Offseason Film analysis thread - Passing concepts

Originally posted by sdaddy101269:
Jonnydel // Thl

I STRONGLY believe Seattles defense is the reason we picked up Bush. When watching the Super Bowl I noticed the routes NE ran with the RB Vereen against Seattles LBs to open up those intermediate routes. I believe Vereen had 11 catches and Edelman had 9? Please let me know what you guys think.

I like what you're saying.

I think with Bush and Torrey Smith, we might finally rattle that annoying defense up north.

Also, to be fair to Kaep here are numbers of other teams QBs:

Aaron Rodgers - 23-33 189 1td 1 int
Aaron Rodgers game two:
19-34 178 1 TD 2 INT

Alex Smith 11-16 108 0 and 0

Shaun Hill 26-37 243 0 and 2. Note: RBs had 13 catches

Newton 23-36 246 2 and 2

Sanchez 10-20 96 2 and 1

Brady 37-50 328 4 and 2
( RBs had 11 catches)

As you can see, statically, MOST QBs struggle against Seattle. However you notice that successful stats have a lot of passes to the RBs.

Originally posted by genus49:

Originally posted by jonnydel:
Here's an example of CK's struggles in in the "smash" concept.


This was late in the 1st Sea game, Sherman's 2nd INT - it was a gift from CK to seal the game. I really like the design of this play, it gives CK 2 concepts in 1 to work. He gets 2 curls along with the inside corner route to work a smash concept with a horizontal curls stretch added in. On these plays you should always be "alert" for the corner route against man-coverage. You see it's man coverage pre-snap based off of Dick's alignment. He's in press, squared up on the receiver, this means man coverage - along with the alignment of the LB's. They're going to "Spy" CK as well.


You see just after the snap how the corner route has an advantage. VD's working against Chancellor and Chancellor's in a tough spot having to defend both the mid-in and corner routes.


an aside - If Ck was deep in his film study, he would've seen what I've seen from Dick Sherman - that is, in man coverage, Sherman's COD isn't great. He's very susceptible to curls in man coverage. The one route you don't throw against Sherman in man coverage is the streak.... You see here how it held true, Johnson is able to get decent seperation on Sherman and is turned completely around, ready for a ball while Sherman is still face the other way....

anyhoo, you see how Ck has a nice pocket to step up in to. Staley did what he should, he took the speed rush upfield past the QB. Davis loses Chancellor with a nifty in/out move.


CK has a nice pocket and Davis has lost his man towards the corner, but, instead, he's fleeing the pocket. also, by now, Sherman's ready to drive on the curl route that CK is bailing out towards.


Davis beat Chancellor so bad that he fell down. VD probably goes in for a TD if CK stayed in the pocket and worked the play. Instead, he bails out to the opposite side with the "spy" waiting for him. I've omitted the last part of the play as it can be disturbing for some viewers. But, CK basically throws the ball straight at Sherman.

Thanks for the cut ups but I think some of your comments are a bit presumptuous.Still shots in here kind of taint the play.

If Kap isn't moving towards Sherman's side I'm not sure Davis beats Chancellor so easily. Also in that 3rd pic where you say he should've thrown to Stevie when he had Sherman in a bad spot it's hard to say what Kap is looking at and certainly his mechanics would've been quite out of whack if he threw right then and there. Sherman may not have the quickest change of direction but it's not as cut and dry imo to say Kap could've looked there adjusted his stance and made a good throw there before Sherman got to that spot.

There's no question Kap needs to make better decisions in these situations but I just don't think some of these statements are so cut and dry based on still shots.

Well, with my mac, I can't really do GIF's but, Davis beat chancellor on a little in/out move - as I mentioned. It had nothing to do with where Kap was going as, in man-coverage with a spy, the defenders will be watching their man almost exclusively. Also, when a defense presents man-coverage, you want to throw the ball to the corner route as it has a high probability of beating the man coverage.

If you don't want to take my word for it:
"The smash concept is a great concept vs. cover 1 because the FS is in the middle of the field and will have a difficult time getting over the top of the corner route to help out. Defensive coaches teach man technique corners to play inside leverage to take away the inside breaking routes, so that leaves them susceptible to sideline breaking routs such as corners (also known as a flag route) and comebacks. The corners can either be ran by #1 with a reduced split or by a #2 or #3 receiver, depending on the best matchup. You can do what you want with the receivers not running the corner.

http://movethemchains.blogspot.com/2010/01/cover-1-and-cover-3-beaters.html

2nd - about the Sherman note. My point isn't that he should've been able to throw with whacky mechanics. My point was, it's about the pre-snap read. He had 2 routes that he could've chosen to defeat the man coverage. He had the corner route - on a 5 step drop with a hitch, or the curl route, which can be a 3 or 5 step drop. Based off the film I've seen from Sherman, I could have told you he was in man-coverage. He never presses up on the line, square to the receiver, unless he's in man-coverage. He'll often try and disguise his zone coverage as man until the last second, but, savvy QB's can pick up on it. When he's in man-coverage, he struggles against curl routes - it's just what I've seen. So, if CK was gonna hit the curl route, he has to adjust his drop and mechanics - he didn't. If he doesn't, he HAS to go to the corner route - which was open. Instead, he bailed out of the pocket early and into the "spy" and threw a pick on the play right to Sherman....Either way, he F'd up the play - it doesn't mean he's doomed to failure for the rest of his career - but, the "smash" is a play that he struggles with..... a lot. Whereas, when AS was here, he ran it very well. It's a great play to work off of some other passing concepts - if he can master it.

Originally posted by sdaddy101269:
Jonnydel // Thl

I STRONGLY believe Seattles defense is the reason we picked up Bush. When watching the Super Bowl I noticed the routes NE ran with the RB Vereen against Seattles LBs to open up those intermediate routes. I believe Vereen had 11 catches and Edelman had 9? Please let me know what you guys think.

I definitely think you're not wrong. We had quite a few RB passes open in the games we've played against Sea. The circle concept or "texas" route as it was often called by Bill Walsh, was used a couple of times to success. But, there were other times where CK was too focused on the concepts working downfield that he didn't make it to his checkdown in time - or, he took himself as the checkdown. The way NE utilized the RB's wasn't as much as a result of purposeful incorporation of the RB's, it's taking what the defense is giving you. Sea, by the way they play, will give the RB's and checkdowns to you, but you have to get there in your progressions very quickly before they can close too much.

Originally posted by sdaddy101269:
Also, to be fair to Kaep here are numbers of other teams QBs:

Aaron Rodgers - 23-33 189 1td 1 int
Aaron Rodgers game two:
19-34 178 1 TD 2 INT

Alex Smith 11-16 108 0 and 0

Shaun Hill 26-37 243 0 and 2. Note: RBs had 13 catches

Newton 23-36 246 2 and 2

Sanchez 10-20 96 2 and 1

Brady 37-50 328 4 and 2
( RBs had 11 catches)

As you can see, statically, MOST QBs struggle against Seattle. However you notice that successful stats have a lot of passes to the RBs.

for sure, to be fair as well though, I want to make sure that everybody remembers what I wrote in the OP. I'm pulling plays from Seattle because they show the weaknesses more clearly than most of the other teams. Most other times, he'll still struggle with the same concepts, it's just usually more glaring against Seattle.

Given the limited sample, I see a little more sophistication in the passing concepts. However, the route combinations are still very simple, multiple curl routes, outs, stops, etc. Very few crossing routes, deep in's, etc.

Originally posted by jonnydel:

Originally posted by sdaddy101269:
Jonnydel // Thl

I STRONGLY believe Seattles defense is the reason we picked up Bush. When watching the Super Bowl I noticed the routes NE ran with the RB Vereen against Seattles LBs to open up those intermediate routes. I believe Vereen had 11 catches and Edelman had 9? Please let me know what you guys think.

I definitely think you're not wrong. We had quite a few RB passes open in the games we've played against Sea. The circle concept or "texas" route as it was often called by Bill Walsh, was used a couple of times to success. But, there were other times where CK was too focused on the concepts working downfield that he didn't make it to his checkdown in time - or, he took himself as the checkdown. The way NE utilized the RB's wasn't as much as a result of purposeful incorporation of the RB's, it's taking what the defense is giving you. Sea, by the way they play, will give the RB's and checkdowns to you, but you have to get there in your progressions very quickly before they can close too much.

The key to throwing to the RBs versus SEA's defense is to hit them in stride and give them a chance to pick 3-4 yards of RAC. Like mentioned, one foot in front of the receiver. SEA is a predominantly cover3 team. One weakness of cover3 is that there are only 4 underneath zone defenders. SEA accounts for this by drafting some of of the fastest LBs in the league, and they're pretty smart too (well coached). Then there's Chancellor who plays like a small LB. So there are the four underneath zone defenderst.

A checkdown can be thrown to in two ways. A RB performs a check release, then sits down in a spot waiting to be targeted, or he delays then flares out and is hit in stride. The way Gore was normally used as a check release will not work versus SEA as he sits down and waits. SEA LBs close too quickly and no RAC can be had this way.

This is what will not work versus SEA because their LBs will close too quickly, and tackle well.

---------------------------------

This is similar to the Texas route JD alluded to. This was not used in a Texas concept though, but it is a RB circle route. Generally speaking, I don't think this will be too effective because defenses almost always assign a spy to mirror Kap, therefore putting a defender right in the middle of the field. Notice Gore is hit somewhat in stride, as opposed to the play above where he's sitting down when catching the pass. Two different types of routes over the middle.

----------------------------------------

So with a spy in the middle of the field, it makes sense to attack the flats with Bush and give him space where he can work. This is how much the SEA defense disrespects the 49er's flats. Why defend it if they never attack it?


I've been b***hing about attacking the flats for over a year because teams love to clog the middle of the field, due to the 49ers running between the tackles (so 8 in the box), and a spy on Kap on passing plays. Notice on this play, the pass to the drag forces the WR to not be able to catch in stride, limiting any chance at RAC, which is what a drag route is all about, RAC. So it's one thing to utilize Bush on short routes, but he must be hit in stride, not at a stand still.

^^^the flats have been begging to be exploited for the last 4 years. It further adds a horizontal element to the passing game and makes a defense defend the whole field. Hell in the old niners playbook the flat was the first option on spot.



This is from the 1994 pass install.

Originally posted by jonnydel:

Originally posted by sdaddy101269:
Jonnydel // Thl

I STRONGLY believe Seattles defense is the reason we picked up Bush. When watching the Super Bowl I noticed the routes NE ran with the RB Vereen against Seattles LBs to open up those intermediate routes. I believe Vereen had 11 catches and Edelman had 9? Please let me know what you guys think.

I definitely think you're not wrong. We had quite a few RB passes open in the games we've played against Sea. The circle concept or "texas" route as it was often called by Bill Walsh, was used a couple of times to success. But, there were other times where CK was too focused on the concepts working downfield that he didn't make it to his checkdown in time - or, he took himself as the checkdown. The way NE utilized the RB's wasn't as much as a result of purposeful incorporation of the RB's, it's taking what the defense is giving you. Sea, by the way they play, will give the RB's and checkdowns to you, but you have to get there in your progressions very quickly before they can close too much.

Totally agree. Another thing you can do...that Seattle did to us for several TD's with (Lynch/Michael/Turbin) is utilize the RB's as primary receivers. This is what NE did against the Hawks...not always were the RB's the last resort. Many times they were the primary target. I think we'll see a lot of plays drawn up for Bush/Hunter this year..including Ellington out of the backfield.

Originally posted by Niners816:
^^^the flats have been begging to be exploited for the last 4 years. It further adds a horizontal element to the passing game and makes a defense defend the whole field. Hell in the old niners playbook the flat was the first option on spot.



This is from the 1994 pass install.

Just saw this. Soooo this!

I would love for the above play/concept to be installed. As with every concept, it can be wrapped up in multiple formation. With the old hammer plays I love that it was essentially "Texas" concept and the "drive" concept combined. It creates a trail type play. I've paid pretty close attention to the plays presented by both Thl & Johnny and do not recall seeing this beauty at all.

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by jonnydel:

Originally posted by sdaddy101269:
Jonnydel // Thl

I STRONGLY believe Seattles defense is the reason we picked up Bush. When watching the Super Bowl I noticed the routes NE ran with the RB Vereen against Seattles LBs to open up those intermediate routes. I believe Vereen had 11 catches and Edelman had 9? Please let me know what you guys think.

I definitely think you're not wrong. We had quite a few RB passes open in the games we've played against Sea. The circle concept or "texas" route as it was often called by Bill Walsh, was used a couple of times to success. But, there were other times where CK was too focused on the concepts working downfield that he didn't make it to his checkdown in time - or, he took himself as the checkdown. The way NE utilized the RB's wasn't as much as a result of purposeful incorporation of the RB's, it's taking what the defense is giving you. Sea, by the way they play, will give the RB's and checkdowns to you, but you have to get there in your progressions very quickly before they can close too much.

The key to throwing to the RBs versus SEA's defense is to hit them in stride and give them a chance to pick 3-4 yards of RAC. Like mentioned, one foot in front of the receiver. SEA is a predominantly cover3 team. One weakness of cover3 is that there are only 4 underneath zone defenders. SEA accounts for this by drafting some of of the fastest LBs in the league, and they're pretty smart too (well coached). Then there's Chancellor who plays like a small LB. So there are the four underneath zone defenderst.

A checkdown can be thrown to in two ways. A RB performs a check release, then sits down in a spot waiting to be targeted, or he delays then flares out and is hit in stride. The way Gore was normally used as a check release will not work versus SEA as he sits down and waits. SEA LBs close too quickly and no RAC can be had this way.

This is what will not work versus SEA because their LBs will close too quickly, and tackle well.

---------------------------------

This is similar to the Texas route JD alluded to. This was not used in a Texas concept though, but it is a RB circle route. Generally speaking, I don't think this will be too effective because defenses almost always assign a spy to mirror Kap, therefore putting a defender right in the middle of the field. Notice Gore is hit somewhat in stride, as opposed to the play above where he's sitting down when catching the pass. Two different types of routes over the middle.

----------------------------------------

So with a spy in the middle of the field, it makes sense to attack the flats with Bush and give him space where he can work. This is how much the SEA defense disrespects the 49er's flats. Why defend it if they never attack it?


I've been b***hing about attacking the flats for over a year because teams love to clog the middle of the field, due to the 49ers running between the tackles (so 8 in the box), and a spy on Kap on passing plays. Notice on this play, the pass to the drag forces the WR to not be able to catch in stride, limiting any chance at RAC, which is what a drag route is all about, RAC. So it's one thing to utilize Bush on short routes, but he must be hit in stride, not at a stand still.

I agree 100%. If Seattle respected that pass in the flat they never int the pass in the NFCCG. I'm confident in Kaep hitting the RB in stride on those crossing routes he / the offensive coordinator just have to throw it. Also, Bush is faster than their LBs and can cause havoc and Boldin will be the beneficiary.

Nice find 816. Notice in those plays the split backfield, which gives the RB a head start on the flare outs. I wonder if Geep will re-introduce that. HaRo used it in 2011, but for whatever reason stopped doing it.

Originally posted by jonnydel:

Originally posted by sdaddy101269:
Also, to be fair to Kaep here are numbers of other teams QBs:

Aaron Rodgers - 23-33 189 1td 1 int
Aaron Rodgers game two:
19-34 178 1 TD 2 INT

Alex Smith 11-16 108 0 and 0

Shaun Hill 26-37 243 0 and 2. Note: RBs had 13 catches

Newton 23-36 246 2 and 2

Sanchez 10-20 96 2 and 1

Brady 37-50 328 4 and 2
( RBs had 11 catches)

As you can see, statically, MOST QBs struggle against Seattle. However you notice that successful stats have a lot of passes to the RBs.

for sure, to be fair as well though, I want to make sure that everybody remembers what I wrote in the OP. I'm pulling plays from Seattle because they show the weaknesses more clearly than most of the other teams. Most other times, he'll still struggle with the same concepts, it's just usually more glaring against Seattle.

True, you did preface it that way. I think because we see Seattle twice a year and have struggled against them a lot of blame is placed on the QB when in fact most QBs that face them struggles. Plus the fact that Kaep has only played them twice at home and is 1-1 and the other losses are up there. The addition of Bush and Torrey Smith, IMO, will be the difference and we will beat them twice this year.

Originally posted by thl408:
Nice find 816. Notice in those plays the split backfield, which gives the RB a head start on the flare outs. I wonder if Geep will re-introduce that. HaRo used it in 2011, but for whatever reason stopped doing it.

That was a staple in Walshs offense too. I would LOVE to see 21 personell with Hyde and Bush split!