or strong I form on first down and run a z spot or a flanker drive or if it's a cover 2 run a Texas concept using miller and VD. Not only would I like to see this in the red zone, but I would love to see this same approach to the rest of the field.
Originally posted by Giedi:Originally posted by Niners816:Originally posted by Paul_Hofer:Personally, the main problem is play-calling. That is, plays are telegraphed by personnel and formation. Blocking and other assignment breakdowns occur mostly due to defenders getting to spots sooner than expected. This is because the Niners' formations are read too easily by the defense. For instance, why not pass out of two back formations? Pass up the middle to the FB? Go four wide and run? Another poster mentioned passing more often on first down. The one time I remember throwing out of a run formation was a wide open TD to Vernon.
I would love to see us come out in an Iform or strong I form on first down and run a z spot or a flanker drive or if it's a cover 2 run a Texas concept using miller and VD. Not only would I like to see this in the red zone, but I would love to see this same approach to the rest of the field.
The red zone defenders use the back of the endzone as an extra DB - specially for those bend-but-don't-break defenses. They have an extra man (so to speak) to take a QB'S first and second options away. So you have to be able to run it in against those defenses. Second problem is they will be using a lot of pressure defenses because the WR's dont have the room to go deep. The big problem was goodwin's blocking and Colin's inability to rapidly get to his third options once red zone defenses took away his first and second options, and/or when defenses used pressure schemes.
Originally posted by Niners816:Originally posted by Giedi:Originally posted by Niners816:Originally posted by Paul_Hofer:Personally, the main problem is play-calling. That is, plays are telegraphed by personnel and formation. Blocking and other assignment breakdowns occur mostly due to defenders getting to spots sooner than expected. This is because the Niners' formations are read too easily by the defense. For instance, why not pass out of two back formations? Pass up the middle to the FB? Go four wide and run? Another poster mentioned passing more often on first down. The one time I remember throwing out of a run formation was a wide open TD to Vernon.
I would love to see us come out in an Iform or strong I form on first down and run a z spot or a flanker drive or if it's a cover 2 run a Texas concept using miller and VD. Not only would I like to see this in the red zone, but I would love to see this same approach to the rest of the field.
The red zone defenders use the back of the endzone as an extra DB - specially for those bend-but-don't-break defenses. They have an extra man (so to speak) to take a QB'S first and second options away. So you have to be able to run it in against those defenses. Second problem is they will be using a lot of pressure defenses because the WR's dont have the room to go deep. The big problem was goodwin's blocking and Colin's inability to rapidly get to his third options once red zone defenses took away his first and second options, and/or when defenses used pressure schemes.
The reasons you mentioned are why I like what I described more in the case of entering the redzone.
As far as short yardage goal situations, I like heavy play fakes from jumbo forms (we do this a lot) and sprint option type passes that try to out flank the defense. I think kaep could excell at this with his legs.
Originally posted by T-9ers:
Can anyone enlighten me to the types of formations and concepts the more successful red zone teams implement? I'm noticing a pattern of not terrible play calling, but just not creative enough. Kaep can do better, and some crappy calls put us in bad situations, also think Stevie and Hyde can make a big difference.
Originally posted by T-9ers: p
Can anyone enlighten me to the types of formations and concepts the more successful red zone teams implement? I'm noticing a pattern of not terrible play calling, but just not creative enough. Kaep can do better, and some crappy calls put us in bad situations, also think Stevie and Hyde can make a big difference.
Originally posted by thl408:here's an example of that "rub" route.
Originally posted by T-9ers:
Can anyone enlighten me to the types of formations and concepts the more successful red zone teams implement? I'm noticing a pattern of not terrible play calling, but just not creative enough. Kaep can do better, and some crappy calls put us in bad situations, also think Stevie and Hyde can make a big difference.
Here's a recent article that touches on that. When I watch Brady and Peyton operate in the red zone, there are a lot of rub routes being used to run interference on the man coverage defenders. Generally speaking, defenses will play man coverage in the red zone. What separates those QBs from the rest of the league when it comes to red zone passing is their anticipation of when a WR will become open. Also, since a QB can never expect a WR to become completely open, a QB has to be able to locate the ball in a location that only their WR can catch, then have confidence in the WR to make the play.
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2110604-nfl-101-introducing-the-basic-red-zone-route-combinations