Analysis from Seahawks Game coaches film

Originally posted by jonnydel:
It's hard to say exactly because I haven't broken down a lot of what the other guys do. Personally, I see him as a lot better than Bevell up in Seattle. Roman is much more creative than that guy. Roman has a great mind for how to execute a lot of staple plays out of different formations to exploit mismatches. He also does a good job of getting the defense to align how he wants them to for the power run game. Honestly, it's easier to coach a heavy zone run scheme. In the end though, a power run scheme tends to be more consistent game to game than a heavy zone run scheme. Like Roman says, "geometry never has a bad day". That's true, but, it requires Roman to be more on top of his game than the D-coordinator. Sometimes we don't see all of his plays working every down, but, the way he sets up his gameplans to set things up throughout the game is good. I think he puts his players in good situations and overall they do pretty well.

I think we 3 and out a lot when we fail to stay on schedule. Roman is a ball control philosophical kind of OC. He's not looking to score on every play, he's looking to keep the chains moving, keep the defense off balance(not just in when they run the ball, but how and where), and keep the opposing offense off the field. This is also part of why we don't fling the ball downfield like the Bucc's will from time to time. After looking at film from the Panthers, Buc's, Falcons, Saints, Rams, Colts, and Lions, I think Roman is better than those guys, save for the Saints. The Buc's do not have a large variety how and where they run the ball, it's pretty straightforward, the Falcon's don't have a huge variety in their passing game, they run a lot of different plays, but a lot of them have the same type of concepts. The Colts probably play the most similar offense to ours, but they still don't have the volume of difference in the run game. This really forces the opposing defense to study up on everything. As the passing game develops, the run game will break free more. But, for the passing game to develop, they have to have success throughout the gameplan. He sets things up throughout the game and the players have to execute from start to finish.

Not sure if this helps but, that's my two cents.

Variety is only good if its actually effective. You can try 1000 formations or 5, but volume by itself doesn't make you more effective. What frustrates me with Roman is that he tries to outsmart himself seemingly. In the Indy game, the 49ers had very good success running the ball early, which is is something he completely got away from in the second half of that game. I'll take a narrow playbook if its applied consistently. Bevell might not have as big of a playbook as Roman but he understands where the strengths of his offense lie and where the weaknesses of the other defense exist. Those passes to Wilson weren't something that they pulled out of thin air, that was clearly a weakness that they had diagnosed on tape with Reid coming up to aggressively, creating a hole in the coverage. If you look back at Seattle this season, they have the same basic approach, heavy running, playaction passing, swing passes, corner routes, Wilson running around behind the line of scrimmage, waiting for someone to get open.


I don't see enough of this offense consistently attacking the same weakness on a defense. They'll run a highly successful play....and then move to something else and something else while other offenses will run same play over and over again until the defense shows that they can stop it. One of the few times I've seen that from the 49ers this season was against the Cardinals where they utilized the same basic running play over and over and gashed them down the field, that was all their best drive of the season on offense.

In the Rams games last season as well as several games this season, you had teams loading up the box, coming full speed at Kaepernick while you had cornerbacks playing 10 yards off the line of scrimmage. Instead of some quick passes, slants...etc, we saw long dropback's and long-developing passing plays. The screen play may not be a strength of this offense but its still something they should try to incorporate into the gameplan more regularly. Teams haven't done a lot of exotic stuff against the 49ers this season, load up the box, dare them to run, play press coverage on the receivers and dare them to throw. The return of Crabtree has put a dent in this sort of defensive approach but I'm still not seeing enough consistency, particularly in the passing game.

Offenses don't have to be complicated to be effective, if anything, this offense being as complicated as it is could very well be a negative with plays consistently coming in late, going on almost 3 seasons now. When the QB is snapping the ball with 2 or 1 seconds on the playclock, it is a detriment to the offense and a huge boost to the defense. You look at a team like Green Bay and they don't do very much that's fancy, basic WCO derived passing attack, target deep, target intermediate, short, checkdown..etc. But it works, all their guys are on the same page, they execute at a very high level and it is an effective, QB friendly offense.


I also don't see the improvement at wide receiver over the past few seasons, looking back at plays throughout the season, the receivers don't really do that much to help out the quarterback downfield. What was wonderful to see against Seattle was Boldin actually coming back for a pass after Kaepernick started scrambling. That's one thing you see consistently with all the Seattle receivers, they move towards the ball and get open to give Wilson targets when he starts to scramble. I saw enough of guys like Kyle Williams running around, oblivious to what was going on, with Kaepernick getting chased down with no targets to throw to. With Crabtree and Boldin this should improve but once more, I haven't seen anything to make me think that Morton is doing a quality job with coaching guys up.

Originally posted by MiamiNiner:
Doesn't all this talk of creativity make the Mike Singletary era seem like the stone age?

jonny just a few more questions/observations.

about 2 centuries ago it seems, there were questions raised about kap being a slow learner and not being able to learn the playbook. I actually did wonder about that way back. From diagramming these plays it appears that the QB has to literally know each and every blocking assignment, every receiver's route, and the entire D set. As opposed to not being able to learning the plays, it appears that not a whole lot of Qbs could actually master this unique offense. And it also appears that kap has to be pretty damn smart to run this O. Correct?

When plays do blow up, and kap throws short, into coverage, or choose your poison, is that a fault of these fascinatingly drawn up plays, Qb , OL, or receiver error or is it a composite of multiple things?

You answered the 3 and out questions, but what exactly happened in the games against the 4 Elites this yr, in which we
lost them all. In the Panthers loss, 10-9, We kinda ran out of time, but we were checkmated(as were they)...what was the deal there(Carolina)and also vs INDY, and esp Saints, where it looked like we never even showed up. Same goes for the SEA game up in SEA. There were so many broken things it would be hard to recount them all. Yet against weak sister teams, we virtually steam rolled them. IN the losses, were QB/receivers not on same page, or was OL just flat overpowered, or was kap having a bad day, or was kap still learning the O, or what? Against SEA we couldn't get anyone open, altho when some guys(boldin) were open, kap held ball too long...or it appeared that way...and boldin was pizzed, because he yelled to kap on the sideline, "Throw the damn ball". Was that just Kap still learning the complicated scheme, and not feeling comfortable in throwing the ball without thinking about it too long?

Also in another thread, NCommand put forth a very good set of arguments for this O being AR(designated anointed receiver), and looking at your breakdowns, it sure seems he was right. It appears every guy on O has his job to do to get the one AR free. When things break down, that is different, more like firehouse football...Boldin is all world when in the EZ and things go to hell. I assume NC was correct that we are primarily an AR offense, with some PS thrown in. Correct or not?

For whatever reason HaRo has avoided the 4-6 yd passes on crossing routes, slants across the middle, especially when D is playing box 8, 9 or sometimes 10. Dinks and dunks work there, but 10-15 yd passes don't seem to work well(as the play takes more than the 3 seconds and the OL can only give kap 3 seconds), and running frank into a box 8-10 has been stopped cold...virtually all the time against elites. If we are playing to get one guy open, what has happened when that doesn't work, yet the middle of the field is virtually wide open in every game where the D plays box 8-10? As you noted SEA ran box 8 or 9 all nite(90% was your number). So why no dinks and dunks, even if they would be open? And why in this complex O is frank asked to run into a box 8 or more, when 5 guys can't beat 8 or 9?

I guess the real question regarding dinks and dunks against box 8-10 is do we not run 4-6 yd 1-3 step quick hitters? Because it doesn't fit the overall scheme? If that's the case, it would seem that deviating from the AR in those cases would be warranted. Yes or no?

Finally, why in a QB learning an obviously complex and difficult O scheme, has a RB split wide of kap(eg, Baldwin, Vance, LMJ, or Hunter), not been used as relief valves, when and if the play turns to dreck? Is it that all 11 players have to be involved in each and every play for the play to work, or couldn't we have a relief valve(until recently miller, but now others are being used too)? Had we done that we sure would have seen a lot less 3 and outs. Is the answer that all 11 guys MUST be part and parcel of every play for it to isolate the AR?

Thanks in advance, Jonny and amazing work, effort, and what a teaching experience especially for me.

One more if I may. After a game where Gruden does a rundown at halftime, he stated , "Just exactly what kind of O are the 49ers running? Man I sure don't know." I assume he has access to the same coaches game tape you do, yet it was apparent he really didn't know what the 9ers had been doing on O. Any idea on that, other than he hasn't been doing his homework? Without this being painstakingly explained, I never would have figured this out, but admittedly the stills and arrows sure allow one to "get it". Again, many thanks, Jonny.

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

Originally posted by jonnydel:
It's hard to say exactly because I haven't broken down a lot of what the other guys do. Personally, I see him as a lot better than Bevell up in Seattle. Roman is much more creative than that guy. Roman has a great mind for how to execute a lot of staple plays out of different formations to exploit mismatches. He also does a good job of getting the defense to align how he wants them to for the power run game. Honestly, it's easier to coach a heavy zone run scheme. In the end though, a power run scheme tends to be more consistent game to game than a heavy zone run scheme. Like Roman says, "geometry never has a bad day". That's true, but, it requires Roman to be more on top of his game than the D-coordinator. Sometimes we don't see all of his plays working every down, but, the way he sets up his gameplans to set things up throughout the game is good. I think he puts his players in good situations and overall they do pretty well.

I think we 3 and out a lot when we fail to stay on schedule. Roman is a ball control philosophical kind of OC. He's not looking to score on every play, he's looking to keep the chains moving, keep the defense off balance(not just in when they run the ball, but how and where), and keep the opposing offense off the field. This is also part of why we don't fling the ball downfield like the Bucc's will from time to time. After looking at film from the Panthers, Buc's, Falcons, Saints, Rams, Colts, and Lions, I think Roman is better than those guys, save for the Saints. The Buc's do not have a large variety how and where they run the ball, it's pretty straightforward, the Falcon's don't have a huge variety in their passing game, they run a lot of different plays, but a lot of them have the same type of concepts. The Colts probably play the most similar offense to ours, but they still don't have the volume of difference in the run game. This really forces the opposing defense to study up on everything. As the passing game develops, the run game will break free more. But, for the passing game to develop, they have to have success throughout the gameplan. He sets things up throughout the game and the players have to execute from start to finish.

Not sure if this helps but, that's my two cents.

Variety is only good if its actually effective. You can try 1000 formations or 5, but volume by itself doesn't make you more effective. What frustrates me with Roman is that he tries to outsmart himself seemingly. In the Indy game, the 49ers had very good success running the ball early, which is is something he completely got away from in the second half of that game. I'll take a narrow playbook if its applied consistently. Bevell might not have as big of a playbook as Roman but he understands where the strengths of his offense lie and where the weaknesses of the other defense exist. Those passes to Wilson weren't something that they pulled out of thin air, that was clearly a weakness that they had diagnosed on tape with Reid coming up to aggressively, creating a hole in the coverage. If you look back at Seattle this season, they have the same basic approach, heavy running, playaction passing, swing passes, corner routes, Wilson running around behind the line of scrimmage, waiting for someone to get open.


I don't see enough of this offense consistently attacking the same weakness on a defense. They'll run a highly successful play....and then move to something else and something else while other offenses will run same play over and over again until the defense shows that they can stop it. One of the few times I've seen that from the 49ers this season was against the Cardinals where they utilized the same basic running play over and over and gashed them down the field, that was all their best drive of the season on offense.

In the Rams games last season as well as several games this season, you had teams loading up the box, coming full speed at Kaepernick while you had cornerbacks playing 10 yards off the line of scrimmage. Instead of some quick passes, slants...etc, we saw long dropback's and long-developing passing plays. The screen play may not be a strength of this offense but its still something they should try to incorporate into the gameplan more regularly. Teams haven't done a lot of exotic stuff against the 49ers this season, load up the box, dare them to run, play press coverage on the receivers and dare them to throw. The return of Crabtree has put a dent in this sort of defensive approach but I'm still not seeing enough consistency, particularly in the passing game.

Offenses don't have to be complicated to be effective, if anything, this offense being as complicated as it is could very well be a negative with plays consistently coming in late, going on almost 3 seasons now. When the QB is snapping the ball with 2 or 1 seconds on the playclock, it is a detriment to the offense and a huge boost to the defense. You look at a team like Green Bay and they don't do very much that's fancy, basic WCO derived passing attack, target deep, target intermediate, short, checkdown..etc. But it works, all their guys are on the same page, they execute at a very high level and it is an effective, QB friendly offense.


I also don't see the improvement at wide receiver over the past few seasons, looking back at plays throughout the season, the receivers don't really do that much to help out the quarterback downfield. What was wonderful to see against Seattle was Boldin actually coming back for a pass after Kaepernick started scrambling. That's one thing you see consistently with all the Seattle receivers, they move towards the ball and get open to give Wilson targets when he starts to scramble. I saw enough of guys like Kyle Williams running around, oblivious to what was going on, with Kaepernick getting chased down with no targets to throw to. With Crabtree and Boldin this should improve but once more, I haven't seen anything to make me think that Morton is doing a quality job with coaching guys up.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying variety for varieties sake is good. What I'm saying is that it keeps the defense off balance. On know it doesn't always seem like we have a high-powered offense but, the way Roman designs his gameplans, it's something that will take a while for all the moving parts to come together, but when they do, it'll click big time. The Colt's game was one that I know frustrated a lot of us because of how the run game seemed to disappear, but, I did go back and look at that game and we had a few series where the play call was right against the defense and there would be a miscue in the execution from one person or another and it would cause a negative or static play that would set the whole thing back. Indy, in the 2nd half, changed their gameplan to give them better defense against the sweep plays that were working so well. This slowed down the pass rush a little to where it looked like the pass would be open. Indy then doubled boldin from those sets and VD was out of the game. They tried some different WR screens and things that didn't work. They were trying to hit some of those quick outs and such to beat the off coverage but Williams ran some really poor routes. Then they put it Patton and he didn't run them any sharper. They were the right routes, but they weren't sharp or really run well.

For example, when Boldin runs his out route he'll try and get the CB to turn his hips in; or when he runs his curls he does a good job of making it look just like his deep routes. When Williams ran his routes, he didn't get the CB to turn his hips in any way or you could always tell by his 2nd step and his hips that he was running a short route. Williams would have best been used in the slot where he can use his quickness. But, we didn't have many other options at WR.

Roman was trying to throw the ball to set up the run game as it had been so successful in the 1st half, but, sloppy execution prevented him from getting back to those plays later. We really didn't have that many plays in the 2nd half, partially, because Indy had some long sustained drives in the 2nd half as well. There was one drive Indy had in particular about half way through the 3rd quarter that I saw as really the turning point in the game.

It had been a back and forth game up to that point and we were winning the field position battle. We had Indy backed up to their own 7 yard line and they faced a 3rd and something like 15 or 17 yards. They ran one of those have 2 receivers run down the field and block and the crosser gets the ball follows the blockers. On that play we had 2 guys miss a tackle and another guy take a horrible angle on the play(very unusual for our team) and it allowed Indy to get a 1st down. Willis also left the game that play with his groin injury. Indy was able to move the ball another 35 yards downfield and keep the ball for another 4-5 minutes. They didn't score but they changed the field position and tired out the defense a lot on that drive.

We got the ball, got stuffed on a run, then had a busted screen play, then Anthony Davis gave up quick pressure on a play where a receiver was open. Indy got the ball right back and kept if for quite and while and completely tired out the defense. You could feel the whole momentum of the game swing. I don't put that one on Roman too much. But, it's just my opinion.

Originally posted by jonnydel:

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying variety for varieties sake is good. What I'm saying is that it keeps the defense off balance. On know it doesn't always seem like we have a high-powered offense but, the way Roman designs his gameplans, it's something that will take a while for all the moving parts to come together, but when they do, it'll click big time.

You're far from the first to state this, but the reality is, we're going on about 3 seasons now and the same issues keep popping, change of QB's, still the same problems. This isn't a team that has gone through a myriad of massive changes on offense, the OL is largely the same, same RB, same TE, Crabtree is still here...etc. It really shouldn't take 3+ seasons to develop some form of consistency and get everybody on the same page on offense. At some point, your offense is doing more harm to your own players than it was to opposing defense's who have largely learned to ignore a lot of the pre-snap motion and shifting.


I just don't see it, I don't see the timely playcalling to really attack a defense's weaknesses, I see the same mixed bag and the same types of struggles, particularly in the redzone like they had against Seattle and Carolina. If this offense played anywhere close to the level of where its potential suggests, this team might have one loss at worst right now.

'The Colt's game was one that I know frustrated a lot of us because of how the run game seemed to disappear, but, I did go back and look at that game and we had a few series where the play call was right against the defense and there would be a miscue in the execution from one person or another and it would cause a negative or static play that would set the whole thing back. Indy, in the 2nd half, changed their gameplan to give them better defense against the sweep plays that were working so well. This slowed down the pass rush a little to where it looked like the pass would be open. Indy then doubled boldin from those sets and VD was out of the game. They tried some different WR screens and things that didn't work. They were trying to hit some of those quick outs and such to beat the off coverage but Williams ran some really poor routes. Then they put it Patton and he didn't run them any sharper. They were the right routes, but they weren't sharp or really run well.

Looking back at that game, I saw a lot of long-developing passing plays, the shorter routes were far and few between. With the way Indy was playing, they were ripe to being lit up on shorter passes, screens, etc. I also do fully believe that they gave up on the run too early. Teams lately have been gashing them with the run and their defense really hasn't changed all that much, its the same defense, with the same weaknesses as they had against the 49ers. I do think that they tried to outsmart themselves instead of continually running the ball, regardless of what Indy was doing, it was clear that they could not consistently shut down the run. How else do you explain Gore only having...what....6 carries in the entire second half? That's not even keeping the defense honest at that point.

For example, when Boldin runs his out route he'll try and get the CB to turn his hips in; or when he runs his curls he does a good job of making it look just like his deep routes. When Williams ran his routes, he didn't get the CB to turn his hips in any way or you could always tell by his 2nd step and his hips that he was running a short route. Williams would have best been used in the slot where he can use his quickness. But, we didn't have many other options at WR.

I also don't buy that response simply because I see teams make do with far lesser talent at WR. You'd think that the 49ers were the only team in the NFL working with average or lesser talent at WR. Look at what some other teams have had to work with at WR this season and found a way to make it work, either scheming guys open or consistently throwing the ball to them enough to get them into a rhythm. Why is it a guy like Ginn, who this coaching staff could never properly utilize, goes to a playoff contender like Carolina and becomes a useful player for them? Meanwhile on the 49ers, McDonald drops one pass and doesn't get another target until like the next game. If these guys are having trouble running routes, then that goes on the coaching staff for not having them ready, once again reiterating my point about Morton.

It had been a back and forth game up to that point and we were winning the field position battle. We had Indy backed up to their own 7 yard line and they faced a 3rd and something like 15 or 17 yards. They ran one of those have 2 receivers run down the field and block and the crosser gets the ball follows the blockers. On that play we had 2 guys miss a tackle and another guy take a horrible angle on the play(very unusual for our team) and it allowed Indy to get a 1st down. Willis also left the game that play with his groin injury. Indy was able to move the ball another 35 yards downfield and keep the ball for another 4-5 minutes. They didn't score but they changed the field position and tired out the defense a lot on that drive.

This team often wins the field position battle, until the defense gets worn down and the floodgates open up. This offense has been too much of a liability this season and in past seasons for me to buy into the notion of Roman, uber-playcalling genius. This defense held up very well in the first Seattle game but with the offense unable to get anything going, eventually they collapsed, similarly in the Indy game as well. Its not enough for this team just to win the field position battle, they have to do with it, when they get the ball in a favorable position, they need to be able to consistently drive the ball downfield and punch it in. I understand that there will be ups and downs with a young quarterback who is very much developing but I've seen way too many opportunities blown this season, the team getting away from their strengths on offense....getting away from the strengths of Kaepernick as a quarterback as well. New Orleans basically built their entire gameplan around daring the 49ers to pass the ball and get it out in a hurry against their aggressive defense and a lot of the same issues that I've been complaining about occurred there as well, more long drop-backs in the face of an aggressive pass rush, trouble getting the playcalls in on time...etc...etc.

We got the ball, got stuffed on a run, then had a busted screen play, then Anthony Davis gave up quick pressure on a play where a receiver was open. Indy got the ball right back and kept if for quite and while and completely tired out the defense. You could feel the whole momentum of the game swing. I don't put that one on Roman too much. But, it's just my opinion.

These things happen to every team though. You know not every play will go perfectly, yet other teams manage to have a consistent offensive philosophy, you know what they're going to do, and they do it anyways. I don't see that with this team, they're a running team....that gets away from the run, and even then they tend to try and get too cute at times, like running Dixon out wide a couple of games ago, right after getting the ball back. Does the blame go on Dixon for not executing or for Roman having the slowest running back on the team run to the outside? Handing off to Hunter from the pistol, rolling outside, that play must have an average of -3 yards a carry this season yet they continually run it in the hopes that somehow the defense will be unable to stop it but its get to a point where, you can run a play 30 times and on the 30th time you make a 30 yard gain, was it worth the previous 29 times where you lost yards or gained nothing? I see way too much up and down, one very good playcall, followed by something that leaves me scratching my head.


This is not a team that should ever struggle on offense, you've got VD, Boldin, Crabtree, Gore, weapons that other teams would kill for. The rhetoric of "it will all eventually come together and it will be awesome" was good in the first season, now we're almost done with the 3rd season and yet this team still struggles to get the playcalls in on time, still struggles to snap the ball on time, there's been no player development at WR, they still struggle in the redzone in crucial situations against quality opponents.

I keep hearing the promises about progress but when it comes to the playcalling, I don't see it. I see Roman coming up with some very creative plays, but also some hare-brained playcalls and the whole thing is largely inconsistent. I see a guy who is still largely inexperienced as an NFL playcaller, trying to find his footing. I'd LOVE to see this offense come up with some consistency, right now it almost feels like its an accident when they are able to move the ball well. I'd especially LOVE to see them be able to make some better adjustments, going back through the Indy game, as well as the Carolina game, I saw both those teams make adjustments after the half, I didn't really see the same thing from the 49ers on offense at all.


The idea that an offensive coordinator needs 3+ seasons to get things to "click" is unsupported. Look at Cleveland this season and what Norv Turner has been able to do with scrub QB's, one very good receiver and no running game to speak of. The Browns are 15th in the NFL in total yards with everyone knowing exactly to whom the ball is going to. Look at the Cardinals in their first season with Bruce Arians. The Eagles in their first season with an entirely new offensive system. It doesn't have to be this complicated, it shouldn't be this complicated.

Originally posted by pasodoc9er:
jonny just a few more questions/observations.

about 2 centuries ago it seems, there were questions raised about kap being a slow learner and not being able to learn the playbook. I actually did wonder about that way back. From diagramming these plays it appears that the QB has to literally know each and every blocking assignment, every receiver's route, and the entire D set. As opposed to not being able to learning the plays, it appears that not a whole lot of Qbs could actually master this unique offense. And it also appears that kap has to be pretty damn smart to run this O. Correct?

When plays do blow up, and kap throws short, into coverage, or choose your poison, is that a fault of these fascinatingly drawn up plays, Qb , OL, or receiver error or is it a composite of multiple things?

You answered the 3 and out questions, but what exactly happened in the games against the 4 Elites this yr, in which we
lost them all. In the Panthers loss, 10-9, We kinda ran out of time, but we were checkmated(as were they)...what was the deal there(Carolina)and also vs INDY, and esp Saints, where it looked like we never even showed up. Same goes for the SEA game up in SEA. There were so many broken things it would be hard to recount them all. Yet against weak sister teams, we virtually steam rolled them. IN the losses, were QB/receivers not on same page, or was OL just flat overpowered, or was kap having a bad day, or was kap still learning the O, or what? Against SEA we couldn't get anyone open, altho when some guys(boldin) were open, kap held ball too long...or it appeared that way...and boldin was pizzed, because he yelled to kap on the sideline, "Throw the damn ball". Was that just Kap still learning the complicated scheme, and not feeling comfortable in throwing the ball without thinking about it too long?

Also in another thread, NCommand put forth a very good set of arguments for this O being AR(designated anointed receiver), and looking at your breakdowns, it sure seems he was right. It appears every guy on O has his job to do to get the one AR free. When things break down, that is different, more like firehouse football...Boldin is all world when in the EZ and things go to hell. I assume NC was correct that we are primarily an AR offense, with some PS thrown in. Correct or not?

For whatever reason HaRo has avoided the 4-6 yd passes on crossing routes, slants across the middle, especially when D is playing box 8, 9 or sometimes 10. Dinks and dunks work there, but 10-15 yd passes don't seem to work well(as the play takes more than the 3 seconds and the OL can only give kap 3 seconds), and running frank into a box 8-10 has been stopped cold...virtually all the time against elites. If we are playing to get one guy open, what has happened when that doesn't work, yet the middle of the field is virtually wide open in every game where the D plays box 8-10? As you noted SEA ran box 8 or 9 all nite(90% was your number). So why no dinks and dunks, even if they would be open? And why in this complex O is frank asked to run into a box 8 or more, when 5 guys can't beat 8 or 9?

I guess the real question regarding dinks and dunks against box 8-10 is do we not run 4-6 yd 1-3 step quick hitters? Because it doesn't fit the overall scheme? If that's the case, it would seem that deviating from the AR in those cases would be warranted. Yes or no?

Finally, why in a QB learning an obviously complex and difficult O scheme, has a RB split wide of kap(eg, Baldwin, Vance, LMJ, or Hunter), not been used as relief valves, when and if the play turns to dreck? Is it that all 11 players have to be involved in each and every play for the play to work, or couldn't we have a relief valve(until recently miller, but now others are being used too)? Had we done that we sure would have seen a lot less 3 and outs. Is the answer that all 11 guys MUST be part and parcel of every play for it to isolate the AR?

Thanks in advance, Jonny and amazing work, effort, and what a teaching experience especially for me.

One more if I may. After a game where Gruden does a rundown at halftime, he stated , "Just exactly what kind of O are the 49ers running? Man I sure don't know." I assume he has access to the same coaches game tape you do, yet it was apparent he really didn't know what the 9ers had been doing on O. Any idea on that, other than he hasn't been doing his homework? Without this being painstakingly explained, I never would have figured this out, but admittedly the stills and arrows sure allow one to "get it". Again, many thanks, Jonny.

A lot of questions in there, I love it.

I'll try and answer them the best I can with my humble opinion.

First I'll answer the Gruden question. What I think Gruden meant is, most systems, like WA, have a very distinct system. WA runs a certain strain of the WCO through Shanahan. They love everything off of the zone stretch and look to keep the defense moving side to side to set up a vertical passing attack. The Browns have a power run game to set up the PA passes into the corners.
San Fransisco does a good job of utilizing a variety of concepts to make it harder to zero in on exactly what to clue in on. I think Gruden meant it as a complement, meaning, that just by looking at the film you can't clue in on everything. They're running some stuff he hadn't seen before.

As to answer things against the Elites. There's a lot of things going on. It's all of the reasons you mentioned above.There were plays where guys were open and Kaep hesitated for one reason or other. There were plays with great design and one of the O-line would whiff a block and give up quick pressure. There were plays where receivers ran sloppy routes and everyone was covered. There were plays where they run a trap play and the TE would block the guy the guard was supposed to kick out and so nobody blocked a LB who blew the play up.
Also, some of it were the D's we played. The Elite's that we have played are Elite's because they all have great D's. Great D's have better players on that side of the ball capable of doing more things well. When you can do more things well it makes it harder for the offense to pick on your weakness. NO runs a lot of complex blitzes very well, they also do a great job of gap integrity. St. Louis tried to run some more complex things against us, but their players didn't execute as well. Seattle won't give you the short stuff very much and makes you have to beat them over the top to win, that's how Indy won, and since we didn't have anyone to win over the top in Seattle, plus Kaep was late in a bunch of recognitions there.

Carolina, we played really sloppy and the O-line started to press and get out of sync.

It's a matter of speculation for us because we're not in the meeting rooms for a lot of the plays, but, I personally, from what I've seen, do not believe we run the majority of our pass plays as AR plays. From what I've seen, they're there, but we almost always have a check down. From that point it's on Kaep to understand where his check down is. Every play has an outlet for him, whether it be a check down, his own legs, or it's designed to get him out of the pocket to throw the ball away if the play is completely snuffed out.

As for your first question about the complexity of the playbook.

A few years ago Mike Martz's playbook from the 2001 Rams got leaked online. It's around 1,000 plays. Understand, this was the offseason playbook. This is what most offenses start with. By the time training camp starts, they trim the playbook down a little, and then, per the gameplan each week they pull active plays for that week. usually about 60 plays involved in the gameplan. The QB has to know each one from memory. Plays are set up in a progression, they outline the formation, the shifts/motions if any, the blocking assignment, and the receiver routes. Within that, the QB has to remember the step drop for the play(if a pass play)3,5, or 7 step, what the read progression is for that play and what the check out option is. From there he has to understand the tendency of the opposing D for that down and distance and their tendency to disguise so he can make a wise decision for his cadence. It's a lot to digest for that many plays.

In effect, you have to be pretty smart to run any NFL offense. That's why you see a lot of guys who are successful in college fail to operate in the NFL. But, they do this every day. It's also why it was such a bid deal that A Smith had to learn a new one EVERY year. He's having to learn completely new nomenclature(like in one system zip means the Z receiver goes in motion and in another Zip is a formation) and all the plays with everything. I can't even imagine having to do that.

As far as the plays being blown up thing. It's a mixture of all those things at some point. The plays are complex a lot of times but they have to be in a lot of cases because you're playing against guys who practice and play the game as a living, not something they can only do a certain amount of hours a week due to NCAA rules

Hope that helps. Just my humble opinion. If you need any more clarity or I was muddy on anything or didn't explain fully just let me know.

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying variety for varieties sake is good. What I'm saying is that it keeps the defense off balance. On know it doesn't always seem like we have a high-powered offense but, the way Roman designs his gameplans, it's something that will take a while for all the moving parts to come together, but when they do, it'll click big time.

You're far from the first to state this, but the reality is, we're going on about 3 seasons now and the same issues keep popping, change of QB's, still the same problems. This isn't a team that has gone through a myriad of massive changes on offense, the OL is largely the same, same RB, same TE, Crabtree is still here...etc. It really shouldn't take 3+ seasons to develop some form of consistency and get everybody on the same page on offense. At some point, your offense is doing more harm to your own players than it was to opposing defense's who have largely learned to ignore a lot of the pre-snap motion and shifting.


I just don't see it, I don't see the timely playcalling to really attack a defense's weaknesses, I see the same mixed bag and the same types of struggles, particularly in the redzone like they had against Seattle and Carolina. If this offense played anywhere close to the level of where its potential suggests, this team might have one loss at worst right now.

'The Colt's game was one that I know frustrated a lot of us because of how the run game seemed to disappear, but, I did go back and look at that game and we had a few series where the play call was right against the defense and there would be a miscue in the execution from one person or another and it would cause a negative or static play that would set the whole thing back. Indy, in the 2nd half, changed their gameplan to give them better defense against the sweep plays that were working so well. This slowed down the pass rush a little to where it looked like the pass would be open. Indy then doubled boldin from those sets and VD was out of the game. They tried some different WR screens and things that didn't work. They were trying to hit some of those quick outs and such to beat the off coverage but Williams ran some really poor routes. Then they put it Patton and he didn't run them any sharper. They were the right routes, but they weren't sharp or really run well.

Looking back at that game, I saw a lot of long-developing passing plays, the shorter routes were far and few between. With the way Indy was playing, they were ripe to being lit up on shorter passes, screens, etc. I also do fully believe that they gave up on the run too early. Teams lately have been gashing them with the run and their defense really hasn't changed all that much, its the same defense, with the same weaknesses as they had against the 49ers. I do think that they tried to outsmart themselves instead of continually running the ball, regardless of what Indy was doing, it was clear that they could not consistently shut down the run. How else do you explain Gore only having...what....6 carries in the entire second half? That's not even keeping the defense honest at that point.

For example, when Boldin runs his out route he'll try and get the CB to turn his hips in; or when he runs his curls he does a good job of making it look just like his deep routes. When Williams ran his routes, he didn't get the CB to turn his hips in any way or you could always tell by his 2nd step and his hips that he was running a short route. Williams would have best been used in the slot where he can use his quickness. But, we didn't have many other options at WR.

I also don't buy that response simply because I see teams make do with far lesser talent at WR. You'd think that the 49ers were the only team in the NFL working with average or lesser talent at WR. Look at what some other teams have had to work with at WR this season and found a way to make it work, either scheming guys open or consistently throwing the ball to them enough to get them into a rhythm. Why is it a guy like Ginn, who this coaching staff could never properly utilize, goes to a playoff contender like Carolina and becomes a useful player for them? Meanwhile on the 49ers, McDonald drops one pass and doesn't get another target until like the next game. If these guys are having trouble running routes, then that goes on the coaching staff for not having them ready, once again reiterating my point about Morton.

It had been a back and forth game up to that point and we were winning the field position battle. We had Indy backed up to their own 7 yard line and they faced a 3rd and something like 15 or 17 yards. They ran one of those have 2 receivers run down the field and block and the crosser gets the ball follows the blockers. On that play we had 2 guys miss a tackle and another guy take a horrible angle on the play(very unusual for our team) and it allowed Indy to get a 1st down. Willis also left the game that play with his groin injury. Indy was able to move the ball another 35 yards downfield and keep the ball for another 4-5 minutes. They didn't score but they changed the field position and tired out the defense a lot on that drive.

This team often wins the field position battle, until the defense gets worn down and the floodgates open up. This offense has been too much of a liability this season and in past seasons for me to buy into the notion of Roman, uber-playcalling genius. This defense held up very well in the first Seattle game but with the offense unable to get anything going, eventually they collapsed, similarly in the Indy game as well. Its not enough for this team just to win the field position battle, they have to do with it, when they get the ball in a favorable position, they need to be able to consistently drive the ball downfield and punch it in. I understand that there will be ups and downs with a young quarterback who is very much developing but I've seen way too many opportunities blown this season, the team getting away from their strengths on offense....getting away from the strengths of Kaepernick as a quarterback as well. New Orleans basically built their entire gameplan around daring the 49ers to pass the ball and get it out in a hurry against their aggressive defense and a lot of the same issues that I've been complaining about occurred there as well, more long drop-backs in the face of an aggressive pass rush, trouble getting the playcalls in on time...etc...etc.

We got the ball, got stuffed on a run, then had a busted screen play, then Anthony Davis gave up quick pressure on a play where a receiver was open. Indy got the ball right back and kept if for quite and while and completely tired out the defense. You could feel the whole momentum of the game swing. I don't put that one on Roman too much. But, it's just my opinion.

These things happen to every team though. You know not every play will go perfectly, yet other teams manage to have a consistent offensive philosophy, you know what they're going to do, and they do it anyways. I don't see that with this team, they're a running team....that gets away from the run, and even then they tend to try and get too cute at times, like running Dixon out wide a couple of games ago, right after getting the ball back. Does the blame go on Dixon for not executing or for Roman having the slowest running back on the team run to the outside? Handing off to Hunter from the pistol, rolling outside, that play must have an average of -3 yards a carry this season yet they continually run it in the hopes that somehow the defense will be unable to stop it but its get to a point where, you can run a play 30 times and on the 30th time you make a 30 yard gain, was it worth the previous 29 times where you lost yards or gained nothing? I see way too much up and down, one very good playcall, followed by something that leaves me scratching my head.


This is not a team that should ever struggle on offense, you've got VD, Boldin, Crabtree, Gore, weapons that other teams would kill for. The rhetoric of "it will all eventually come together and it will be awesome" was good in the first season, now we're almost done with the 3rd season and yet this team still struggles to get the playcalls in on time, still struggles to snap the ball on time, there's been no player development at WR, they still struggle in the redzone in crucial situations against quality opponents.

I keep hearing the promises about progress but when it comes to the playcalling, I don't see it. I see Roman coming up with some very creative plays, but also some hare-brained playcalls and the whole thing is largely inconsistent. I see a guy who is still largely inexperienced as an NFL playcaller, trying to find his footing. I'd LOVE to see this offense come up with some consistency, right now it almost feels like its an accident when they are able to move the ball well. I'd especially LOVE to see them be able to make some better adjustments, going back through the Indy game, as well as the Carolina game, I saw both those teams make adjustments after the half, I didn't really see the same thing from the 49ers on offense at all.


The idea that an offensive coordinator needs 3+ seasons to get things to "click" is unsupported. Look at Cleveland this season and what Norv Turner has been able to do with scrub QB's, one very good receiver and no running game to speak of. The Browns are 15th in the NFL in total yards with everyone knowing exactly to whom the ball is going to. Look at the Cardinals in their first season with Bruce Arians. The Eagles in their first season with an entirely new offensive system. It doesn't have to be this complicated, it shouldn't be this complicated.

I agree on some levels and don't on others. All I can speak to is what I see on film. Don't get me wrong I'm not trying to give anyone excuses here, just trying to make sure we know it's not all on one guy. I've seen a lot of plays that we ran that didn't work and it's never one consistent thing that keeps the offense from clicking. When you look at the film, I know you said you don't buy it, but, you really can see they are really close to putting it all together. By put it all together I mean all the guys play at a high level at the same time. Not necessarily that everyone finally understands the system or the playbook but that they get in rhythm with each other. Yes these guys have played together a lot but there's also been a lot of in/out at key positions like QB and WR. Yeah the Browns may put up some numbers, but they're also behind in a lot of games and have to throw against prevent defenses that inflate their numbers. How many wins do the Browns have?

Thanks again,Jonny, just superb...and understandable.

Great takes, jonnydel. There was discussion in the Roman thread about the reasons the offense is lagging this season, and there were a few factors considered. In your observation, how would you break down the 'blame' as to why the offense is lackluster this season?

- Play calling
- Quarterback
- WRs
- Oline

Feel free to add more factors, but do not remove any. I posted my percentages in that thread, but want to hear your breakdown in percentages.

Johnnydel, you have shed the light on all of the webzone. Three things I've noticed when you started this amazing thread.
1. A lot less complaints in the Roman thread.
2. A lot less complaints in the Kap thread on how he sucks and doesn't goes thru his progressions.
3. The zone is a lot more positive now days, or maybe the win over the Seahawks did that but Im sure this thread has a lot to do with it too.

I really think you should considered coaching, make use of that talent brah.

Let's play a game of madden!

Ok, first like everyone else I want to thank you johnny for continuing to post your and observations here. I think that this is only thread many of are reading right now. i can't recall any other thread where I have literally read every word, much to the detriment of my job performance. So thanks for your time, observations and analysis. I hope you continue to post.

I think we can get a collection bucket going if you need money to subscribe to coache's film package for all games.

Anyway, I had just written this huge huge post and lost it all due to explorer hiccuping before i could hit the post button.

ARGGGGGHHHHH!

However I will proved the short version here.

SUMMARY: We are underperforming on Offense by a wide margin. Why? Like other posters i am suspicious of it's a little thing here, a little thing there.

Speculation:

1) We do not focus on down and distance as a driving force for play selection. You mentioned that Roman is an OC who is concerned about getting first downs and moving the chains -- that is the opposite impression that I have. We don't approach play sequencing with the fundamental notion that we have three plays to advance the football ten yards. It's more like, we have three chances to get a play longer than ten yards. So that strikes me as fundamentally risky, not conservative, and anti-WCO. Is this accurate?

2) You mention that our OC likes to use plays to "set up" one or more defenders throughout the game for a big play. I think this is consistent with item 1) above. Could this be a risky influence in our play design because relying on any one play is risky on a professional football field. Too many things can go wrong to have, say, 3 or 4 players make movements on 5 or 6 plays throughout the game just to "set up" one or two kill plays. It could be a risky, low reward strategy that takes the focus away from the offense's immediate down/distance objectives.

3) using 50 formations to run one play -- this has been commented on for over a year know. Is this more or less helpful than having one look from which you run 50 plays? I think both have their place. does all this emphasis on formation shifting and personnel specialization shorten the amount of time the qb and OTHER PLAYERS have to orient themselves to the field and also reduce the cohesion, the communication of the offensive personnel among themselves on the field. Maybe this is playing into the effects you so often quote of having " little things " go wrong to kill this play or that play. You mention that quite a bit.

Also, it seems like the eclectic formation approach has lost effectiveness in getting the other team to show pre snap looks -- I don't see a lot of panic or confusion on the other side when we do all our shifts so much. They sometimes see the formations as a tell, seemingly, then blow up the play that they have read. Sometimes, that's what looks like is going on.

I am pressing the post button now so I DONT LOSE THIS TOO.

At the end of the day, we are very near the bottom in statistical categories with an excellent defense. This has to be corrected if we're going anywhere. I am not optimistic about being 13 weeks into the football season and still being in correction mode.

As other posters have requested, please look at last weeks browns pats game and let us know what you think of what norv did. especially the 1st half.

thanks!

Originally posted by jonnydel:
I agree on some levels and don't on others. All I can speak to is what I see on film. Don't get me wrong I'm not trying to give anyone excuses here, just trying to make sure we know it's not all on one guy. I've seen a lot of plays that we ran that didn't work and it's never one consistent thing that keeps the offense from clicking. When you look at the film, I know you said you don't buy it, but, you really can see they are really close to putting it all together. By put it all together I mean all the guys play at a high level at the same time. Not necessarily that everyone finally understands the system or the playbook but that they get in rhythm with each other. Yes these guys have played together a lot but there's also been a lot of in/out at key positions like QB and WR. Yeah the Browns may put up some numbers, but they're also behind in a lot of games and have to throw against prevent defenses that inflate their numbers. How many wins do the Browns have?

With the QB change I believe the installment/sync of the offense was set back considerably. The former QB was experienced, having learned new systems every two years; whereas the new QB is a babe in the woods as an NFL QB. So to me, this offense may be close to popping but like every offense--runs the risk of being overly complicated in order to stay ahead, or will become predictable as teams analyze our tendencies. Right now it seems that Roman/Harbaugh are over-complicating the game plan in order to keep from being predictable.

I don't have an issue with multiple formations except that they seem to change personnel too often and folks don't get into a rhythm. Paso or Phoenix mentioned McDonald dropping a pass and not getting another chance...which is the opposite of what you want to do with a receiver. So it appears Roman is calling plays without taking into account the players and their needs, ignoring the mental aspects of the game. It might be CK calling off plays so, as you point out, it's not on one guy.

You comment about it not being one thing is why I love football! It is a most complex sport and offers such an opportunity to create variations! I really do not like the offense as it is constituted right now and prefer the WCO as first designed--though it was never a static set of plays--and hope as CK gets more experience the team will be able to run just about any play at any time.

My concerns in no particular order:

1) CK's lack of experience and inability to hit short passes consistently--he has been missing wide open dump offs--which you just can't afford!
2) OLine is built with a hodge-podge of player skills. No consistency. Some have limited mobility, others are very mobile.
3) No consistency with WRs--Crabtree and Manningham being out for most of the year has set back the offense--others did not step up to help Boldin.
4) Gore being limited as a receiver--not used as in previous years--he can catch the ball just fine.
5) Play calling--so tired of watching Gore run into an eight man front. They need to attack the outside more when teams stack. They have two backs who can do this fairly well--James and Kaepernick--but James is so seldom used it would be a tell. Gore is so unlikely to attack outside that teams can afford to stack. They need to use more plays like the QB option (even Montana ran more of these than CK is doing this year). Are they saving these for the playoffs? Or are they protecting the franchise?
6) Overall offensive design--I love the pass to set up the run. I believe it is logical and effective. I hate the Jumbo--"we're going to cram this down your throat" offense which I believe only works against teams with inferior defenses...and is Neanderthal in nature--good enough for Singletary...and that's why he's gone.

Thanks again for your insightful posts Jonnydel, you have added much credit to this site and have driven us to logical debate as opposed to circular arguments...most of us know each other too well!

Originally posted by dtg_9er:

1) CK's lack of experience and inability to hit short passes consistently--he has been missing wide open dump offs--which you just can't afford!

This one bothers me the most. There have been innumerable times they he's had a checkdown option wide open along the sideline and he instead tries to rifle a pass into double coverage. I know it's easier said than done and that playing quarterback is a very difficult thing to do considering the limited amount of time you have back there, but this is one of those areas I feel he could make huge improvements in.

Originally posted by theduke85:

Originally posted by dtg_9er:

1) CK's lack of experience and inability to hit short passes consistently--he has been missing wide open dump offs--which you just can't afford!

This one bothers me the most. There have been innumerable times they he's had a checkdown option wide open along the sideline and he instead tries to rifle a pass into double coverage. I know it's easier said than done and that playing quarterback is a very difficult thing to do considering the limited amount of time you have back there, but this is one of those areas I feel he could make huge improvements in.

Yes, it's almost as if he knows he has strengths and weaknesses and tries to avoid the difficult passes. The edge near the sideline and middle are so...not good! Harbaugh has to recognize this and hopefully will work with him in the off season. No Atlanta this year! Stay in SF and develop your touch passing game, not your weight lifting!