Horrible Passing: The KC Recap
- Thread starter soxfan121
- Start date
In the first play Vollmer is moving to block the Dee Ford (#55) who appears to be pass rushing at the snap but is actually running up to cover Ridley out of the backfield. I would think the protection scheme should have had Ridley with initial responsibilities for Ford with Vollmer cleaning up if nothing else comes and the hot read. It was a well designed and run blitz from KC, Abdullah showed late enough there wasn't time for a pre-snap adjustment and Vollmer just blew it.
The first fumble Fleming does an excellent job blocking like a right tackle, unfortunately he's playing guard. White either forgets he's supposed to chip or decides late to chip. Vollmer's positioning would have allowed him to steer Houston around Brady's back without White there but White actually gives Houston a push around Vollmer's left shoulder. He gets the opportunity for the sack because Fleming forgot which OL position he was playing.
This image shows a great example of what the OLine should be doing, the interior lineman are keeping the DTs occupied and away from Brady. The tackles are forcing the DEs further downfield so Brady can step up and around them. Granted, this is 5 against 4 so they should be able to do their jobs here.
The first fumble Fleming does an excellent job blocking like a right tackle, unfortunately he's playing guard. White either forgets he's supposed to chip or decides late to chip. Vollmer's positioning would have allowed him to steer Houston around Brady's back without White there but White actually gives Houston a push around Vollmer's left shoulder. He gets the opportunity for the sack because Fleming forgot which OL position he was playing.
This image shows a great example of what the OLine should be doing, the interior lineman are keeping the DTs occupied and away from Brady. The tackles are forcing the DEs further downfield so Brady can step up and around them. Granted, this is 5 against 4 so they should be able to do their jobs here.
Well, that was depressing (but very well done).
In re the chicken-egg argument of whose more to blame, the OL or the QB, pretty definitive here that there's plenty of blame in both areas. I guess the question is: is it more likely that the OL will improve given their youth or more likely the QB will improve given his experience and moxie?
In re the chicken-egg argument of whose more to blame, the OL or the QB, pretty definitive here that there's plenty of blame in both areas. I guess the question is: is it more likely that the OL will improve given their youth or more likely the QB will improve given his experience and moxie?
Thanks for the love.
It's a tough question to answer, but my off-the-cuff is that it's more likely that Brady and the offensive staff adjust to what the OL can do. We may see more and more max protection schemes, simplifying the calls up front and giving help with TEs/RBs on the edges. Then the question becomes whether they have the players on the outside who can get open/win battles for balls in the air.
I mentioned earlier this week that I think right now this is an offense without a set identity. They don't have the ability to go 4 and 5 wide and keep a clean pocket for Brady right now. They also don't have the players built to win battles in the secondary on 2 receiver routes. Maybe the coaching staff sees a bit of Anquan Boldin in LaFell, a big strong guy who can bail out his QB and make a tough catch in traffic. But Flacco/Boldin had a burner or two to stretch defenses down the field and open up some room underneath. Is Julian Edelman going to accomplish that?
It's a tough question to answer, but my off-the-cuff is that it's more likely that Brady and the offensive staff adjust to what the OL can do. We may see more and more max protection schemes, simplifying the calls up front and giving help with TEs/RBs on the edges. Then the question becomes whether they have the players on the outside who can get open/win battles for balls in the air.
I mentioned earlier this week that I think right now this is an offense without a set identity. They don't have the ability to go 4 and 5 wide and keep a clean pocket for Brady right now. They also don't have the players built to win battles in the secondary on 2 receiver routes. Maybe the coaching staff sees a bit of Anquan Boldin in LaFell, a big strong guy who can bail out his QB and make a tough catch in traffic. But Flacco/Boldin had a burner or two to stretch defenses down the field and open up some room underneath. Is Julian Edelman going to accomplish that?
People can chalk this up to taking a chance by throwing a ball into tight coverage with the game out of hand, but we've also seen him lock onto receivers when the game is still competitive as highlighted by the throw to Gronkowski into double coverage with Develin all alone in the flat. You cannot just lock onto on receiver and never look off your intended target, especially when you know you are facing zone coverage where the underneath defenders are watching your eyes.
Conceptually, the route combinations on this play were odd. Edelman runs a quick in, Gronk runs a corner, Amendola runs the post on the strong pass side and Vereen runs a quick out while Lafell runs a corner route on the weak passing side. Where's the bait for the underneath defenders? Edelman is on the outside so his in/drag route is too slow to develop. I think Brady needs to use Lafell as the bait on this one, but also think the corner route is poor play design - he should work the seam between Abdullah and the deep outside 1/3 defender. That said, Brady needs to use the bait.
Anyway, that was a great breakdown of a series of awfully executed plays. It's troubling there were so many to choose from.
Great work, as usual.
As ugly as this is, it actually left me a bit encouraged (if that doesn't paint me as the ultimate glass-half-full Patriot homer, nothing will). I know this is only a handful of plays, but I feel like the issues on the line can be addressed, at least somewhat. Most of this seems like mental errors or communication/cohesion errors. Dante or no Dante if the issue is mental mistakes and execution (as opposed to talent) then I trust this coaching staff to be able to address those.
Not to say there are not talent issues on the line as well, but maybe they can get it to a place where it can be at least adequate.
That leaves Brady. I am the biggest Brady apologist in the world, but man that article is depressing. If Brady no longer has the ability to correctly diagnose what the defense is doing and make the right throw 99% of the time, then to state the obvious they are in big trouble. I am going to stick with the "this is still largely a mental/confidence" issue, in that he does not trust his line or his receivers at this point in time (other then Edelman and Gronk). We'll see whether that gets any better over time. Can't get worse than Monday at least.
By the way, great work on these breakdowns. I'm not an X's and O's guy in the least but have learned a ton from reading you guys.
As ugly as this is, it actually left me a bit encouraged (if that doesn't paint me as the ultimate glass-half-full Patriot homer, nothing will). I know this is only a handful of plays, but I feel like the issues on the line can be addressed, at least somewhat. Most of this seems like mental errors or communication/cohesion errors. Dante or no Dante if the issue is mental mistakes and execution (as opposed to talent) then I trust this coaching staff to be able to address those.
Not to say there are not talent issues on the line as well, but maybe they can get it to a place where it can be at least adequate.
That leaves Brady. I am the biggest Brady apologist in the world, but man that article is depressing. If Brady no longer has the ability to correctly diagnose what the defense is doing and make the right throw 99% of the time, then to state the obvious they are in big trouble. I am going to stick with the "this is still largely a mental/confidence" issue, in that he does not trust his line or his receivers at this point in time (other then Edelman and Gronk). We'll see whether that gets any better over time. Can't get worse than Monday at least.
By the way, great work on these breakdowns. I'm not an X's and O's guy in the least but have learned a ton from reading you guys.
Edit: really amazing work guys. This is the best breakdown of Monday's game anywhere on the internet. Really amazing.
- is this one of the inherent dangers of the Patriots' preference of having each receiver running option routes with their own route "tree" and making an independent decision about which route to run*, instead of the traditional play design in which every route is strategically set ahead of time?
- and, if so, is this group of receivers (apart from Edelman, Gronk) struggling with its inherent complexity?
I realize it's more complicated than that (it always is) -- on some plays routes actually have been assigned, if everyone reads the defense/coverage correctly their decisions should be parallel, etc.
* This is what I understand to be a modified Erhardt-Perkins system that Kevin Gilbride refers to as "Streak and Read," but sorry if advance if this turns into an argument of semantics. It's almost impossible classify these offenses, and even harder to identify why something that used to work doesn't work anymore.
Thinking more about this, I realize this is a question I've had off and on over the past few years but never actually asked:nazz45 said:
- is this one of the inherent dangers of the Patriots' preference of having each receiver running option routes with their own route "tree" and making an independent decision about which route to run*, instead of the traditional play design in which every route is strategically set ahead of time?
- and, if so, is this group of receivers (apart from Edelman, Gronk) struggling with its inherent complexity?
I realize it's more complicated than that (it always is) -- on some plays routes actually have been assigned, if everyone reads the defense/coverage correctly their decisions should be parallel, etc.
* This is what I understand to be a modified Erhardt-Perkins system that Kevin Gilbride refers to as "Streak and Read," but sorry if advance if this turns into an argument of semantics. It's almost impossible classify these offenses, and even harder to identify why something that used to work doesn't work anymore.
nazz45 said:
As you probably know, there were more to choose from.
Yeah, that is a good point about route design. On the forced throw to Gronk where Develin was open, Gronk's route ran right into someone, Amendola I think. Everything flowed away from Develin so it wasn't a natural checkdown. Just off.
Ralphwiggum said:
I'm interested to see how the new-look OL performs in a more sterile environment. Asking Stork and Fleming to make their first career NFL starts in Arrowhead is a tough task. It is on the center to make the right calls re: fronts, etc. Maybe in the friendly confines of Gillette they can shore things up pre-snap. That way, if everyone is at least on the same page pre-snap, there's a greater chance each defender is picked up in the pass rush.
I don't think this is an accurate characterization of E-P, based on what I know. There are Patriots playbooks posted online; they're from 10 years ago, so some things may have changed, but my understanding is:dynomite said:
- The "option route" is a specific route, almost always run from the slot, where the receiver runs forward some set distance (usually 5ish years) and then cuts based on whether it's man or zone defense and what direction he's being shaded towards.
- There are defined routes where a player is just running a 6-yard slant without any choices or modifications. Not every route involves choices or reading defenses.
- Some non-option routes might also have "sight adjustments"- an inside receiver might run down the seam and then run a post or corner depending on the alignment of the safeties, or an outside receiver might run a fade against press coverage and a post against zone. The route can also be modified by a blitz - a deep post might be adjusted to a quick slant. Generally there are only two choices, however; it's not like they have to choose from the whole route tree.
- None of the above is unique to Erhardt-Perkins or the Patriots. Every offense does these to some extent. Running a pure Bill Walsh or Don Coryell offense in 2014 would be as backwards as running the wishbone.
One interesting thing about that play was that Hali covered Gronk way down field. Brady may have just made a bad throw, but it almost looks like he expected Gronk to square off the route more, which would have led him away from the safety (but towards Hali). Maybe Brady expected Hali to peel off into a shallow zone?Mark Schofield said:
dynomite said:
I've seen a couple of people asking why don't they just make the offense more simple for the WRs that are struggling to pick up the nuances. At first I get that line of thinking, but I'm not sure that is something you can actually do at this point. Making it more simple and less read and react for the WRs, means it would also have to be less simple and read and react for the QB.
I am working off the premise here that Tom knows offense as well as anyone on the planet. Under that assumption I would believe that the option routes and choice of to throw ball to X spot against Y looks is more reaction and instinct to him at this point. Eliminating all of those nuances means that Brady would need to do more thinking or at least fight what I assume are now natual reactions. All that occuring behind an offensive line that is, to be kind, not playing well.
This is kind of damned if you do and damned if you don't. Making it simplier for the WR, would probably mean that Tom needs to play slower right now. I don't think making Tom play slower is the answer right now.
1) Thanks for the background SN. I have to say, though, your characterization understates the role of option routes in the Pats offense compared to most of the articles I've read on the topic. For example: http://blog.masslive.com/patriots/2013/09/on_most_plays_new_england_patr.html
I'd be interested to know whether you're seeing something different, though.
And all of this is an aside to the larger point, which is me groping to understand why Brady and his receivers just don't seem to be executing the offense this season.
Edit: and no, I definitely don't want Brady to change what has led the team to ridiculous success over the last decade. But why did everyone -- not just the OL -- look so uncomfortable in the system over the past weeks?
(Note as well Boyce's description of the playbook)
I'd be interested to know whether you're seeing something different, though.
And all of this is an aside to the larger point, which is me groping to understand why Brady and his receivers just don't seem to be executing the offense this season.
Edit: and no, I definitely don't want Brady to change what has led the team to ridiculous success over the last decade. But why did everyone -- not just the OL -- look so uncomfortable in the system over the past weeks?
I don't think the author is saying anything that factually contradicts what I wrote. The "option route" does have four choices, so up to four choices is correct. The author chooses to start the article by highlighting a play that has a large number of sight adjustments. It is on page 76 of the playbook I linked to above. On that particular play, every receiver has a sight adjustment, but a) that's not true for all plays and b) only one of the five receiving options has more than one read.dynomite said:
The telling part of the article is the following, I think:
First of all, the bolded passage indicates that, even at the college level, receivers are asked to read defenses. The "even in some NFL locales" clause suggests that most NFL teams do things the way the Patriots do - receivers and the QB have to both read the defense and both read it the same way so the QB can throw with anticipation. He describes this process like it's some revolutionary thing the Patriots do, even while he literally writes that it's not.
Honestly, I think the idea that the Patriots have an offense that's much more complicated than other NFL teams is maybe 20% true, 80% overblown media trope. The author writes this up like reading where the deep safety is located is splitting the atom.
I see. It's an interesting question, one I don't really feel like I know enough (or watch other teams closely enough) to answer.
My impression has been that the Patriots legitimately do run a somewhat more complicated system than the average NFL team, but I'll admit that 1) offenses in general have gotten pretty complicated and 2) that could be media driven hyperbole. (I mean, it's not like Ochocinco went to the Dolphins and regained his mojo -- maybe the dude was just cooked here)
In some senses the Patriots are still running some of the basic plays they've been running since the Charlie Weis days.
My impression has been that the Patriots legitimately do run a somewhat more complicated system than the average NFL team, but I'll admit that 1) offenses in general have gotten pretty complicated and 2) that could be media driven hyperbole. (I mean, it's not like Ochocinco went to the Dolphins and regained his mojo -- maybe the dude was just cooked here)
In some senses the Patriots are still running some of the basic plays they've been running since the Charlie Weis days.
Further reading: this is an article by Doug Farrar on why Ochocinco didn't adjust to the Pats. They talk about sight adjustments and option routes, but the article also talks about how those concepts play out in "West Coast" and Coryell offenses, too. Basically, everyone is doing this kind of stuff: http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-shutdown-corner/option-routes-why-drive-receivers-crazy-233247212--nfl.htmldynomite said:
Reggie's Racquet said:
You're joking, right? Because Tyms isn't a rookie with tons of unfulfilled promise; he's a guy who's bounced around the NFL's practice squads for several years and is unlikely to even make the Pats 53-man roster next week.
I apologize if this was sarcasm; I've been told to get a new detector and I will. But if you're not, you really need to explain why - other than "looked great during garbage time of preseason games" that he "might" be the answer to any question other than "who just got cut and added to the practice squad"?
To follow onto this (old) item, Chris Brown has a piece up now at Grantland on the Packers offense. The Packers have a better track record than the Patriots in developing young receivers, but Brown diagrams a play and yep, three out of four receivers have sight adjustments or options on the play.Super Nomario said:
Two takeaways:
1) Every team is doing options and sight adjustments, not just the Patriots. If a receiver can't handle this stuff, he can't play anywhere - which is why we haven't seen failed pass-catchers thrive elsewhere.
2) While these sorts of decisions complicate running individual plays (because receivers and QBs have to make the same read), they can shrink the size of the overall playbook because one play can functionally substitute for several.