Play Calling

[Guest]

Lol! Not even close.
We would say "just look at the tape"

You are claiming we would make a bunch of stuff up.
Sorry, that is your schtick so you can pretend to be exactly right in spectacular fashion.

BoltJolt, Xenos and others have takes that are more context around the stats, the scheme, coverages, protection, reads, execution by players and the other team gets paid too. And what did the tape show for each and every players assignment for both Chargers and opponents on each snap.

Would you mind going over to the Bengals game thread and checking the recent tape that shows how spectacularly wrong you were.

I don't need to make up Palmer arm was hit before ball got there making it technically pass interference and of course disruptive and contested catch to make. Go to the thread and look for yourself.

#CheckTape

Critty, the Cincinnati game showed that I was right. So why don't you go to the tape and watch the deep passes that I said would help us all along actually help us win the game?!

Again, I said, do "X" and it will help. We did it one time--instant 44 yard TD. It did help.

And who needs to guess about you making up BS? You have made up a bunch of ridiculous arguments, cited old and outdated data, tried to disingenuously manipulate stats, and have misquoted, and mischaracterized my positions, et cetera. That is already a long since done deal.

To be clear, I am saying that you guys are not really thinking through your positions and are backslapping each other as if the positions you are taking are 1) valid and 2) consistent with each other's positions when neither is true. To me, it is laughable that you seem to be oblivious to it.

Finally, Critty, your mischaracterization of my post about the Palmer play has already been responded to in the other thread. That issue has nothing to do with this thread other than providing an example of what I was referring to above when I stated that you have repeatedly misquoted/mischaracterized what I have said.

[Guest]

Lol.
Murder, teleportation, islands by yourself, everyone else,....time travel, aliens.
Your ridiculous rhetoric is amusing and undermines any football take you have. Bravo!

It's nice to see you can take comfort in feeling exactly right in spectacular fashion.
:ygdr:

Party A: We are not throwing deep because too many pass rushers are after Herbert.

Party B: We are not throwing deep because too many pass defenders are playing the deep pass.

Party C: We are throwing deep a whole lot.

Parties A, B and C to each other: Great points, guys!

veryourhead:

[Critty]

Critty, the Cincinnati game showed that I was right. So why don't you go to the tape and watch the deep passes that I said would help us all along actually help us win the game?!

Again, I said, do "X" and it will help. We did it one time--instant 44 yard TD. It did help.

And who needs to guess about you making up BS? You have made up a bunch of ridiculous arguments, cited old and outdated data, tried to disingenuously manipulate stats, and have misquoted, and mischaracterized my positions, et cetera. That is already a long since done deal.

To be clear, I am saying that you guys are not really thinking through your positions and are backslapping each other as if the positions you are taking are 1) valid and 2) consistent with each other's positions when neither is true. To me, it is laughable that you seem to be oblivious to it.

Finally, Critty, your mischaracterization of my post about the Palmer play has already been responded to in the other thread. That issue has nothing to do with this thread other than providing an example of what I was referring to above when I stated that you have repeatedly misquoted/mischaracterized what I have said.

Fact: Some of those same route combinations in other games were not executed. It's on tape. And even posted to show the evidence you so desperately needed. And you disregarded it because it didn't fit your narrative.

A broken clock can claim it's exactly right twice a day.
That is exactly what you are doing.

You called that catch barely contested. And I showed tape. You responded with a wall of text that includes a teleportation take.

You've also included a murder take to discredit others and prop yourself up.

Keep feeling exactly right and smarter than the OC, HC, the players and every fan that disagrees with your opinion, but it might be a good idea to not go to extremes of murder and teleportation to make your points. I don't think that add support to what your saying, it only serves to take away from any point you're attempting to make.

Anyway, I'll just agree to disagree with you.
I don't need your aliens and time travel argument which undoubtedly was coming next. Save those for the courtroom.

[Critty]

Party A: We are not throwing deep because too many pass rushers are after Herbert.

Party B: We are not throwing deep because too many pass defenders are playing the deep pass.

Party C: We are throwing deep a whole lot.

Parties A, B and C to each other: Great points, guys!

veryourhead:

Talk about mis-characterizations. Wow this take takes the cake.

Take was they are design into the calls and game plan.


Take was when they had opportunity to do so they have completed them. They rank well in term of success.

Take was the protection and coverages at times has prevented execution of the deeper routes.

And you turned these 3 takes into your silly a, b, c.
Very telling and not surprised.

Take it away, you get the last word.
I'm on to the Giants.

[foreigner]

Fuck you TT.... its all on personnel...

[FoutsFan]

As I have stated, I do not dispute that teams sometimes play defenses to stop the deep passing game. And they play other defenses too. They also cause pressure at times.

But here is the deal. They did that last year also and we still hit deep passes from time to time. To the best of my recollection, Sunday represented the first time we even attempted a designed deep pass to Guyton with Guyton as the primary read.

I do not think that it has been any great mystery since Herbert first started playing that he has a strong arm and can throw deep passes with accuracy.

So I am not buying that defenses have played nothing but deep cover 2 shells against us all season long. We know that that is not Gus's defense, for example. And yet, there were no deep passing plays attempted/completed--zero. I think Staley and some on this forum have oversold that concept to the extreme.

I strongly suspect that we have not been trying to do deep passes for most of this season by design. And that is a great concern when we have a weapon like Herbert. I could not emphasize enough that that is exactly what happened to Lombardi in Detroit as well, so that is not encouraging in that that makes it seem like a Lombardi thing.

Further, it is not like I am asking us to throw a dozen deep passes per game. I think 3 to 4 would be just fine as a realistic goal. Even when teams want to play the deep pass, there are things that can be done to try to create opportunities and there favorable individual matchups even when the coverage is not entirely favorable. But when we are snapping the ball and immediately throwing short as often as we do, we are not trying to make that happen. And what I am seeing is defenses trying to choke down on our short passing game at times and still no deep passes.

Also, on a lesser note, I do not completely agree with what I will refer to as the "inability to see the QB's progression" argument. I think that is usually pretty easy to see in televised NFL games. From the stands, yes, I think you have more of a point. I think it is easy to see when Guyton is the primary option as he clearly was on Sunday on the long pass play where Herbert rolled out, planted, and threw the ball. And it is easy to see when Herbert has looked at three other receivers and then throws against his body to Guyton just before Herbert is forced to run out of bounds with a pass rusher closing on him.

Finally, I assume that people on this forum have an understanding of football and that most of us are not anything close to being mere casual fans. But just like I disagree with the approaches of paid professional NFL coaches at times, I also disagree with the views of some here at times.

I will leave you with this. There is a difference with people who have either played or coached and the casual fan when you watch a game. I guarantee it. You just pick up on things, little things that a casual fan would not. I am not saying that the casual fan would not understand it if pointed out to them like the color guys do in the broadcasts. They just instinctively see it and know what it means and how it affects the game/play calling. It is real.

Second when Lombardi puts together a game plan it is based on tape and in coordination with the head coach and QB. They do not come up with a set of plays and just run them all game. They change and adjust as the game goes on based on what the defense is doing. So in the first half the Bungles were loading up the box and running a lot of single high and man coverage so we threw deep and took advantage of that. As the game went on, its not like Lombardi just said, thats enough of throwing deep, lets throw short. The Bungles made an adjustment to take away the deep ball. That is why the Chargers adjusted, not out of some sort of whim. If the defense is playing well they might not change as much

Every game has its own identity, every half has its own identity, hell every drive has its own identity and it is up to the team to constantly adjust and take advantage of what the defense is giving them. The defense is always giving something, you just need to figure out what it is and exploit it.

[Guest]

Fact: Some of those same route combinations in other games were not executed. It's on tape. And even posted to show the evidence you so desperately needed. And you disregarded it because it didn't fit your narrative.

A broken clock can claim it's exactly right twice a day.
That is exactly what you are doing.

You called that catch barely contested. And I showed tape. You responded with a wall of text that includes a teleportation take.

You've also included a murder take to discredit others and prop yourself up.

Keep feeling exactly right and smarter than the OC, HC, the players and every fan that disagrees with your opinion, but it might be a good idea to not go to extremes of murder and teleportation to make your points. I don't think that add support to what your saying, it only serves to take away from any point you're attempting to make.

Anyway, I'll just agree to disagree with you.
I don't need your aliens and time travel argument which undoubtedly was coming next. Save those for the courtroom.

Just nonsense.

[Guest]

I will leave you with this. There is a difference with people who have either played or coached and the casual fan when you watch a game. I guarantee it. You just pick up on things, little things that a casual fan would not. I am not saying that the casual fan would not understand it if pointed out to them like the color guys do in the broadcasts. They just instinctively see it and know what it means and how it affects the game/play calling. It is real.

Second when Lombardi puts together a game plan it is based on tape and in coordination with the head coach and QB. They do not come up with a set of plays and just run them all game. They change and adjust as the game goes on based on what the defense is doing. So in the first half the Bungles were loading up the box and running a lot of single high and man coverage so we threw deep and took advantage of that. As the game went on, its not like Lombardi just said, thats enough of throwing deep, lets throw short. The Bungles made an adjustment to take away the deep ball. That is why the Chargers adjusted, not out of some sort of whim. If the defense is playing well they might not change as much

Every game has its own identity, every half has its own identity, hell every drive has its own identity and it is up to the team to constantly adjust and take advantage of what the defense is giving them. The defense is always giving something, you just need to figure out what it is and exploit it.

I agree in general with what you are saying and always have, but what I am saying is that Lombardi has a bias in favor of throwing short the same way Lynn has a bias in favor of running the ball. And that short pass bias does not fit well with Herbert just as it did not fit well with Stafford.

You know that Gus runs mainly single high as well and we had no deep passes in that game (I actually went back play by play to see if I failed to recall something). Other teams have not been just sitting back in two deep coverage all game long either. Honestly, I do not see a meaningful difference between what defenses did against us last year and this year. IMO, the difference is mainly Lombardi, whose offense calls for more passes than what we were doing under Lynn/Steichen, yet much fewer deep passes than we did last year.

I do not disagree with the notion that we should not routinely throw into coverage designed take away the deep pass. But you know that teams have hit a couple of deep passes against us even though we go to the nth degree above and beyond what other teams do to stop the deep passing game. There are ways to take a shot here and there even against two deep coverage.

Williams and Guyton can create matchup problems and plays can be called to influence safeties. You know that too.

Again, I am not talking about going long bomb crazy. I am talking about 3-4 passes per game.

I believe that we need to pass in the short, medium, long and wide zones at times. This season, we have been overusing the wide and short areas of the field. Our offense has absolutely stagnated at times because we force ourselves to execute on 12-15 play drives to score. We get 6 first downs and we are still not in the end zone. We need to make it easier on ourselves a couple of times per game by hitting a big play.

Of course, our deep passing strategy is about to take a hit as we are now down Allen and Williams due to Covid-19 protocols. Why can't we ever catch a break and have a nice, easy blowout win against a weak opponent playing a third string QB?

[FoutsFan]

I agree in general with what you are saying and always have, but what I am saying is that Lombardi has a bias in favor of throwing short the same way Lynn has a bias in favor of running the ball. And that short pass bias does not fit well with Herbert just as it did not fit well with Stafford.

You know that Gus runs mainly single high as well and we had no deep passes in that game (I actually went back play by play to see if I failed to recall something). Other teams have not been just sitting back in two deep coverage all game long either. Honestly, I do not see a meaningful difference between what defenses did against us last year and this year. IMO, the difference is mainly Lombardi, whose offense calls for more passes than what we were doing under Lynn/Steichen, yet much fewer deep passes than we did last year.

I do not disagree with the notion that we should not routinely throw into coverage designed take away the deep pass. But you know that teams have hit a couple of deep passes against us even though we go to the nth degree above and beyond what other teams do to stop the deep passing game. There are ways to take a shot here and there even against two deep coverage.

Williams and Guyton can create matchup problems and plays can be called to influence safeties. You know that too.

Again, I am not talking about going long bomb crazy. I am talking about 3-4 passes per game.

I believe that we need to pass in the short, medium, long and wide zones at times. This season, we have been overusing the wide and short areas of the field. Our offense has absolutely stagnated at times because we force ourselves to execute on 12-15 play drives to score. We get 6 first downs and we are still not in the end zone. We need to make it easier on ourselves a couple of times per game by hitting a big play.

Of course, our deep passing strategy is about to take a hit as we are now down Allen and Williams due to Covid-19 protocols. Why can't we ever catch a break and have a nice, easy blowout win against a weak opponent playing a third string QB?

Often times what looks like a single high can morph into another coverage. And a two high shell is not the only way to stop a long pass. That being said, take what the defense is giving you. That is the best way and take your shots when they are presented to you.

You can also call plays and do things to set up others as well. I would at some point get into a rhythm in the cadence on purpose to be able to change it up when needed to draw the defense off sides. Or stare down a receiver a couple of plays in a row to set up a safety later in the game.

Its a different game now. In the past we teams would look long and work their way back. Now teams look short and work their way long. its why QB's have a 68% completion percentage compared to Fouts and his 59% completion percentage. Its why QB's now have a 1.somthing to 2% interception percentage and Fouts had a 4.5%. Not taking anything away from Fouts, he was my favorite and what I tried to model my play style after but that really aggressive style leads to high TO's. Taking what the D gives you is much safer and overall effective but not nearly as sexy. There is also a mental aspect to wearing down a defense that they know you are picking on their weakness and are being killed by 1000 cuts. Just watch some of the drives we gave up earlier and in the Donkey game and how frustrating those were as a fan. Now imagine the players perspective. Giving up a 15 play 90 yard drive is much more physically and mentally exhausting then a 3 play 80 yard drive from a long bomb.

[NoMoreChillies]

Again, I am not talking about going long bomb crazy. I am talking about 3-4 passes per game.

Sorry to cut your post but i wanted to address this specifically:

I gave you 5 plays, video evidence of 5 plays where Lombardi designed deep routes and each of the 5 plays someone different missed a block or Herbert got spooked and the long bomb never happened.

You just dismisssed this evidence and went on a tirade about Mathew Stafford. Now you say you want 3-4 passes per game...

[BayAreaBoltz]

How about this:

Do any of the Lombardi apologists here have ANY problems with his play calls this season? Or how he's prepared the team? Just curious.

And, Crush, do you have anything you like about Lombardi as OC this season? Anything that puts him above Anthony Lynn in your eyes?

[Xenos]

How about this:

Do any of the Lombardi apologists here have ANY problems with his play calls this season? Or how he's prepared the team? Just curious.

And, Crush, do you have anything you like about Lombardi as OC this season? Anything that puts him above Anthony Lynn in your eyes?

I didn’t care for Lombardi as an OC hire at first because of what happened with the Lions. But he’s definitely doing a much better job with Herbert than he did with Stafford. For example, we don’t have a great running game so we’re using the pass to set up the run and it’s working so far. My main issues with him seem to be in our offensive inconsistency especially against the better defensive minds in the league. I’m not sure if the inconsistency is because of him, Herbert, or personnel. Maybe all three through varying degrees?