Coaches Film Analysis: 2018 Season

Originally posted by jgarf08:
The numbers are a great reference, thank you!!

Wonder if the 02 and 03 pers is just based on formation and no on actually pers. Could be in Empty with Breida out wide at WR and whatnot.

The great thing about Kyle's offense is he can come out in 21 pers and be in a 0 pers formation and be successful.

Have to have the players to be able to do that, meaning Juice being able to catch a slant as the #1 WR as THL broke down a couple weeks ago, and having multi dimensional players in the system.

Tangent, but would have been real nice to see McKinnon in the offense this year. His route tree is going to be a little more expansive than Juice and even Breida.

To my understanding, these numbers are purely based on personnel groupings (I pulled them from smartfootballstats.com) so apparently we've had 1 play that had no backs 2 TEs and 3 WRs and 1 play with no backs 3 TEs and 2 WRs.

I love Kyle's usage of 21 personnel and my theory is he wants to be the outlier of a team in this league that features that grouping because as a whole the NFL is only in 21 7% of the time and we currently lead the league using it 41% of the time (Pats are number 2 at 28%). Conversely, we run 11 the least amount in the league at 39% and are the only team under 50% and the league average is 65%.

We are the following:

21 pers 41%
11 pers 39%
12 pers 10%

IMO, that's showing a great deal of balance with groupings compared to the rest of the league. Hell, you've got a team like the Rams that are in 11 95% of the time and haven't run a single play in 21. Like you've mentioned, having guys like juice who can split out and run WR routes is huge as it lets you run formations that aren't necessarily traditional 21 type forms.

Linking it back to our dynasty days, this is exactly what we use to be able to do with guys like roger Craig and Watters and even Rathman. I don't have numbers backing it up but I'd guess under Walsh we were in 21 maybe 70% of the time and still in that 60% plus range as the dynasty played out in the 90s but we would go empty in these grouping along with other various forms not really considered 21 formations because we did have backs that could run routes.

Here I am just sticking up for play callers.

This i s 3&18 in the redzone where the 49ers settle for a Field Goal. I'm sure this is a play that upsets fans and even the TV analyst (already mentioned he was a tool), made mention of hating the play call.

The thing is as a play caller you try to put your players in the best situation possible to be successful. In this this situation yeah you would love to get the 1st down, would love to get the TD, but look at what Seattle is doing defensively.

Not a lot of pass plays on 3rd and 18 are going to be successful, particularly when you are on the +23 yard line and have a condensed field to work with. The press CBs and off LBs make any screen or pass over the middle tough to execute, safeties are over the top to take away the deep ball, not left with a lot of options.

However you have a 4 man box with defenders that are going to pin their ears back and try to get after the QB. Well what looks good? How about just running split zone and seeing what you can get.

Nothing fancy scheme wise, Split zone with the Y cutting off the backside end, Celek actually should be working to the EMOLS #59 instead of picking up the defender Staley is wheeling on. Would like to have seen Tomlinson run to the legs of the 2nd level LB and cut him down instead of stopping his feet, in which case giving Breida a 1on1 with a 2 way go on a LB, so not very clean.

But fact is, was the best call you could make given the defensive look, running on 3rd and long, sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't, but hard to argue against the thought process. /rant

Celek looked like he's open too down at the bottom. And if he's any faster, it would be a TD

On 2nd thought, that safety might give him trouble if Nick look that way initially

Love the design here.

1st play of the drive 13 minutes left in the 4th.

Start in a 2x2 formation and motion into a Y Off Trey 3x1 formation. In the picture you can see Juice and Kittle signaling what I assume is man to man coverage to Bourne up top, or maybe that Kittle is on top of the mesh, setting the rub for Bourne instead of the inverse.

Brieda to the flat to stretch the alley defender, Kittle sets good depth for Bourne to rub shoulders and come underneath on the crosser.

Juice is running a quick hitch, while Pettis is going to run what Coach Leach and June Jones and the like called a "Runaway" Route, or what they call a slot fade now. For those two players it's just a different way of getting to a smash concept, or a Hi-Lo on the CB.


The runaway route is a great route, it's a little more difficult to run and throw than you think, but Pettis has to make sure he gets outside leverage on the safety in this look, leans on him to create space to the #'s and then separate late to make the catch.

I love the concept because the mesh is obviously a man beater, also good against a quarters look to the boundary, but the Smash/Runaway concept should be good against Cov 2, Cov 3 or Man. So if you can identify coverage you should be able to find yourself a completion.

On 1st down, Mullens takes a shot, although he had Bourne wide open as well, heckuva catch by Pettis.

Nice breakdown. Mullens throw here was so good.
I think the difference between Smash (Corner/hitch) and what you call Runaway (slot fade/hitch) is that Runaway will work better against Cover1. Runaway against a Cover2 safety puts that slot fade route directly into the Cover2 saftey's area. Imagine if there was a Cover2 safety in that play you cutup above.
Smash (Corner route) works better against Cover2 since that Corner route breaks sharply away from a Cover2 safety.

I've seen Harbaugh/Roman run a variation of this but they did it with a hitch/slot fade/hitch (#1/#2/#3). It can beat Cover1 (slot fade) and Cover3 (hitches). I try to dig those up. They were shown in past film threads.

@jgarf08, thanks for the contribution. Never would have thought we would have coaching level film breakdown on the Zone.

Appreciate the 2 guys, thl408 and jonny that started the ball rolling long ago

Originally posted by thl408:
Nice breakdown. Mullens throw here was so good.
I think the difference between Smash (Corner/hitch) and what you call Runaway (slot fade/hitch) is that Runaway will work better against Cover1. Runaway against a Cover2 safety puts that slot fade route directly into the Cover2 saftey's area. Imagine if there was a Cover2 safety in that play you cutup above.
Smash (Corner route) works better against Cover2 since that Corner route breaks sharply away from a Cover2 safety.

I've seen Harbaugh/Roman run a variation of this but they did it with a hitch/slot fade/hitch (#1/#2/#3). It can beat Cover1 (slot fade) and Cover3 (hitches). I try to dig those up. They were shown in past film threads.

Yeah great point, and I remember those examples you're mentioning.

The corner route against cover 2 is nice because the corner route itself is a little bit more adaptable based on the height/width of the safety and the depth/width of the CB. I teach Corner routes to have a high angle (back pylon/front pylon) and let the ball flatten you. The only problem I've come against with a true smash concept is how they teach the CB to midpoint WR #1 and #2, the Depth of the CB makes it tough sometimes to fit the ball into the window and you end up throwing the hitch to #1 and the CB comes downhill and makes a play on the ball or makes a big hit. (I made some adjustments to the smash concept to protect against this - there's always an answer).

However, some teams will play cover 2 with a safety a bit lower (8-10 yards) and not working for as much width post snap which makes the Runaway route absolutely deadly. Slot WR can step on the toes of the safety, leave him in his tracks and it's an easy Touchdown.

I ran the run & shoot offense a few years back in small college football and we had an option route that was a runaway based on this coverage or a beater (short post) vs this coverage, etc. etc. That was deadly.

If you guys are interested and I have sometime I can put up some clips of the offenses I've run, explain some parts of it, but I assume 49ers film is a little more enjoyable.

About that Runaway with a hitch. The 49ers have used a hitch/runaway/hitch combo as a pretty versatile combination to beat man and zone.
This Tomsula/Geep using a variation of the Runaway combo jgarf mentioned:


This play looks similar to the Mullens/Pettis play. Both vs Cover1.

---
This is Harbaugh/Roman using it to beat Cover3



vs Tampa2

Originally posted by jgarf08:

Yeah great point, and I remember those examples you're mentioning.

The corner route against cover 2 is nice because the corner route itself is a little bit more adaptable based on the height/width of the safety and the depth/width of the CB. I teach Corner routes to have a high angle (back pylon/front pylon) and let the ball flatten you. The only problem I've come against with a true smash concept is how they teach the CB to midpoint WR #1 and #2, the Depth of the CB makes it tough sometimes to fit the ball into the window and you end up throwing the hitch to #1 and the CB comes downhill and makes a play on the ball or makes a big hit. (I made some adjustments to the smash concept to protect against this - there's always an answer).

However, some teams will play cover 2 with a safety a bit lower (8-10 yards) and not working for as much width post snap which makes the Runaway route absolutely deadly. Slot WR can step on the toes of the safety, leave him in his tracks and it's an easy Touchdown.

I ran the run & shoot offense a few years back in small college football and we had an option route that was a runaway based on this coverage or a beater (short post) vs this coverage, etc. etc. That was deadly.

If you guys are interested and I have sometime I can put up some clips of the offenses I've run, explain some parts of it, but I assume 49ers film is a little more enjoyable.

Dude, I say go for it. It's mostly us same guys in this thread and I don't want to speak for others but I love looking at offensive football concepts. Personally I'm a WCO lover (whatever the WCO means nowadays) but I love hearing what other systems call stuff and how they use concepts.

So it's an up vote for me

Originally posted by jgarf08:
Yeah great point, and I remember those examples you're mentioning.

The corner route against cover 2 is nice because the corner route itself is a little bit more adaptable based on the height/width of the safety and the depth/width of the CB. I teach Corner routes to have a high angle (back pylon/front pylon) and let the ball flatten you. The only problem I've come against with a true smash concept is how they teach the CB to midpoint WR #1 and #2, the Depth of the CB makes it tough sometimes to fit the ball into the window and you end up throwing the hitch to #1 and the CB comes downhill and makes a play on the ball or makes a big hit. (I made some adjustments to the smash concept to protect against this - there's always an answer).

However, some teams will play cover 2 with a safety a bit lower (8-10 yards) and not working for as much width post snap which makes the Runaway route absolutely deadly. Slot WR can step on the toes of the safety, leave him in his tracks and it's an easy Touchdown.

I ran the run & shoot offense a few years back in small college football and we had an option route that was a runaway based on this coverage or a beater (short post) vs this coverage, etc. etc. That was deadly.

If you guys are interested and I have sometime I can put up some clips of the offenses I've run, explain some parts of it, but I assume 49ers film is a little more enjoyable.

(underlined). If the safety is shallow, I see how the runaway route is viable versus Cover2.
bolded, maybe the split between the #1 and #2 can help give the QB a clearer read on the depth of the CB and if the corner route is available. Keep hitting the hitch till the CB cheats.
I remember the Oilers and Falcons with their Run and Shoot. Put those clips up I know I'd have questions about how that type of offense works.

I can't wait for this Bears game breakdown (and season end breakdown).
My BIG question is why can't we score touchdowns inside the 20?
Is KS a genius for 80 yards who goes full retard in the redzone?
What's going on that we keep ending up with 3's instead of 7's?

Originally posted by Sourball:

I can't wait for this Bears game breakdown (and season end breakdown).
My BIG question is why can't we score touchdowns inside the 20?
Is KS a genius for 80 yards who goes full retard in the redzone?
What's going on that we keep ending up with 3's instead of 7's?

I hope you get a great, film backed, scientific answer from Thl or Jgarf, but in the meantime, I'll say, it's just harder in the Redzone.

Kyle's scheme is about stretching the field to expose gaps, there's less field up near the end zone. Windows get tighter and talent is more important, we just haven't got enough talent to be effective down there.

Originally posted by 49erBigMac:

Originally posted by Sourball:

I can't wait for this Bears game breakdown (and season end breakdown).
My BIG question is why can't we score touchdowns inside the 20?
Is KS a genius for 80 yards who goes full retard in the redzone?
What's going on that we keep ending up with 3's instead of 7's?

I hope you get a great, film backed, scientific answer from Thl or Jgarf, but in the meantime, I'll say, it's just harder in the Redzone.

Kyle's scheme is about stretching the field to expose gaps, there's less field up near the end zone. Windows get tighter and talent is more important, we just haven't got enough talent to be effective down there.

I think part of the problem is running the ball. The offense has to show they can and will run the ball inside the red zone with success to then have success passing in that tight area.

I like Wilson and how hard he has been running, but I'm not sure he's a lighting quick hole hitter like Breida. Then inside the 10 yard line, it's usually all about over powering the defensive line. I think that's like a 50/50 chance of success if that.

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by pickle:
thl408-----Given your breakdown of these run plays in overtime, would you think that an early pick (2nd round?) or significant free agent signing, should be focused on a guard? Interested in how you see it.

Person has been a nice surprise and Tomlinson is adequate. So an upgrade would be nice but I don't have guard as a top 5 group position to upgrade. Who knows what Kyle thinks but the only situation where I see Kyle going guard day 2 is if Person is not re-signed and there is great value when it comes time to make a selection. Two years in a row Kyle has found a vet guard to come in and hold it down (Fusco, Person). Adequate guard play is good enough and I feel spending a day 2 pick on a guard would be a luxury pick for this roster.

our right side got absolutely dismantled yesterday. something to be aware of