Offseason All22 Film Study

Originally posted by thl408:

It's crazy to think Rathman had 73 catches in a season. And for 8.4 ypc, so he's moving the ball. Wish I knew what I was watching back then. No FB will ever get 73 catches in today's game, no way.

I don't think I saw Juice make a catch on a Texas concept. Maybe just don't remember but if so it wasn't many times. It's too good a play not to use. Easy throw, chance for 4 yards. Against a Cover1 blitz it can go big. Kyle will for sure get his RBs running some angle/arrow routes.
He'll use the angle route in a Follow concept too:
http://www.49erswebzone.com/forum/niners/181749-offseason-all22-film-study/page51/#post752

Hyde can do some things with the ball. Texas vs Cover1 blitz

Here's a couple more FB-centric plays from the good ole days...


Both are really trail type plays.....they each kinda combine the Drive Concept with he angle route. We really did use to wear this sort of s**t out from a ton of different formations.

Originally posted by Niners816:

Originally posted by thl408:
It's crazy to think Rathman had 73 catches in a season. And for 8.4 ypc, so he's moving the ball. Wish I knew what I was watching back then. No FB will ever get 73 catches in today's game, no way.

I don't think I saw Juice make a catch on a Texas concept. Maybe just don't remember but if so it wasn't many times. It's too good a play not to use. Easy throw, chance for 4 yards. Against a Cover1 blitz it can go big. Kyle will for sure get his RBs running some angle/arrow routes.
He'll use the angle route in a Follow concept too:
http://www.49erswebzone.com/forum/niners/181749-offseason-all22-film-study/page51/#post752

Hyde can do some things with the ball. Texas vs Cover1 blitz

Here's a couple more FB-centric plays from the good ole days...


Both are really trail type plays.....they each kinda combine the Drive Concept with he angle route. We really did use to wear this sort of s**t out from a ton of different formations.

Looking at the stats for Kyle's CLE offense when Hoyer was QB, they didn't use RBs in the passing game very much. Not sure if that's by gameplan or if Hoyer doesn't target RBs. He's only played partial seasons in CLE, HOU, and CHI so it's hard to see how much he targets RBs by looking at end of season totals.

Originally posted by thl408:

Looking at the stats for Kyle's CLE offense when Hoyer was QB, they didn't use RBs in the passing game very much. Not sure if that's by gameplan or if Hoyer doesn't target RBs. He's only played partial seasons in CLE, HOU, and CHI so it's hard to see how much he targets RBs by looking at end of season totals.

I was looking at Kyle's statistical profile and really his only years where the HB was a top 3 target was his last 2 years in ATL. I just think a lot of those traditional back/FB passes from our heyday offense get swallowed up by slot WR.

Originally posted by thl408:
It's crazy to think Rathman had 73 catches in a season. And for 8.4 ypc, so he's moving the ball. Wish I knew what I was watching back then. No FB will ever get 73 catches in today's game, no way.

I think it's for a couple of reasons. These pass rushers today in the NFL are so much faster now, they get to the QB faster, and these FBs just don't have enough time to run longer routes like Rathman did. Also, you have so many LBs now that run a 4.4 4.5, much easier for them now to keep up with a FB that really hasn't changed that much athletically , basically it's still a bunch of white guys playing FB

This is to play off the Cover 3 variations in the Concepts thread:
http://www.49erswebzone.com/forum/niners/182144-all22-analysis-coverages-amp-concepts/page16/#post228

This is one way to bust Cover 3 Mable. With the CB locked in man coverage, there is one less possible defender to cover a deep zone. Defenses can adjust for this by having the curl/flat defender carry any vertical route upfield.


The WR runs a short crossing route and takes the CB with him. What the CB should do is pass coverage of the WR off to one of the Hook defenders. In this case, blue LB.


Attack the deep 1/3 zone that the Mable CB would have defended, had there been no Mable call, with two verticals. The curl/flat defender helps defend one of the verticals by matching and carrying it upfield, but there's another vertical unaccounted for.


This is a Kyle Shanahan playcall (ATL 2016).

This is a beauty. It's basically a four verts concept with a drag underneath. However, due to formation choice he uses a Wheel route to comprise the 4th vert and along with that underneath drag you get some good defense contortion.

Professor thl in da house.

I really like how you illustrated the sets and how to beat them. Terrific stuff right here.

You and Niners816 should do a battle royale game plan...816 calls an offensive play and you defense and both post blindly, and JD determines who wins each play based on the play calls of each...then vice versa.

Originally posted by NCommand:
Professor thl in da house.

I really like how you illustrated the sets and how to beat them. Terrific stuff right here.

You and Niners816 should do a battle royale game plan...816 calls an offensive play and you defense and both post blindly, and JD determines who wins each play based on the play calls of each...then vice versa.

This will allow us to be more specific with the kind of Cover3 being played by this 2017 defense. It could get repetitive to just say that the 49ers played Cover3. Now that some of the different ways it can be played are listed, we'll know how much Saleh is mixing things up.
If I was coaching against 816 I'd just call a bunch of Cover2 Zone to counter his short passing WCO concepts.

Originally posted by thl408:

This will allow us to be more specific with the kind of Cover3 being played by this 2017 defense. It could get repetitive to just say that the 49ers played Cover3. Now that some of the different ways it can be played are listed, we'll know how much Saleh is mixing things up.
If I was coaching against 816 I'd just call a bunch of Cover2 Zone to counter his short passing WCO concepts.

I'd have to dial up some smash concepts and some Texas stuff then Seriously though, the cover 2 is tough because it takes big boy throws to hit the holes. You have that spot behind the corner and before the safety gets over and you have to try to split the safeties.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Professor thl in da house.

I really like how you illustrated the sets and how to beat them. Terrific stuff right here.

You and Niners816 should do a battle royale game plan...816 calls an offensive play and you defense and both post blindly, and JD determines who wins each play based on the play calls of each...then vice versa.

I'd like to see how they'd argue the route adjustments after the playcall.

Originally posted by thl408:

This is to play off the Cover 3 variations in the Concepts thread:
http://www.49erswebzone.com/forum/niners/182144-all22-analysis-coverages-amp-concepts/page16/#post228

This is one way to bust Cover 3 Mable. With the CB locked in man coverage, there is one less possible defender to cover a deep zone. Defenses can adjust for this by having the curl/flat defender carry any vertical route upfield.


The WR runs a short crossing route and takes the CB with him. What the CB should do is pass coverage of the WR off to one of the Hook defenders. In this case, blue LB.


Attack the deep 1/3 zone that the Mable CB would have defended, had there been no Mable call, with two verticals. The curl/flat defender helps defend one of the verticals by matching and carrying it upfield, but there's another vertical unaccounted for.


This is a Kyle Shanahan playcall (ATL 2016).

Not to argue too much but ibthink it's a blown coverage by Sherman. It looks like Sea is trying to show man-coverage by moving Sherman but then playing a "mable" but Sherman screwed up. In the mable vs a 3x1 it's the single side that's mable. Side Sherman was is the 3 side with the 2 TE's. You never want the 3 side to be mable because of this very thing. The only way to threaten the mable side with this is a really long developing play and you have to have a receiver that will outrun the MLB and FS or a RB who will outrun the WLB.

Originally posted by Niners816:

Originally posted by thl408:

This will allow us to be more specific with the kind of Cover3 being played by this 2017 defense. It could get repetitive to just say that the 49ers played Cover3. Now that some of the different ways it can be played are listed, we'll know how much Saleh is mixing things up.
If I was coaching against 816 I'd just call a bunch of Cover2 Zone to counter his short passing WCO concepts.

I'd have to dial up some smash concepts and some Texas stuff then Seriously though, the cover 2 is tough because it takes big boy throws to hit the holes. You have that spot behind the corner and before the safety gets over and you have to try to split the safeties.

It has begun! LOL

Thl...this will be awesome to reference and revisit. I would imagine, we'll get a big hint in pre season since this is a new install and there isn't a ton of variants and no need to hide our cards.

Originally posted by Giedi:

I'd like to see how they'd argue the route adjustments after the playcall.

Haha, they'd have to predetermine the receiver ala HaRoman and can't vary from it.

Originally posted by jonnydel:
Not to argue too much but ibthink it's a blown coverage by Sherman. It looks like Sea is trying to show man-coverage by moving Sherman but then playing a "mable" but Sherman screwed up. In the mable vs a 3x1 it's the single side that's mable. Side Sherman was is the 3 side with the 2 TE's. You never want the 3 side to be mable because of this very thing. The only way to threaten the mable side with this is a really long developing play and you have to have a receiver that will outrun the MLB and FS or a RB who will outrun the WLB.

It does seem odd to have a Mable call in this situation (3x2), and on the trips side. Perhaps Sherman missed the audible to nix the Mable call. I know Sherman was shadowing Julio around the field in this game (regular season 2016). Julio was split wide outside the numbers where the Mable call might be called. BUT, like you said, it's on the trips side, which is a no no.

"The only way to threaten the mable side with this is a really long developing play and you have to have a receiver that will outrun the MLB and FS or a RB who will outrun the WLB". You're talking about running crossers from the trips side to the Mable side, trying to outrun any defenders that are matching crossers? Yeah that's a very long developing play.

If all this is right, that Sherman should not have been in man, then the play above is a bad example of how to bust Mable. It's more a blown coverage than it is an example of the defense doing things right and getting beat by scheming.

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by jonnydel:

Not to argue too much but ibthink it's a blown coverage by Sherman. It looks like Sea is trying to show man-coverage by moving Sherman but then playing a "mable" but Sherman screwed up. In the mable vs a 3x1 it's the single side that's mable. Side Sherman was is the 3 side with the 2 TE's. You never want the 3 side to be mable because of this very thing. The only way to threaten the mable side with this is a really long developing play and you have to have a receiver that will outrun the MLB and FS or a RB who will outrun the WLB.

It does seem odd to have a Mable call in this situation (3x2), and on the trips side. Perhaps Sherman missed the audible to nix the Mable call. I know Sherman was shadowing Julio around the field in this game (regular season 2016). Julio was split wide outside the numbers where the Mable call might be called. BUT, like you said, it's on the trips side, which is a no no.

"The only way to threaten the mable side with this is a really long developing play and you have to have a receiver that will outrun the MLB and FS or a RB who will outrun the WLB". You're talking about running crossers from the trips side to the Mable side, trying to outrun any defenders that are matching crossers? Yeah that's a very long developing play.

If all this is right, that Sherman should not have been in man, then the play above is a bad example of how to bust Mable. It's more a blown coverage than it is an example of the defense doing things right and getting beat by scheming.

Yeah, it is, but, we did it against them with up gabba and McD. But, it took a long time to develop. We did it off PA and happened to have really good protection and Gabbert threw with a lot of anticipation. It's definitely not a play you can bread and butter and hope to live off of. Plus, you have to outrun the LB. In one of your cover 3 cutups in the other film thread you'll see that. Take a look at it, there's the MLB running with a WR down the middle in a crosser- that's classic "mable" coverage stuff.