Play-by-play Passing game review

Originally posted by dj43:
Thanks for this clip. It also shows another point I made in my OP, that being, none of the receivers are running deeper than the LTG. This happened often.

well it would've been unfortunate if our coaches didn't believe in our Oline against their Dline...enough to call deeper routes. If you are forcing them to drop deeper into their zones, then that should open stuff underneath passed the 1st down marker...or past their underneath coverage if they play the sticks. Sure the window would be small, but it should be there.

the question is, do the coaches NOT trust our Oline... or do the Coaches NOT trust Gabbert's confidence to try to hit the intermediate to deep openings...or/and not trust his arm-strength/accuracy to do so.

Originally posted by Kense:
I've never seen so many people make excuses for a 3rd string caliber QB in my life. The entire NFL fanbase knows what we have at QB but you have delusional fans here making excuses for Gabbert. SMH

I think you are doing selective reading. On the very first play I criticized Gabbert for not realizing he was not on the same page as Hyde. That is the QB's sole responsibility and it became glaringly obvious as he turned to hand the ball to thin air in front of 70,000 people. By the same token, when Kerley flattens out his route 2 yards short of the LTG despite having room to finish it and Gabbert throws him the ball with no other options, that is on Kerley.

Originally posted by dj43:
I think you are doing selective reading. On the very first play I criticized Gabbert for not realizing he was not on the same page as Hyde. That is the QB's sole responsibility and it became glaringly obvious as he turned to hand the ball to thin air in front of 70,000 people. By the same token, when Kerley flattens out his route 2 yards short of the LTG despite having room to finish it and Gabbert throws him the ball with no other options, that is on Kerley.

The 49ers have no Offense, I don't need to read anything.

Originally posted by northoakland510:
I think what bothers me most is we have known for years we needed receivers with size and Baalke never made it a priority.

One of many REASONS I`m loking forward to Baalke getting the AXE hopefuly doing the season and not after this season.

Originally posted by Afrikan:

Originally posted by dj43:

Thanks for this clip. It also shows another point I made in my OP, that being, none of the receivers are running deeper than the LTG. This happened often.

well it would've been unfortunate if our coaches didn't believe in our Oline against their Dline...enough to call deeper routes. If you are forcing them to drop deeper into their zones, then that should open stuff underneath passed the 1st down marker...or past their underneath coverage if they play the sticks. Sure the window would be small, but it should be there.

the question is, do the coaches NOT trust our Oline... or do the Coaches NOT trust Gabbert's confidence to try to hit the intermediate to deep openings...or/and not trust his arm-strength/accuracy to do so.

Great question. Throw in new WRs too and weak WRs, new offense, coaches still learning personnel, etc. and it makes it even harder to tease out.

Originally posted by dj43:
Thanks for this clip. It also shows another point I made in my OP, that being, none of the receivers are running deeper than the LTG. This happened often.

It's trying creating a horizontal stretch to the underneath zone defenders. That is part of a ball control passing attack (don't laugh). It's hard to defend a gameplan that had such crap results, so I'm mostly trying to explain Chip's train of thought. I have little confidence in Gabbert taking 5/7 step drops to target downfield where ET is lurking. I know you mentioned that Chip's (lack of) confidence in Gabbert can be a factor in this.
This is what all the short routes are supposed to do - attack those underneath zones. In theory it sounds like the right thing to do to avoid sacks and to take the short gains.
2015: three step timing. All routes considered short.

Originally posted by TheWooLick:
I added that I felt like Gabbert was inaccurate on many of his throws including the completions.

A week or two ago dj43 said that his favorite GIF was the one of Kaepernick from last year when he didn't see Smith waving his arms. He also crapped on Kaepernick after yesterday's game int his very thread. Some sort of FTFY dig on Kaepernick's game last year against the Cardinals. I like dj43's posts but he is definitely biased against Kap.

You have mistaken me for someone else. I did not say ANY of the things you accused me of above. NONE of them.

Originally posted by jrouter4949:

Originally posted by northoakland510:

I think what bothers me most is we have known for years we needed receivers with size and Baalke never made it a priority.

One of many REASONS I`m loking forward to Baalke getting the AXE hopefuly doing the season and not after this season.

Just listen to John Clayton and he said Baalke still needs two more years and that rebuilding takes time. I'm sure that's just what fans want to here. Lol

Originally posted by NCommand:
Just listen to John Clayton and he said Baalke still needs two more years and that rebuilding takes time. I'm sure that's just what fans want to here. Lol

If anyone is interested in listening: http://www.csnbayarea.com/49ers/49ers-insider-podcast-espns-john-clayton

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by dj43:
Thanks for this clip. It also shows another point I made in my OP, that being, none of the receivers are running deeper than the LTG. This happened often.

It's trying creating a horizontal stretch to the underneath zone defenders. That is part of a ball control passing attack (don't laugh). It's hard to defend a gameplan that had such crap results, so I'm mostly trying to explain Chip's train of thought. I have little confidence in Gabbert taking 5/7 step drops to target downfield where ET is lurking. I know you mentioned that Chip's (lack of) confidence in Gabbert can be a factor in this.
This is what all the short routes are supposed to do - attack those underneath zones. In theory it sounds like the right thing to do to avoid sacks and to take the short gains.
2015: three step timing. All routes considered short.

Do we even have adequate receivers to run those deep routes without getting knocked off the route. Smith maybe. Patton, Kerley, Streeter, I don't know...

Chancellor can cover some grounds back there. Do they have the physical ability to go up and fight for it if somewhat contested. If not, you are inviting some INTs.

Originally posted by TheWooLick:

Originally posted by jrouter4949:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by TheWooLick:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by TheWooLick:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by TheWooLick:
I rarely saw a ball that I thought was put int he right spot. Just because a pass is caught it doesn't mean it was a good pass. He needs to put the ball in a place that gives the receivers a better shot at YAC. He put his receivers in poor position on catches a lot yesterday.

What did you think of the WR play?

It is also the case that if the WR is not running the route the QB anticipates, the ball will not appear to be in the best spot.

I don't think the WRs are great but they are not the problem with Gabbert's accuracy. Take that second pass of the day, was that one that was thrown short of Vance that he had to turn back for? He had no chance of making anything of that throw.
Gabbert is not delivering the ball accurately, that is almost all on him.

Are we talking about the same play?

I listened to the first half on the radio with Tim Ryan commenting. He is always on the critical side and he called it a good throw. When I got home I watched the entire game, then watched it again for the summary above, and then just looked at that specific play again after reading your comment. Yes, McD twisted his body back a bit but the ball was there on time, and, Chancellor knocked him out of bounds as soon as he turned back. There was NO CHANCE, NONE whatsoever to make any YAC on that play. It appeared to be a design play to spread the Seahawk defense for upcoming plays.

He turned himself around to get the pass, that ball should lead him and he should be in a position to see the field and keep running as he catches it.
There was no chance of YAC because it was a poorly executed pass that should have been easy.

If that is the way you see it, then I have nothing further.

DJ this guy is being a prick,and He has nothing to add to a very well article you have written,I never once read ANYTHING you have written to show your dislike for Kap....geeesh shaking my head, and yes I think it is time to see what Kap can do.

I added that I felt like Gabbert was inaccurate on many of his throws including the completions.

A week or two ago dj43 said that his favorite GIF was the one of Kaepernick from last year when he didn't see Smith waving his arms. He also crapped on Kaepernick after yesterday's game int his very thread. Some sort of FTFY dig on Kaepernick's game last year against the Cardinals. I like dj43's posts but he is definitely biased against Kap.

I don`t see any bias in DJ s post,He was very critical of Gabbert,and I personally am disappointed inGabbert`s play and Kelly`s offensive play- calling... and I know you probably agree,Baalke needs to be booted NOW,He has continually screwed us in the draft by not getting us a couple of good WRs year after year and NOT addressing the QB position,Baalke is a ego-manic a*****e.

Originally posted by Afrikan:

Originally posted by dj43:
Thanks for this clip. It also shows another point I made in my OP, that being, none of the receivers are running deeper than the LTG. This happened often.

well it would've been unfortunate if our coaches didn't believe in our Oline against their Dline...enough to call deeper routes. If you are forcing them to drop deeper into their zones, then that should open stuff underneath passed the 1st down marker...or past their underneath coverage if they play the sticks. Sure the window would be small, but it should be there.

the question is, do the coaches NOT trust our Oline... or do the Coaches NOT trust Gabbert's confidence to try to hit the intermediate to deep openings...or/and not trust his arm-strength/accuracy to do so.

It is my opinion that the coaches now trust the OL pass protection. What I don't know is whether the failure to call deeper patterns is lack of confidence in the QB or the WRs or both. From what I could see yesterday, on the few plays where I could see a WR running a deeper route, they were well covered as they left the picture. On the few occasions I could see, it appeared Seattle shaded a safety to Smith's side thereby negating our best deep threat.

If it were me, I would tell Gabbert to just haul off and waste one deep. Throw it far enough so no one could catch it if you didn't think the WR could get it, but THROW IT. Loosen things up.

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by dj43:
Thanks for this clip. It also shows another point I made in my OP, that being, none of the receivers are running deeper than the LTG. This happened often.

It's trying creating a horizontal stretch to the underneath zone defenders. That is part of a ball control passing attack (don't laugh). It's hard to defend a gameplan that had such crap results, so I'm mostly trying to explain Chip's train of thought. I have little confidence in Gabbert taking 5/7 step drops to target downfield where ET is lurking. I know you mentioned that Chip's (lack of) confidence in Gabbert can be a factor in this.
This is what all the short routes are supposed to do - attack those underneath zones. In theory it sounds like the right thing to do to avoid sacks and to take the short gains.
2015: three step timing. All routes considered short.

Thanks for the vid. I get the idea. Walsh introduced a lot of that when he first came here...and was often criticized for it, until people saw that it worked. He called them "long handoffs." Problem, as i see it, is that we just don't have the talent in the passing game right now to compete with a team like Seattle with speedy LBs and quality DBs.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Just listen to John Clayton and he said Baalke still needs two more years and that rebuilding takes time. I'm sure that's just what fans want to here. Lol

No. I'm okay giving him one more year. But if we don't see major improvement next year then he should be gone.

Originally posted by Jcool:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Just listen to John Clayton and he said Baalke still needs two more years and that rebuilding takes time. I'm sure that's just what fans want to here. Lol

If anyone is interested in listening: http://www.csnbayarea.com/49ers/49ers-insider-podcast-espns-john-clayton

Two more years makes sense, so much cap space we can resign our players we want to add a couple free agents, draft a qb and a impact wr and/or passrusher