Play Calling

[FoutsFan]

I think one of things that has been misinterpreted here is that people pointing out that there may or may not be a lack of long passes called and looking at the film to come to that conclusion is not in of itself a defense of Lombardi but a defense of reality. It is possible to objectively look at the play calling and why we see the results we see and be critical of Lombardi (I am), yet also understand the facts on the field. It is important to have those facts and also have an understanding of what a long pass is for the sake of the argument. Most football people consider a long pass as a play over 25 yards, if someone wants to say its over 40 yards then we have to change the entire outlook and formula of the comparison. Now in both of those the Chargers do pretty well compared to the rest of the league, though I too would like to see more for the eye test as it is fun to watch.

[Critty]

Please go back and look at the plays again. None of them are very deep passes and none are with Guyton as the primary read. So these plays are not examples of what I am calling for the team to do. Also, while there is evidence of poor execution to be sure, there is also some poor play design involved.

Video #1: This shows a 15-20 yard medium crossing route by Guyton and I agree that he is wide open. And that should be him running that route and not Allen as Allen's lack of speed will cause the defender to be carried with him across the field, which has led directly to 2 INTs this season. But Guyton is not the primary read on the play. Allen is on the short out.

Video #2: Again, Guyton is not the primary read. It is also a bad route combination with two receivers running in the same area for a prolonged period of time.

Video #3: This looks like a designed clear out for a short pass to Cook over the middle of about 12 yards or so.

Video #4: There is a major lack of pass protect on this play, which muddies what exactly is supposed to happen. However, we can clearly see Herbert looking to his left. If I had to guess, this is supposed to be a short pass to Allen.

Video #5: This is a 25 yard out deep crossing route that appears to be intended for Williams.

None of these plays are designed very deep passes. None of these plays are designed for Guyton to be the primary receiver. Two of the plays have a line of scrimmage too close to the end zone for a very deep pass even to take place.

I do not see Herbert looking to connect on very deep passes on any of these plays. I do agree that there pass rush pressure issues on these plays. I think the pressure is avoidable with a little better play design and execution. I think it is too bad that Herbert is not looking for Guyton because he was wide open on a couple of these plays.

Fact: Every single one of the clips Chili showed was a deep route concept that failed because of execution.

You dont even get routes and your bias is obvious as you called Allen the primary running the short out.
That plays is designed to open the field to hit the deep cross.

I gave you a link in the other post so you can see Kyle Shanahan uses that exact route Guyton ran and it's called the deep cross and he is the primary.

What are you going do now, say Shanahan doesn't know what a deep cross is. Clearly it's you who doesn't under route concept and design as you called Allen route a short out.

If you were given a test by everyone in the NFL that said what route did Allen run and you said short out, you would fail the test. And the entire NFL would know you don't know your routes.

It's was a deep out, deep cross that Chili showed you in clip #1 go ask Staley or Belichick or Shanahan or which every coach you think is the smartest out there what happened on that play and get back to me when they agree it was a short out by Allen.

Chainy, Results grading is all you did and you aren't even doing it well.
BrokenClocksAreRightTwiceADay.

[SBbound]

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.

Terrific post.

[Boltjolt]

Fact: Every single one of the clips Chili showed was a deep route concept that failed because of execution.

You dont even get routes and your bias is obvious as you called Allen the primary running the short out.
That plays is designed to open the field to hit the deep cross.

I gave you a link in the other post so you can see Kyle Shanahan uses that exact route Guyton ran and it's called the deep cross and he is the primary.

What are you going do now, say Shanahan doesn't know what a deep cross is. Clearly it's you who doesn't under route concept and design as you called Allen route a short out.

If you were given a test by everyone in the NFL that said what route did Allen run and you said short out, you would fail the test. And the entire NFL would know you don't know your routes.

It's was a deep out, deep cross that Chili showed you in clip #1 go ask Staley or Belichick or Shanahan or which every coach you think is the smartest out there what happened on that play and get back to me when they agree it was a short out by Allen.

Chainy, Results grading is all you did and you aren't even doing it well.
BrokenClocksAreRightTwiceADay.

We all know what Chain wants to see. A Go route with Guyton and Herbert throwing it to him deep. He wants those and deep posts to Guyton.
That is his agenda , doesn't care about all the other stuff.

I don't care to even try and show him anything as he shows no interest to learn and thinks everybody else including NFL coaches are wrong.

Ain't worth the headache.

[NoMoreChillies]

Please go back and look at the plays again. None of them are very deep passes and none are with Guyton as the primary read. So these plays are not examples of what I am calling for the team to do. Also, while there is evidence of poor execution to be sure, there is also some poor play design involved.

Video #1: This shows a 15-20 yard medium crossing route by Guyton and I agree that he is wide open. And that should be him running that route and not Allen as Allen's lack of speed will cause the defender to be carried with him across the field, which has led directly to 2 INTs this season. But Guyton is not the primary read on the play. Allen is on the short out. Pre-snap shows soft coverage on Allen so he should be 1st read. DEN nickel blitz and Herb doesnt recognise it. If RB makes the block Herb has time to find Guyton for 37yrd TD. You take what the defense gives you

Video #2: Again, Guyton is not the primary read. It is also a bad route combination with two receivers running in the same area for a prolonged period of time. Agree the routes are not great. Would like to see MDub corner there not sit. DEN still drops 2 safeties but if Herb has 1.5 more seconds thats a 70yrd touchdown to a streaking Guyton

Video #3: This looks like a designed clear out for a short pass to Cook over the middle of about 12 yards or so. It does look like a designed clear out, but if Herb sees the safety bite on Cook then also has Mdub open 50/50 40yrd jump ball TD. Just needs time

Video #4: There is a major lack of pass protect on this play, which muddies what exactly is supposed to happen. However, we can clearly see Herbert looking to his left. If I had to guess, this is supposed to be a short pass to Allen. Of course Herber looks left, he has 3 recievers there and DEN shows press coverage pre-snap. Allen is on right corssing late. Such a good designed play that 3 receivers get open (Guyton post, Cook out-route, Allen crossing). Looking left and seeing Guyton get open would have made it 28yrd TD. You wanna argue thats not long pass maybe you got a leg to stand on.

Video #5: This is a 25 yard out deep crossing route that appears to be intended for Williams. Correct. I guess its not long enough for you?

None of these plays are designed very deep passes. None of these plays are designed for Guyton to be the primary receiver. Two of the plays have a line of scrimmage too close to the end zone for a very deep pass even to take place.

I do not see Herbert looking to connect on very deep passes on any of these plays. I do agree that there pass rush pressure issues on these plays. I think the pressure is avoidable with a little better play design and execution. I think it is too bad that Herbert is not looking for Guyton because he was wide open on a couple of these plays.

I see Herbert getting spooked alot, and making rushed decisions. For me any pass over 25yrd is enough to force the defence to cover bombs. A bit better blocking, a bit better run game and these play action passes will produce big results.

[Guest]

I think one of things that has been misinterpreted here is that people pointing out that there may or may not be a lack of long passes called and looking at the film to come to that conclusion is not in of itself a defense of Lombardi but a defense of reality. It is possible to objectively look at the play calling and why we see the results we see and be critical of Lombardi (I am), yet also understand the facts on the field. It is important to have those facts and also have an understanding of what a long pass is for the sake of the argument. Most football people consider a long pass as a play over 25 yards, if someone wants to say its over 40 yards then we have to change the entire outlook and formula of the comparison. Now in both of those the Chargers do pretty well compared to the rest of the league, though I too would like to see more for the eye test as it is fun to watch.

The OP referenced my discussion in his first post, but then did not use "deep passes" the same way that I used that terminology in his discussion of the videos he is using. Neither that reference nor his videos are contrary to anything I have said. They are basically completely inapplicable to what I have said as they never were the kinds of plays that I have been discussing in terms of what I want to see 3-4 times per game.

My discussion has focused on the very deep passing game. "Bombs" as the OP stated and as I have stated. These are mainly very vertical routes, not short or medium crossing patterns or out patterns. I do not think the plays resemble each other at all, so there really should be no confusion between the two.

The two clearest examples from Sunday were the long completions to Williams and Guyton. Those are the passes that I have been calling for the team to throw all along. I have made repeated references to the 10 45+ yard completions from last year. I am not sure how anyone could have missed that as I referenced it at least 20+ times combined in multiple threads.

I have also made the point to a lesser degree, but still in a significant way that we do not throw a lot of deeper passes that are even just beyond the medium range. We rank 20th in passing plays over 25 yards and that number includes catch and run plays. As was noted in the Simms video, 92% of our passes were under 20 yards heading into last Sunday's game. That is not a team that is trying to throw deep in any way, shape or form.

[Guest]

I see Herbert getting spooked alot, and making rushed decisions. For me any pass over 25yrd is enough to force the defence to cover bombs. A bit better blocking, a bit better run game and these play action passes will produce big results.

Herbert is almost never looking for the long pass. In terms of WRs, he looks almost exclusively for Allen and Williams.

I am not talking about long throws coming off of scrambles or 3rd or 4th reads. I am talking about designed bombs with the very deep pass as the primary read. I agree that the blocking has room for improvement.

To be very clear, I am looking for 3-4 attempted bombs per game.

[BayAreaBoltz]

Nice clip.
It really would have been cool to see Simms do a comparative analysis to previous game tape and shows a real difference in the call itself. Unfortunately he didn't do that. His analysis was of the results after the play was executed.

The stat he showed was a result stat which only shows more deep throws were executed, it did not show if it was called more. Come on Chris Simms pull other tape and compare the calls. Show me the difference.
It's easy to do the eye test on results.

Staley when asked about the deep throws in Bengals game specifically said we had a lot of those types of throws up through the season and whether or not it happened was depending on coverage and things.

Execution makes more sense than play call.
The OP posted tape of calls where those same type of throws would have been available for Herbert to make but execution prevented it from happening.

I agree in that I'd love to see a deep dive on the whole situation from Sims or someone like him.

[Guest]

Fact: Every single one of the clips Chili showed was a deep route concept that failed because of execution.

You dont even get routes and your bias is obvious as you called Allen the primary running the short out.
That plays is designed to open the field to hit the deep cross.

I gave you a link in the other post so you can see Kyle Shanahan uses that exact route Guyton ran and it's called the deep cross and he is the primary.

What are you going do now, say Shanahan doesn't know what a deep cross is. Clearly it's you who doesn't under route concept and design as you called Allen route a short out.

If you were given a test by everyone in the NFL that said what route did Allen run and you said short out, you would fail the test. And the entire NFL would know you don't know your routes.

It's was a deep out, deep cross that Chili showed you in clip #1 go ask Staley or Belichick or Shanahan or which every coach you think is the smartest out there what happened on that play and get back to me when they agree it was a short out by Allen.

Chainy, Results grading is all you did and you aren't even doing it well.
BrokenClocksAreRightTwiceADay.

Oh clueless one, neither Kyle Shanahan, you, nor anyone else get to define what I mean when I use the terms short, medium, deep and very deep passes when I have already defined those terms many times in other posts in other threads. I can tell you that my definition is right in line with that used by FoutsFan. I do not begin to think of anything as a deep pass until it is greater than 25 yards. That said, my discussion has clearly been primarily focused on the very deep passing game.

I get that the OP here is not using the term "deep passes" in the sense that I have considered them even after referencing my desire for bombs in his first post. That is my point exactly, clueless one. That is why the videos do not apply at all. He and I are not talking about the same kind of plays. Get it?!

Further, if you have eyes, then you should have been able to see Herbert looking to other receivers on the Guyton crossing pattern. When I say "primary read", I generally mean where Herbert is looking first as a potential target, not where Herbert is not looking at all. It is irrelevant how Shanahan designs a similar play in his offense. I am talking about the Chargers and Herbert, not the 49ers or any other Shanarat, Jr. team.

But beyond that, what I have been calling for the team to do, and I have been very clear about this, is to throw 3-4 designed very long passes per game (bombs) with that pattern being the primary read.

[Guest]

Mike Williams's 40 time was only 4.54 but he's caught a lot of deep passes in his short career. He's proof that you don't have to be a speed burner to get deep. Don't forget the WR knows the play, thus knows where he going but the DB has to trail himsince he doesn't know where the WR is going. A guy like MDub, that wins more often than not on 50-50 plays has an advantage because he doesn't have to be a yard or two ahead of the DB. A speed burner like Guyton must get deeper than the DB's because he can't be expected to win many of the 50-50 plays, although he did win one last week. That's the first one I can recall him catching in that manner.

I'm with Fouts Fan regarding the spread formations. I see several advantages to spread formations for both the passing game and for running the ball. I wish we used the spread formations more than we do. I also wish they'd throw long more. I'm hoping Lombardi will change those two facets of the offense. He's seen it work, so there's reason to hope he will. On the other hand, I like that I can't call the next play all the time as I have with some of our teams in the past. I have hope for Lombardi to figure it all out.

I appreciate your post regarding deep passes, but I look at it from the opposite side.

The issue with the lack of speed is that there will be a lack of separation. That makes the throw more dangerous in theory even with Williams being very good in the air.

I prefer speed because it can create big separation, which Guyton has shown us on multiple long completions to him over the past two seasons. The separation is what makes the pass safer. IMO, separation trumps contested catch ability.

I agree with what you are saying about spread formations.

[Guest]

Nice clip.
It really would have been cool to see Simms do a comparative analysis to previous game tape and shows a real difference in the call itself. Unfortunately he didn't do that. His analysis was of the results after the play was executed.

The stat he showed was a result stat which only shows more deep throws were executed, it did not show if it was called more. Come on Chris Simms pull other tape and compare the calls. Show me the difference.
It's easy to do the eye test on results.

Staley when asked about the deep throws in Bengals game specifically said we had a lot of those types of throws up through the season and whether or not it happened was depending on coverage and things.

Execution makes more sense than play call.
The OP posted tape of calls where those same type of throws would have been available for Herbert to make but execution prevented it from happening.

92% of passes 20 yards or less. Bottom 5 in air yards per attempt. Not among the leaders at holding the ball in the pocket. They are not trying to access the deep part of the field. Last year's team provides an example of a team that is trying to access the deep part of the field (and doing so with the worst OL in the NFL). Designed deep passes with the deep pass as the primary read are not being regularly called at all.

Staley gave the media a pretty big white lie on that one as he should if he sees a team benefit to doing so.

[Critty]

Oh clueless one, neither Kyle Shanahan, you, nor anyone else get to define what I mean when I use the terms short, medium, deep and very deep passes when I have already defined those terms many times in other posts in other threads. I can tell you that my definition is right in line with that used by FoutsFan. I do not begin to think of anything as a deep pass until it is greater than 25 yards. That said, my discussion has clearly been primarily focused on the very deep passing game.

I get that the OP here is not using the term "deep passes" in the sense that I have considered them even after referencing my desire for bombs in his first post. That is my point exactly, clueless one. That is why the videos do not apply at all. He and I are not talking about the same kind of plays. Get it?!

Further, if you have eyes, then you should have been able to see Herbert looking to other receivers on the Guyton crossing pattern. When I say "primary read", I generally mean where Herbert is looking first as a potential target, not where Herbert is not looking at all. It is irrelevant how Shanahan designs a similar play in his offense. I am talking about the Chargers and Herbert, not the 49ers or any other Shanarat, Jr. team.

But beyond that, what I have been calling for the team to do, and I have been very clear about this, is to throw 3-4 designed very long passes per game (bombs) with that pattern being the primary read.

Lol. You truly live in an imaginary world.
You called Allen route a short out.
Only in your imaginary playbook is that a short out
:goofylol:

Just simplify your BS and say you want to see Gos, 9s and 7s routes called more and executed. Do you even know what Go, 9 and 7 routes are? Or do you just call it (bombs) It isn't just the call, it has to be executed. And if you look at the Chargers plays they have Gos, 9s and 7s. If you look at Chili tape you can see a couple plays include the bomb routes you've been desperate to see executed, and you disregarded it because you had to as it doesn't fit into your story.
The clueless one is you. And you have done it in spectacular fashion. Mic drop!