49ers Week 2 2016 - Thoughts after rewatching the game... | Page 9

Marvin49 · 2016-09-19T10:35:48-07:00

Well that was predictable. 1) Gabbert: ................................... Where do I start? I have to start by giving it up for when he does something well. The TD to Torrey was nice. The first down throw to Streater just before it was nice. The TD to Vance was nice even though Vance did most of the work. The drop by Vance was also a fairly nice throw even though it would have been a difficult catch. The rest was average to pretty bad. Gabbert is hurting them with inaccuracy, rushing through his progressions and not letting plays develop, and what REALLY stood out to me is that he's even killing the run game. The read option only works if the QB is an actual threat to run the ball. There were AT LEAST 4-5 times that he handed off when he had space in front of him to run if he'd held the ball. In most of those cases the handoff to the RB was blown up for a loss or no gain. The first one was the run in which Draughn lost 5 yards on their first possession of the game. Huge hole for the QB to run. It happened AGAIN on Draughns SECOND run of the game. It happened AGAIN with several Hyde runs. It also happened on his TD run where he went in untouched. It looked good, didn't it? Well that run had been there ALL DAY because they knew if the LB just stood anywhere close to that hole, the QB was handing off. That (amongst other things) IMO KILLED the run game. What looked really clear to me though was that Chips scheme was working. The plays were there to be made. Gabbert had time (more on that later) and guys were open. Gabbert simply couldn't deliver the ball. Gabbert isn't the guy. Plain and simple. I dunno that Kap is but I'd like to see what he can do. Reality tho IMO is that the earliest we would see Kap without a Gabbert injury is week 5. Dunno why, but thats my guess. 2) O-Line: Lost in the madness is just how damn good the O-Line played yesterday in Pass Protection. Say what you want about Gabberts performance, but it wasn't because he was under pressure all day. The only tie they game up a sack was when...wait for it....Marcus Martin subbed into the game. This is another reason I'd like to see what Kap can do. If they can protect him, maybe Kap can push the ball down the field like he did in 2012. Dunno if it would work but I'd like to see them try. 3) McDonald: So in just a few plays we saw why many here really want to see him play more and then show why so many can't stand the guy. The TD displayed the raw athletic ability the guy has. Not many TDs could have outrun the D like that. The drop however was bad. In fairness it would have been a tough catch as it was on his fingertips, but it was a tough catch he should have made. 4) Pass Rush: What pass rush? Niners need help bad at OLB. Those guys are supposed to be your pass rusher supremes and they are doing nothing. This will get better when Lynch returns, but we got 2 more games of this. Conditions were certainly an issue (and that works both ways), but the lack of a pass rush was a big problem. 5) Bethea: Ouch. He had a few good plays in there (INT, caused fumble), but man that guy got torched yesterday. I've been him play as poorly as he did on a few of those plays. Hope thats an aberration and not a sign of age. Tartt is in the wings if he plays poorly, but hoping Bethea still has something left. 6) Garnett: Why didn't Garnett sub in instead of Martin? Last week excuse was that Martin plays more positions so Garnett was inactive...but Garnett was up for this game. Thats a concern. 7) Defense in General vs Kelly Scheme: So...we've all heard about how Chips scheme puts the D on the field too long because they run fast and don't burn any clock. Well that wasn't an excuse yesterday. Chip was using his scheme for sure but he wasn't running NEARLY as fast as he likes to. He knew the conditions were going to be a problem and ADJUSTED. What killed that D were the conditions and the O being unable to sustain drives. If you burn every second of time off the play clock between plays but can't stay on the field, the D is gonna tire. There are a lot of nice pieces on that side of the ball. Cam Newton was the MVP last year for a reason. 8) Run Game: So I've already gone over what IMO is Gabberts role in the poor run game. The other aspect was Those monster DTs and LBs just blowing up the entire middle of the line. Some of that is to be expected as even though they game up some yards vs Denver, thats more of an aberration than the norm. The other guys get paid too and the Niners open the season with a murderers row of front 7s in the Rams, Panthers, and 'hawks. I would though like to see Garnett in there for Beadles. more power up front. 9) Seattle: Seattle is struggling, but I'm not in any way thinking this is a slam dunk. They'll be pissed and in their house. Good news is that sound shouldn't be the issue it once was as everything now is based on hand signals. Getting to the line quickly and snapping the ball may even slow down the crowd. Remains to be seen however. Seattle's D is just if not more ferocious than Carolinas, but the O isn't playing like Carolinas. They don't have 6'5" walking mismatches at WR. Should be interesting. I'd still bet on a Seattle win, but it's not nearly the sure thing I though it might have been before the season started. 10) Team weaknesses: When people asked me after the Rams game what I though, I pretty much game them the same answer every time. I came away viewing them pretty much exactly the way I viewed them going in. Better than people think, some really young and talented defenders, need at OLB, and desperate need at QB and WR. I didn't expect 28-0, but all of those weaknesses showed up even in week 1. In week 2 they were REALLY on display, QB in particular. In the past I've been an advocate of looking at stats to make my points. I did this in particular with Alex Smith. With Gabbert, the stats really lie. There were some good throws in there, but for SO MUCH of the game he was just KILLING them with his unwillingness to keep on the run, make an accurate short pass, or just sit in the pocket and let a play develop. So frustrating.

Sep 19, 2016 at 1:27 PM

#121

a49erfan77
Veteran
Posts: 5,086

Originally posted by thl408:
Gabbert also sees an unblocked LB right where he is supposed to run. Are you suggesting he keeps the ball and runs up the middle into the MLB? Forget 59 because Gabbert probably doesn't see him, but 58 is just sitting there. Check out Gabbert's TD run and you'll see when it's the right decision to keep the ball.

So you'd rather the QB take a sure loss rather than try to get positive yards?

Sep 19, 2016 at 1:28 PM

#122

Joecool
Veteran
Posts: 70,984

Originally posted by pasodoc9er:
In the retrospectoscope , I would have wished chip went after them with the dink and dunk passing scheme. INstead he went after the best or second best front 7 with Hyde, occasionally draughn . I would love to see the outcome had we done that. Retrospectoscope however, is cheating. I would have thot chip knew we werent' going to run on Panthers, but he didn't change his game plan. I was just a bit surprised.

Not sure if dink and dunk would have worked against the speed of their LB's. We did the right thing by attacking further up field but were not perfect on the execution.

Until our defense completely understands their responsibilities, we need to play a perfect game to beat a team like CAR because of how good CAR is and the scheduling circumstances. Let's face it, CAR is a bigger version of the Harbaugh 49ers.

If anything, I would chalk this one up to a scheduling loss and be happy that we competed the entire game and were not blown out 43-18 with most of those 18 coming in garbage time.

Scratch this game and move forward to SEA for a chance to be 2-0 in our division.

Sep 19, 2016 at 1:29 PM

#123

Jcool
Veteran
Posts: 44,532

Originally posted by thl408:
Gabbert also sees an unblocked LB right where he is supposed to run. Are you suggesting he keeps the ball and runs up the middle into the MLB? Forget 59 because Gabbert probably doesn't see him, but 58 is just sitting there. Check out Gabbert's TD run and you'll see when it's the right decision to keep the ball.

Looks to me he is 100% focused on the RB. Might be a chance for Gabbert to get by him.

Sep 19, 2016 at 1:30 PM

#124

a49erfan77
Veteran
Posts: 5,086

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by a49erfan77:

Originally posted by thl408:
Here are two plays I thought Gabbert did the right thing to hand off even though the result of the play ended up being very bad (tackle for loss).
Most zone read plays have the backside DE as the key defender and if the QB keeps, then he runs to the edge where the DE came from. Here, the 49ers key the DT (KShort). So Gabbert needs to read his own running lane, but the running lane is now up the A gap - right up the middle.

So if Short is his read on this play, and Short is unblocked heading straight for the HB, shouldn't the read be to not hand it off here?

Gabbert also sees an unblocked LB right where he is supposed to run. Are you suggesting he keeps the ball and runs up the middle into the MLB? Forget 59 because Gabbert probably doesn't see him, but 58 is just sitting there. Check out Gabbert's TD run and you'll see when it's the right decision to keep the ball.

OK, one more thing about this play. Seems like poor design. Shouldn't the RG have pulled over to take Short instead of leaving him unblocked since the run was to his side? Instead he is uselessly blocking the backside defender who would have no play regardless of who got the ball.

Sep 19, 2016 at 1:30 PM

#125

bzborow1
Veteran
Posts: 3,522

Originally posted by thl408:
Here are back to back packaged plays where we can see how CAR used the extra half man in the box. One of the reasons teams started to play man coverage against Chip is because of his use of Packaged Plays (or Run Pass Option play). CAR is primarily a zone coverage team and this is how RPOs can attack zone.

The 49ers put 6 blockers on the LoS (5OL + TE). CAR matches up by putting 7 in the box. But they sneak half a man into the box (orange). Is orange lined up over the slot WR or is he considered 'in the box'? He's actually trying to do both.

Gabbert sees that orange is not committing to go in the box so he hands off to the RB.

Decent +4 gain although it took some bouncing from Hyde.

-----------------
This is the very next play of the game. Everything looks the same from the formation of the offense to the alignment of the defense. It's actually the same play, but the result of the play is very different.

Gabbert sees orange is not committing to the box, but by orange trying to play both the box and the slot, he can't play the slot.

You can see that at the time Gabbert throws the ball, there are OL blocking downfield. That's because the OL isn't pass blocking, they are run blocking in case there's a handoff. I thought the 49ers could have done more of this. Not sure if they did and it didn't work, or they didn't try. Point of all this is that Chip has gotten some flak for running too much on 1st down, but the reality is that some of these runs are determined by Gabbert, not Chip.

I love your work. Thank you for these. The next question is how does Chip respond to the wrinkles defenses are throwing at him? It's clear these types of tactics aren't going away.

A lot of people are really hard on Gabbert and there are good reasons for it, but I we also need to take stock in the level of opposition they are playing and the number of points scored. Against Carolina they benefited from turnovers but they had to score. Fun fact: SF currently sits 9th in the NFL in red zone efficiency.

[ Edited by bzborow1 on Sep 19, 2016 at 1:33 PM ]

Sep 19, 2016 at 1:31 PM

#126

Willisfn4life
Veteran
Posts: 7,337

Originally posted by thl408:
Here are two plays I thought Gabbert did the right thing to hand off even though the result of the play ended up being very bad (tackle for loss).
Most zone read plays have the backside DE as the key defender and if the QB keeps, then he runs to the edge where the DE came from. Here, the 49ers key the DT (KShort). So Gabbert needs to read his own running lane, but the running lane is now up the A gap - right up the middle.

Kilgore is not supposed to engage Short, but Short gets Kilgore knocked off balanced and unable to make it to the second level. If Gabbert keeps here, he gets mobbed (red LB).

----------------
Same zone read concept as above. The 49ers ran a bunch of packaged plays to try to stress the 7th box defender - this is one of them. The option to handoff, keep, or pass is up to Gabbert and his presnap read of the defensive alignment.

I think Beadles is supposed to move to the second level and block orange while leaving the DT unblocked for the QB to read. Unblocked orange defender chillin and Gabbert doesn't want to keep and run smack dab into the defender. The reason orange is able to stay home and not follow the RB is because the safety is coming down to provide run support.

Textbook run support from a Quarters safety. Trying to win with the zone read is tough considering CAR's offense also does it and CAR's defense probably practices against it everyday.

Have you rewatched the whole game? I'm on the way back from Carolina, so I'm anxious to see the difference of the film and the naked eye when I can slow it down a bit. Lol

Sep 19, 2016 at 1:31 PM

#127

thl408
Moderator
Posts: 33,312

Originally posted by a49erfan77:

Originally posted by thl408:
Gabbert also sees an unblocked LB right where he is supposed to run. Are you suggesting he keeps the ball and runs up the middle into the MLB? Forget 59 because Gabbert probably doesn't see him, but 58 is just sitting there. Check out Gabbert's TD run and you'll see when it's the right decision to keep the ball.

So you'd rather the QB take a sure loss rather than try to get positive yards?

What kind of question is that? His read tells him to handoff the ball, not go head on with LBs for a minimal gain, if that.

Sep 19, 2016 at 1:34 PM

#128

NYniner85
Veteran
Posts: 119,077

Originally posted by Method:
I think you're being awfully hard on gabbert. There were some other throws to make but he put up 27 points in a brand new offense in week 2. Could have been more if Vance doesn't drop a perfectly thrown pass in his hands.

And imo, Hyde was terrible yesterday. There were holes created but he either tried cutting outside or didn't hit them hard so made minimal gains. Plus his fumble to Carolina td was the worst play a rb could make. He has to step up.

He put up 90% of the points on turnovers...they had one drive not off a turnover in panther's territory that resulted in points and it was a broken coverage TE by Vance that was all him.

Marvin isn't being too hard on Blaine, he's right on the money...especially with the inaccuracy issues and for sure the horrible read option reads.

Sep 19, 2016 at 1:34 PM

#129

thl408
Moderator
Posts: 33,312

Originally posted by a49erfan77:
OK, one more thing about this play. Seems like poor design. Shouldn't the RG have pulled over to take Short instead of leaving him unblocked since the run was to his side? Instead he is uselessly blocking the backside defender who would have no play regardless of who got the ball.

What you said is very possible. I don't know enough about the blocking assignments. I just know Gabbert keeping the ball would not have been worth the risk for a very minimal gain.

Sep 19, 2016 at 1:35 PM

#130

a49erfan77
Veteran
Posts: 5,086

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by a49erfan77:

Originally posted by thl408:
Gabbert also sees an unblocked LB right where he is supposed to run. Are you suggesting he keeps the ball and runs up the middle into the MLB? Forget 59 because Gabbert probably doesn't see him, but 58 is just sitting there. Check out Gabbert's TD run and you'll see when it's the right decision to keep the ball.

So you'd rather the QB take a sure loss rather than try to get positive yards?

What kind of question is that? His read tells him to handoff the ball, not go head on with LBs for a minimal gain, if that.

I think Kap and a few other read option QBs would take their chances with a LB one-on-one rather than handoff for a sure loss.

Sep 19, 2016 at 1:36 PM

#131

thl408
Moderator
Posts: 33,312

Originally posted by Willisfn4life:
Have you rewatched the whole game? I'm on the way back from Carolina, so I'm anxious to see the difference of the film and the naked eye when I can slow it down a bit. Lol

No I have not rewatched the entire game, just the 1st quarter where I thought the 49ers went toe to toe with the Panthers. If this was a win I'd have rewatched it already. Since it's a loss, I'll just wait until the all22 is available.

Sep 19, 2016 at 1:36 PM

#132

communist
Veteran
Posts: 12,475

Originally posted by a49erfan77:
In both of these examples, Gabbert keeping would have at the very least resulted in a short gain or back to the LOS. Instead we took huge losses on both plays.

No, it would not. You assume that the LBs would run the same routes on a QB keep, right?
Especially in the first example you see that at the mesh point, the LB is completely unblocked and is looking at the handoff. He would immediately chase up the field if Gabbert kept the ball.

Sep 19, 2016 at 1:36 PM

#133

Willisfn4life
Veteran
Posts: 7,337

Originally posted by Jcool:
Originally posted by thl408:
Gabbert also sees an unblocked LB right where he is supposed to run. Are you suggesting he keeps the ball and runs up the middle into the MLB? Forget 59 because Gabbert probably doesn't see him, but 58 is just sitting there. Check out Gabbert's TD run and you'll see when it's the right decision to keep the ball.

Looks to me he is 100% focused on the RB. Might be a chance for Gabbert to get by him.

I don't think so. Davis was still right in the middle of the running lane. Gabbert wasn't going anywhere on that play.

Sep 19, 2016 at 1:37 PM

#134

a49erfan77
Veteran
Posts: 5,086

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by a49erfan77:
OK, one more thing about this play. Seems like poor design. Shouldn't the RG have pulled over to take Short instead of leaving him unblocked since the run was to his side? Instead he is uselessly blocking the backside defender who would have no play regardless of who got the ball.

What you said is very possible. I don't know enough about the blocking assignments. I just know Gabbert keeping the ball would not have been worth the risk for a very minimal gain.

The more I watch it, the more it looks like Kilgore didn't expect Short to go unblocked. That sweep play would have been more successful if it was just designed with him to stay put and block Short.

Sep 19, 2016 at 1:37 PM

#135

thl408
Moderator
Posts: 33,312

Originally posted by a49erfan77:

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by a49erfan77:

Originally posted by thl408:
Gabbert also sees an unblocked LB right where he is supposed to run. Are you suggesting he keeps the ball and runs up the middle into the MLB? Forget 59 because Gabbert probably doesn't see him, but 58 is just sitting there. Check out Gabbert's TD run and you'll see when it's the right decision to keep the ball.

So you'd rather the QB take a sure loss rather than try to get positive yards?

What kind of question is that? His read tells him to handoff the ball, not go head on with LBs for a minimal gain, if that.

I think Kap and a few other read option QBs would take their chances with a LB one-on-one rather than handoff for a sure loss.

Kap definitely has more experience with the zone read.