Sunday, October 30, 2011

2011 Week 8 picks

Time for the futile waste of precious minutes that is my week 8 picks. It's more like tradition than anything now;

Cardinals @ Ravens
Having gambled on a rejuvenated Cardinals last week, who then promptly let me down, they can forget it this time. The Ravens defense did a reasonable number on Jacksonville last week and only the faintest of offensive production would have secured a win. Flacco was bad though and after the game there was much mumbling, groaning and maligning of a lack of carries for Ray Rice. Don't expect that to continue this week. Cam Cameron will probably pull a Mike Martz and shove Rice down peoples throats until they're sick of it. Which actually worked really well for Martz and the Bears, and I'm expecting it to do the same for the Ravens. Ravens win.

Vikings @ Panthers
Rookie quarterback shootout time! Christian Ponder vs. Cam Newton. Traditional pocket style passer with good mobility versus scrambling quarterback with big arm and ridiculously good mobility. Both teams also have rather snazzy running games to back them up and... frankly suspect defenses. That's not to say that both teams can't produce a pass rush. They can. But both teams also struggle to back their pass rush up with something more substantial on the back end.

I think for this one I'm going to side with the Vikings. I think Christian Ponder has big potential in the future, which he's showing in flashes now. He's had more time to work with his receivers now. Hopefully they can get Percy Harvin more involved in the game. Then of course we have the spectre of Adrian Peterson lurking in the back field, who had another big game last week. Antoine Winfield should be back at corner for Minnesota, and that combination of things is what's making me lean towards the away team in this one. Vikings win.

Jaguars @ Texans
After watching the Jaguars last week and comparing that to the Texans, I can't take Jacksonville seriously. They struggle to protect Gabbert, who is predictably having a torrid time in the NFL. Meanwhile the Texans are finding alternative ways to move the ball without Andre Johnson. Their offensive line is up to the task I think and Jacksonville's secondary is porous as hell. Texans win.

Dolphins @ Giants
I'm trying to think of a good reason to take the Dolphins. The only one I can think of is that the Giants offense always poses that risk of turning the ball over 5 or 6 times. It's not worth the gamble though. Giants win.

Saints @ Rams
Saints win.

Colts @ Titans
Now we get an intriguing match up. The predominant reason for this is because both teams are playing so poorly right now. The Colts offense minus Manning has been positively wretched. They occasionally string some passes together against the weaker teams, but they don't have the punch when it really counts. Delone Carter was a big bright spot in the running game last week and it's possible the Colts will try something new and lean on him somewhat this week, but that's a big "if".

The Titans? Matt Hasselbeck started the season well, but that early optimism is starting to tail off at a time when it should be building up further. Chris Johnson has bombed out since signing his big contract and despite claims by the coaching staff that Javon Ringer wasn't about to be thrust into the starting line up, I'd still say it's a safe bet that he'll get more carries this week.

So who wins? Errrm. Nobody? Alright, serious answer, I kind of can't help leaning towards the Colts. I can't even really explain why. I guess in my head I'm thinking their defense is more suited to the style of play that Matt Hasselbeck prefers (quick fades etc) and their pass rush is better... when Freeney and Mathis decide to show up. Colts win.

Redskins @ Bills
A part of me keeps ticking over in the back of my mind the fact that the Bills defense is pretty reliant on turnovers to stop people this season. Then a part of me remembers that the Redskins offense has hardly been well noted for it's ball security this season and that Bills running back Fred Jackson has been having a great year. So right now I have to favour the Buffalo. Bills win.

Lions @ Broncos
Last week I got a little lucky taking the Broncos. Lucky in the sense that the Dolphins were awful. This week, can I really take the Broncos over the Lions? I shouldn't. I really shouldn't. But you know what? I can't back down from having spent all this time flying the flag for Tebow. Money where the mouth is time. Broncos win.

Patriots vs Steelers
I made the mistake of overlooking the Steelers last week. But then last week their injury tally was bad, but not quite as bad as it is this week. The Patriots are hardly in prime shape, having dumped corner Leigh Bodden then put Ras-I Dowling onto injured reserve, but Brady has been having a heck of a season and so far nobody has put together a plan for stopping him. My gut instinct therefore is to go with New England. Patriots win.

Bengals @ Seahawks
I can't back the Seahawks. 3 points against Cleveland? Are you kidding me? The Bengals haven't really lit things up in 2011, but they have quietly been plodding along, getting just enough production out of the Andy Dalton - A.J. Green partnership, and just enough production on defense, to get by. So I'm going with the the Orange and Black attack. Bengals win.

Browns @ 49ers
As much as I like Colt McCoy, I don't like him that much. Not against the 49ers pass rush, coupled with a Browns defense that is just bad enough to make Alex Smith look good. 49ers win.

Cowboys @ Eagles
Another Sunday Night Football extravaganza? Ugh, kind of. The Cowboys and the Eagles, both teams notable for the fact that their records are totally out of place with the talent levels they have on their teams. Mainly due to their own errors, specifically turnovers from the quarterback position.

For Dallas the situation got a bit better last week. Romo kept his excesses in check and the Cowboys romped home behind a record setting day for running back DeMarco Murray. The only hitch in that plan was the fact that it was against the Rams, who have been their own special kind of bad this year. Can the Cowboys actually replicate that performance against a slightly stiffer defense (I guess we'll have to wait until after the Eagles game to find out... ba doom tish).

The Eagles have just come off their bye, having gone in 2-4 after beating the Redskins by seven points in a game that saw the Redskins turn the ball over like it was going out of fashion. Which is what worries me about Philadelphia. All those turnovers and they still came up with just 20 points?

I can't see Dallas being that generous (though history has a way of repeating itself) and so I'm inclined to lean towards Dallas. Cowboys win.

Chargers @ Chiefs
Ghosts and ghouls, tricks and treats, and all those other boring Halloween jokes that I'm sure everyone's making about this game. In case you hadn't guessed, I hate Halloween. I think it's the dumbest and most commercialised holiday in existence. More so than Christmas, because at least with Christmas there is (or at least used to be) an underlying excuse for it all and you get a couple of days off work, which isn't to be sniffed at. Halloween is just a bunch of brat kids in shitty costumes eating everyone's f**king sweets, while people old enough not to go trick or treating and too young to be considered adults go to the pictures, further encouraging movie companies that "SAW 2012" will be a good idea, even though that franchise plainly died its creative death after the first excellent movie.

What? ........... Oh yeah football game.

It's the Chargers and Chiefs for Gods sake. Last time these two played on a Monday night I called the Chiefs win correctly, in large part thanks to the Chargers complete special teams ineptitude. I think relying on a repeat would be overly optimistic.

In fact, I think relying on the Chiefs at all is optimistic. I'm not buying the sudden resurgence of Matt Cassel or the mystery and mystique surrounding Todd Haley's beard. I can think of three much better reasons why Kansas has won three back to back games and those reasons would be the Vikings, the Colts and the Raiders.

Not that I'm about to start cheer leading the Chargers, who can't seem to find any of their magic from last year. Not that they were particularly casting many dazzling spells on teams in 2010 as it was. Still, they're the lesser of two evils in this game, so I think I'm going to throw my Ouija board in behind the arcane skills of Norv Turner, Phillip Rivers, Vincent Jackson, Antonio Gates and Shaun Phillips. Chargers win.

Saturday, October 29, 2011

Matt Forte's touchdown run versus the Buccaneers

Sorry this was a little late, I've been pretty busy. Right, diagram time again.

I'll get the disclaimer out of the way first and explain that as always with these diagrams the alignments can't be 100% accurate through virtue of not having enough room in the drawing space to lay out a field to scale and the inability to draw scale sized little blobs etc. The balance is between making things clear and getting them lined up perfectly, so something has to give at times. I'm also hampered by relying on TV camera angles to judge distances etc.

With that out of the way, we're going to look at Matt Forte's touchdown run against the Buccaneers. We'll start by looking at the offensive formation and the defensive front;




So this is basically the look that the Bears got after sending their second tight end in motion to the strong side (as indicated by the dotted line). The defense shifted, with the weak safety starting to creep down a little and the defensive line shuffiling across to adjust from a relatively balanced formation to one that favours the strong side.

This look is perfect for the Bears. The fact that the strong safety was actually starting to drop back a little deep (slowing his reaction to the play) just made it all the more so. What the Bears are going to do is run a power sweep play to the right side, pulling two offensive linemen to lead the running back around the edge. It's what the Bears have been doing all season and they're the best team at it right now, mainly through virtue of the fact that they're one of the few true power running teams left in the NFL. It's certainly done no harm to Matt Forte's rushing numbers.

Now I'll make no secret of the fact that I love this play. There are just so many things about it that are interesting;

- In an age of zone running schemes it's fun to watch a more old fashioned power running play,
- It has a slightly quirky twist, something you don't see a lot of these days, 
- The blocking on the backside of the play,
- The whole concept of "smash mouth", "power" football,

I'll start with that last point because it's kind of a personal hobby horse of mine to climb on and complain about. Basically people mostly use the term "smash mouth football" in one of two ways, either a) to deride this style of play or b) to suggest that this style of play requires a degree of physical brutality and "manliness" that is beyond the more "finesse" orientated teams. Both arguments are as bad as each other and both fuel each others side of the debate. Both are also wrong.

People using the term in the manner described in A are trying to infer that somehow power football, or indeed running the football in general, is somehow a dying art and the reserve only of those coaches who aren't intelligent or daring enough to design fancy passing schemes. The term "three yards and a cloud of dust" often follow closely behind, in the rather naive and misplaced assumption that offensive coordinators calling power plays are merely holding onto the ball in an effort to not lose the game and to grind down the defense. The fact that Forte ran this one in for a 32-yd touchdown and could have gone further if there was more field to run with tells you everything you need to know about the big play potential of this running style.

On the other hand, people using the term in the manner described in B are trying to infer that power football is the preserve of tough guys, of coaches and players who like nothing more than grinding the opponents facemasks into the turf and then stamping on them for good measure. The implicit suggestion is often that "spread" offenses would never be manly enough to run this type of play, despite the fact that almost all "spread" teams have a power play in their playbooks. It also tends to show a lack of appreciation as to how difficult some of the blocks are, requiring leverage and technique over strength, possibly more so than in a zone play.

Which is second thing that interets me. After spending the last couple of weeks describing many of the details surrounding zone running plays and how ubiqitous they are in the NFL, it's nice to get a look at some "old school" running, if you'll excuse a slightly vague and over used phrase. At the minute the Bears seem to be almost single handedly keeping this style of running alive in the open field.

This isn't just your standard running play though. Normally if you're going to pull offensive linemen then you tend to pull the two guards, who are usually your smallest and most agile linemen. In this case the Bears are going to pull their center and right guard, a pretty unusual occurence, but a welcome and fun change up to see.

Lastly they're going to do something a little risky, but something I think more teams could do with trying; they're going to leave the backside defensive linemen completely unblocked. People always moan about numbers in the box against the run, but one of the best ways to defeat this is to simply leave one of the defensive linemen unblocked. Because this is a play that attacks the edge of the defensive front, you can afford to leave that backside man unblocked because he has no choice but to "stay at home" and play his contain assignment. If he doesn't, and instead persistently comes crashing down the line after the running back, that's when you switch to your constraint plays and start running QB keepers and bootleg passes out the backside.

On that note, let's get down to the details of the blocking scheme and see what's really going on here;




What the Bears are trying to do is to create something of a traffic jam up the middle of the defense, while at the same time trying to get some of their big bodied offensive linemen to the outside where they can block either linebackers or secondary men. It's the running game equivalent of creating a mismatch, like asking Vince Wilfork or Albert Haynesworth to cover a tight end like Jimmy Graham or Tony Gonzalez down the field in the passing game.

It starts by blocking down with the right tackle and tight end, marked with the purple arrows, a color which in retrospect I now regret using. These two players have advantageous angles with which to crash down on the defensive tackle and defensive end to their side. This is part of what I was talking about when I said that this play involves technique and leverage. These two offensive linemen have to get out of their stances quickly at the snap and attack their men from the side on, using their footwork and positioning to seal the two big defensive linemen to the inside.

Then we get the right guard and the center pulling, marked with the light blue arrows. They're obviously important, but we're going to skip past them just for a second.

For now we need to quickly peek at the blocks of the left guard and the left tackle, marked with the green arrows. The left guard probably has the toughest block out of any here. He has to get across the face of the the nose tackle "N" and cut that guy off. Again, this is not a block that really relies on great strength, it's more about speed and positioning. He has to get himself in front of the tackle and stop him from penetrating into the backfield through the hole vacated by the center and right guard, which in this case he did superbly, using his shoulder to block off the tackle who then gets caught up in the wash created by the down blocks of the right tackle and tight end.

The left tackle goes up to get the backside "Will" linebacker. This is a size mismatch in favour of the offense, but it's also something of a speed mismatch in favour of the defense. Luckily for the left tackle, all he really needs to do is to get his hands on the linebacker and disrupt his path across the field. You can't just ignore a 300 pound man trying to push you over as you run and in this case the tackle does manage to get his hands on the backer, knocking him flat on his butt.

We also need to touch on the block of the wide receiver to the play side and that second tight end. The second tight end runs right up and out, pulling the "Sam" linebacker away with him, who he then blocks. This is one of the differences that you can create by playing around with formations. In an "I" formation for example, that second tight end would be replaced by a fullback in the backfield, which would completely change the blocking scheme on the edge, so maybe one day when I catch a team running this play out of the "I", I'll draw it up then and we'll go over that.

The wide receiver on the playside also has a different block to make depending on how the corner over him is aligned. In this case the corner is sitting well back, which commonly would prompt the receiver to ignore him and block down on the strong safety, but as the strong safety is backing off even further, it makes sense for the wide receiver to take that corner, which he does.

Finally then we come to the blocks of the center and right guard. As you can see in the diagram above, they pull laterally across the field, trying to get outside of the wash of bodies in the middle. At this point they're looking for the first "color", that is a jersey of the opposing teams color, to show which they will then attack and block. This explains how having that second tight end in makes a difference. If this were an "I" formation with a fullback in the backfield then the right guard would likely end up getting to the edge first and blocking that "Sam" linebacker as he came down hill.

As it turns out, the linemen find themselves in a wide open space between the wash of bodies to the inside and the one-on-one block of the tight end to the outside. They have the "Mike" linebacker coming down to meet them (I imagine making a large gulping noise as he did) and the weak safety trying to sneak his way across from the backside, because secondary players only tackle from a position where they can't get hurt ;)

Let's put up another diagram so we can get a better look at this;


As you can see, the Mike linebacker now has a difficult choice to make. He can try and take on the block of a 290-300 pound lineman running at full speed, in the hope that he might be able to get around him or at least get a hand on the running back, while also knowing that if he fails then he's going to end up taking a very painful tumble. Or he can choose the lesser of two evils and just try to cut the offensive linemens legs, knowing that it might result in him getting crushed but at least he's taken out a blocker and then someone else can make the tackle.

In this case the Mike backer tried going one-on-one... and the right guard decided to cut the backer for a change, a situation which didn't end particularly well for the backer.

This means that the only person left who can realistically make the tackle and stop this play from going for a first down (the strong safety is too deep) is the weak safety who is desperately rushing across to make the play. The only thing between him and the ball carrier is the small matter of the pulling center. As you might expect, the center meets the challenge of the safety head on... or rather shoulder on, driving him back with a forceful blow and damn near knocking him off his feet. The end result of all that looks a little something like this;


Anyone that feels the need at this point to put on their best Vince Lombardi voice and shout "... what we're trying to get is a seal here - and a seal here - and try to run this play in the alley!", well you go right ahead. Because that's exactly what we're looking for and it's exactly what the Bears got. The Sam linebacker and the corner are sealed to the outside, and the weak safety and Will linebacker are sealed to the inside. This leaves Forte with a clean alley to run through.

Now it comes down to the strong safety to try and save the touchdown, but this is where running backs really earn their money in one-on-one situations with defenders. Forte cuts inside the safety almost effortlessly as he flies across to make the tackle. I'm not sure if Forte has been paid yet.

He still has to dodge a few more attemtped tackles from players that have managed to get off their blocks (*stares evily at the offensive linemen for not finishing off their blocks and staying on their assignments until the whistle*) but Forte manages to dodge these and make the endzone to put the Bears up 7-0.

So there you have it, the power sweep. This is your real "smash mouth" football; a series of difficult but well executed blocks, using technique and leverage to control the defensive line, while creating blocking mismatches of big offensive linemen against second and third level defenders. It's just a little odd that a tactic perfected and made famous by the Packers is now being used by the Bears!

Speaking of the Packers, in case you missed it, that link I put in above ("best Vince Lombardi voice") will take you to an article I wrote a long while back. The main article is a bitch and moan fest about hitting and fines in the NFL (and strippers), but if you scroll down past that you'll get to three videos of Vince Lombardi coaching the Packer Sweep.

As for the Forte run, mercifully someone has uploaded it to YouTube which you can watch here. In the event that link ends up dead due to copyright violations or something, here's the link to the NFL.com video. Enjoy the advert. Both videos show the Fox broadcast, the commentary of which made me laugh when the commentator complains about the pulling linemen getting "caught up on the outside". Or as it's otherwise known to me and you; blocking.

There is also a link here to my recent article about a Frank Gore run against the Lions, which as I mentioned in that article demonstrates a compliment to the power play.

So I hope you enjoyed it. If so, share a link/facebook/e-mail someone etc. And I will see you tomorrow for my week 8 picks. Enjoy your day

Friday, October 28, 2011

A word on 3-4 defensive ends

So today I just want to touch on a subject that irks me a little.

In an age where the Internet and TV combine to make NFL players into household names or even the dreaded 'Superstars' title, the simple fact is that some people on football teams get more attention and more time spent raving about them than others. Some of it is understandable; quarterbacks are more visible and spend more time on the field than kickers. And while kickers sometimes miss important field goals, they don't throw interceptions at key moments like many quarterbacks do (mentioning no names here *cough* Tony Romo).

Now defenses get a reasonable amount of love and attention, probably not as much as they really should, but even then there are winners and losers. In fact, there are big winners and big losers.

We hear all about secondary guys like Revis and Asante Samuel and Charles Woodson and Troy Polamalu. We get plenty of air time spent talking about pass rushers like Jared Allen and DeMarcus Ware and Jason Pierre-Paul and Dwight Freeney. We often here about middle linebackers, guys like Patrick Willis, Ray Lewis, Sean Lee, James Farrior etc. People talk about defensive tackles like Ndamukong Suh, Casey Hampton, Haloti Ngata, B.J. Raji etc.

But you know who we never hear about? I'm guessing you do, because I gave it away yesterday and the title kind of gives it away too; Defensive ends in 3-4 defenses. You very really hear people talk about these guys.

Guys like Ziggy Hood and Brett Keisel (Steelers). Guys like Cory Redding (Ravens). Guys like Randy Starks and Jared Odrick (Dolphins, who've actually started to drift away from the true 3-4). Guys like Glenn Dorsey (Chiefs). Guys like Luis Castillo and Jacques Cesaire (Chargers). Guys like Adam Carriker (Redskins). Guys like Calais Campbell and Darnell Dockett (Arizona). Guys like Justin Smith and Ray McDonald (49ers). Guys like Marcus Spears (Cowboys).

The unsung heroes of the 3-4 defense.

These are the guys that do pretty much everything that the nose tackle does, with the exception of maybe not dropping out into coverage as much (it just sounds weird saying that, but nose tackles are becoming legitimate members of the pass defense in the NFL), and perhaps contribute more. They stop the run just as well as nose tackles and they certainly seem to get after the quarterback better.

Part of that might get attributed to the nose tackles being doubled so often, but that's not necessarily the case as 3-4 defensive ends see a fair share of double teams too. It's also interesting to note that the teams with what might be considered the "better" defensive ends right now, the 49ers, Steelers, Ravens and Cowboys, seem to be among the leagues best defenses.

Yet hardly a word is spoken about these invaulable cogs in their various defensive schemes. You never hear about how Ziggy Hood and Brett Keisel eat up blocks on the tackles so guys like James Harrison and LaMarr Woodley can end up one on one with a pass protecting running back. You don't get to hear about how Cory Redding often sets the edge for the Ravens defense, forcing runs back inside to the waiting arms of Ray Lewis. How often have you heard people talk about the amount of sacks that Justin Smith has picked up over the years for the 49ers? How often do you hear about Marcus Spears shutting down escape routes for opposing quarterbacks, forcing them to sit in the pocket while Demarcus Ware comes crashing in from the opposite side?

So whether you have a beer, a cup of coffee, a glass of orange juice or whatever refreshing beverage you've chosen for the evening, raise it now and say it with me; "3-4 defensive ends, we salute you!"

And that's really all I wanted to say about that. Just throwing out some love and recognition for hard working players who don't get enough attention. Tomorrow I'll be back to normal service, e.g. drawing badly proportioned diagrams, when I look at Matt Forte's touchdown run from Sunday against the Buccaneers. Then Saturday I'll do my picks for week 8 (we're already half way through the season? Shit). And then at some point next week, in honor of the fact that this looks like it'll be the last season for the UFL, I want to expand and lay down in writing my crazy master plan for creating an alternative league to the NFL.

And I'll also spend some time figuring out a way to stop myself from starting sentences with the word 'And'.

Thursday, October 27, 2011

Play-pass off the outside zone

In a follow up to my previous posts about the inside zone run and the outside zone run, next up is to take a quick look at some of the possibilities that extend from them in terms of play-action passing.

Now the first thing to address is that this is going to be but a brief look. Obviously, like any passing game, the number of different routes that can be run down field, the number of route combinations that can be put together and the number of formations from which to run such plays is pretty huge. Thus really we're just going to look at some of the more basic concepts and ideas which form the foundation upon which the grand house of a play-action passing game can be built.

The first thing to look at is the basic design of how many NFL teams put together their zone schemes, including the favoured formations. One of the preferred choices for running the outside zone is to have a full back offset to the weak side. This full back can cut off the backside defensive lineman, as demonstrated below. Please note that these diagrams are not necessarily to scale, and that drawing representative alignments in Powerpoint is anything but a precise art! Also, you can enlarge any of the pictures simply by clicking on them.




In reality that defensive tackle ("T") next to the center would be a little more to the right from our perspective, as would the defensive end ("E") on the tight end side, but I've found that just complicates the drawing process. Maybe one day I'll figure out a convenient way to diagram it all, but for now... tough.

What's of interest is that offset fullback, whose path is marked with the dotted line.

The reason for this is the potential that exists for slipping that guy out of the backside of the play. With the heavy run action to the right the entire front seven will be drawn across to stop the outside zone run. The "Will" linebacker gets pulled across and becomes more concerned with filling any potential cut back lane. Meanwhile we're left with a defensive end matched up against the fullback.

Now from a blocking perspective on a run play, that match up favours the defensive end. In all fairness the fullback should be considered to have done a good job if he can just delay the end for long enough to get the running back to the line of scrimmage. But when it comes to the play-pass, now the match up favours the offense. A 6 foot, 6 inch, 270lbs defensive end is not going to pivot on the spot and keep pace with a 5 foot 10, 230lbs fullback in the open field.

With the quarterback 'boot legging' or 'waggling' (depending on your preferred choice of terminology) away from the flow of the run, we can now create a situation where you have the quarterback running out towards a wide open space, with the fullback down field at about a 4-5 yard depth, plus whatever other routes the offensive coordinator has in place.

Let's put this up in a diagram so we know where we stand;




I've cut the line off at the center because we're not overly interested right now in what's taking place past that point. The only two things of note on that side would be the tight end running across the back of the linebackers to get open and the opposite side receiver running downfield to draw off the safety coverage.

What concerns us immediately is the dynamic between the quarterback and the fullback. They've now put the defensive end in a bind, because one man can't cover two players. If he tries to drop off and cover the fullback he leaves the quarterback free to set up and thrown downfield, or even to run it, using the fullback to throw a block on the end. If the end comes charging down after the QB then he leaves the quarterback with the option of a little dump off pass to the fullback, who can then turn up field and potentially turn a 5 yard gain into something much bigger.

It's certainly not an enviable position to find yourself in.

And that's the real advantage to throwing play-action off the outside zone. The amount of lateral movement by the defense required to cover the run leaves the backside wide open. Even a slower quarterback can gain perhaps 5-10 yards himself. Someone like a Michael Vick can bust that thing open for a huge gain. Or if the defense reacts well and starts to close in, the QB can take the little dump off pass to the fullback and get himself a few yards. On first down that sets you up in a nice and convertible short yardage situation. On third and short it gets you a first down. And in the red zone that small gain could be worth 6 points.

The only real way for the defense to compensate for this play-pass is to have the defensive end and the "Will" linebacker 'stay home', that is to play very cautiously and not pursue across the field when they see the outside zone action going away from them. This of course is precisely what the offense is looking for. Such caution only makes it easier to block the end and the linebacker when the offense legitimately runs the outside zone, or what your TV commentators will describe as "keeping the defense honest" (maybe a future title for a sister blog perhaps?).

And (I must stop starting sentences with 'And') while we're talking about red zone potential and bringing up the running ability of Mike Vick, two subjects that were combined into a post a while back, there is another version of this play-pass that's worth looking at because a number of NFL teams use it when they get down into those "1st and goal" situations, while others still will use it in the open field. It's certainly common enough to be worth taking a look at. Maybe Andy Reid could take some notes?

The basic difference in this next variation of the play is in who the offense uses to block the backside, and in the case of the play-pass, who it is that slides out of the back door. Basically what you do is to put a second tight end into the game as a replacement for the fullback, then line this guy up behind either the strongside offensive tackle or the original tight end. Many teams refer to this player as an 'H-back', for reasons I've never been entirely sure of, especially when the running back in most schemes is labelled as 'H' for halfback already.

Regardless, you line this second tight end up on the strong side and when the ball is snapped he now takes over the blocking responsibility of the fullback, running back across the formation to make the block on the backside defensive end. Or in the case of the play-pass, he fakes the block on the end (maybe gives him a shove, depending on how strong/brave your tight end is) and then runs for the open ground in the backside flat. Here's a rough look at it;




First of all, I accept that the defense probably wouldn't be quite so generous as to use the above front for their goal line/close to goal line setup, but just roll with it for now. The important point is that we have a tight end running clean out the back of the play.

The primary difference between this and the fullback, is that the tight end is usually a bit quicker and more often than not has better hands. That means he's more likely to run free from any backside defenders and if the ball is thrown to him, he's more likely to catch it, which is always a bonus. The secondary effect is that the path of the tight end/H-back can pull the "Sam" linebacker across a little, or at the very least cause him to hesitate, making it slightly easier for the starting tight end to get up and block him inside.

Another slight variation of this is to send the second tight end/H-back in motion prior to the snap, to line up behind the left tackle, where he is much better placed to get the block on the end or to sneak out the back door on the play-pass, though this negates somewhat the surprise effect of him coming across the back of the line. The positioning of this second tight end on the right side can also add a further variation to the outside zone, where instead of coming across the play he simply drives upfield, perhaps chipping the "Sam" backer on the way, and goes up to get the strong safety.

Finally, to finish we'll take a quick look at a play-pass by the Houston Texans from Sunday's game against the Titans, which ended with running back Arian Foster bagging a 78-yd catch and run. Here's the video of the play for those interested, and we start with the diagram below showing the pres-snap alignment of the offense and defense;




This diagram is as accurate as I could make it. With the Texans playing a heavy run set, the Titans naturally clamp down, especially on the strong side. They seem worried that the Texans are going to run to the strong side and thus have brought the numbers down heavily to defend it, but in actual fact they're going to get an outside zone to the left.

The split receiver on the left side will go hard downfield and come across the middle, with the tight end on the right side slipping out between the strong safety and the 'Mike' linebacker in order to head downfield and then break right to the sideline. The fullback is going to press towards the line initially, then he too is going to peel off to the right and try and slip out into the flat.

The defense starts by going with the zone run to the left, then as soon as they read pass they all start to flock back to the right in order to cover the various receivers headed in that direction. What they don't see is Foster coming up through the line and sneaking out to the left. As Schaub waggles out to the right he sees his receivers reasonably well covered, all that is except Foster. So he pulls up, turns and fires one out to the left.

For Foster it's a simple case of catch and run, cutting inside one would be tackler and then letting his speed do the rest. I've drawn up the final play here;




On a side note about the above play, I've noticed the Texans are really fond lately of these heavy sets, bringing an additional tight end into the game to replace one of the receivers. I'm not sure if they were doing this before the injury to Andre Johnson or not, but it's worked out well for them. They lead the league in rushing attempts which has led to the fourth most total rushing yards. They had two 100-yd rushers in the game against the Titans.

Which has sparked up a question I've long thought about; what if more teams used heavy, goal line style sets in the open field? This may strike people as me yearning for the old "three yards and a cloud of dust" mentality, but one thing I've noticed is the amount of times down by the goal line that a team will get their back through untouched and on his feet. Obviously in the end zone he has nowhere else to run, but in the open field he'd be clean through and off to the races. Interesting...

Well that's your lot for today. Tomorrow I'm planning to have a quick look at a group of players who I think are grossly under appreciated and have a huge impact on contemporary 3-4 defenses; the 3-4 defensive end.

See you tomorrow.

Tuesday, October 25, 2011

Week 7 review and my writing schedule for the week,

So my plan for the week rolls a little something like this;

- Review the week 7 action (now)
- Follow up post about zone running by looking at some of the play-action possibilities,
- At look at the unsung heroes of the great contemporary 3-4 defenses,
- Matt Forte's touchdown run versus the Bucs,
- Picks for week 8,

So, we'll start with;

Redskins @ Panthers
A much more comprehensive performance from Cam Newton, with a wider range of passes and a better showcase of his full skill set. No interceptions was also a big plus point. The Panthers offense still has kinks to work out of its system though. They gave up 4 sacks and it could have been more were it not for Newton's physical skills. They finished 5/12 on third down and 3/5 in the red zone. Newton is also still a little too reliant on Steve Smith, who caught 7 passes for 143 yards. That's more to the detriment of the Redskins defense though, which at times appeared to have given Smith far too much room to run, despite him being the only major receiving threat on that offense. I often wonder what till happen to the Panthers this season if Smith gets injured or gets game planned out of the game by a defense.

Speaking of game plans, the Redskins offense have had theirs wrecked with an injury to Tim Hightower. At times Hightower gashed the Panthers defense, but outside of Hightower the Redskins only ran the ball three times; twice with Ryan Torain and once for Roy Helu. Helu is a good rookie and Torain can run pretty good too, so it'll be interesting to see how much the Redskins lean on them in the coming weeks, especially given the quarterback play they've had recently. Beck was ok, but only completed 22/37.

Seahawks @ Browns
Nine points between them? What in Gods name was this, because it wasn't a football game. In fairness there were points left on the field, but not a lot of them. Red Bryant blocked two Cleveland field goal attempts that otherwise could have left the Browns winning 12-3, while the Seahawks had a punt return touchdown by Leon Washington brought all the way back by one of my most hated penalties in all of football; a block in the back.

Now by rule, it was a penalty. I'm not questioning that the referee called it correctly by rule. But why, why in the name of Vince Lombardi is that even a penalty? All it was, was a little nudge in the back, to a player that had no real hope of catching the return man. I can understand something like spearing, because you don't want guys smashing each other in the back during a return. But a little nudge that just about knocks the opponent off balance? C'mon, surely that's not what footballs about, wiping out a great individual play for something so insignificant.

The question out of this game is this; who has the worst offense? Instinctively you might say Seattle, who picked up a whole 9 first downs with 137 net yards, were 2/12 (16%) on third down and gave up 3 sacks to Chris Gocong, T.J. Ward and Jabaal Sheard, all of whom are under rated, largely as a result of playing for the Browns.

But Clevelands offense has to be in there with a shout. They gave up 5 sacks themselves, including two for poor Chris Clemons (deserves to be on a better team). They held the ball for a record setting 42 minutes and 56 seconds, running no less than 84 offensive plays, yet managed just 12/24 on third down (they had 24 third down plays!), a total of 298 net yards, were 0/2 in the red zone and scored a whole 6 points. I just want to vomit reading that.

Falcons @ Lions
Both quarterbacks took their licks, getting sacked three times a piece and suffering some nasty looking injuries, but it would appear neither quarterback will miss any real significant time. That's especially good news for the Lions, who are really struggling even with Stafford. Their last two games have begun to expose the early season hype for what it was... hype. Like the Panthers, the Lions offense is something of a one receiver show, except this one receiver show has no running game to pick up some of the slack when needed.

Unlike the Falcons, who have Michael Turner carrying 27 times for 122 yards, as well as three receivers who went over 50 yards a piece. One of them was tight end Tony Gonzalez, who reaffirmed his future hall of fame credentials by equalling and then surpassing Marvin Harrison to take second in the all time catches list. Only Jerry Rice is ahead of him now, which considering Gonzalez is a tight end, is a huge achievement.

Broncos @ Dolphins
Well, I did pick it right. But perhaps not in this fashion. What an exciting late rally though, coupled with the over time sack/fumble that set up the winning field goal. In truth though it was another horrible game from both teams. Tebow's 13/27 for 2 touchdowns belies the fact that for about three quarters he was something like 3/10 and looked quite shaky. The Broncos offense finished 4/16 on third down and only made the red zone twice, both of which times they converted.

But a win is a win. And a loss is a loss. And it's another loss for the Dolphins, who we should all remember, had less net yards on offense, less first downs, were 3/14 on third down, 1/3 in the red zone and on defense gave up over 180 yards on the ground. The sole bright spot was that they poured on the sacks, finishing the game with seven. Though I'm not sure if such a strong defensive performance doesn't actually make their offense look worse for not capitalising on it?

Both teams have a long way to go before being competitive again. The Dolphins can't seem to buy a break right now. And the Broncos need to seriously reassess their offensive and decide if they really want Tim Tebow holding onto the ball that long waiting for passes to develop down field. They could also do with some better performance at the offensive tackle spots.

Chargers @ Jets
I just don't understand what has happened to Phillip Rivers. Nobody does. He had Antonio Gates out there. He had Vincent Jackson out there. Yet he only hit 16/32, for less than 200 yards, along with two interceptions. It's just not very... Phillip Rivers like. There was some pressure from the Jets defense, but it wasn't like they were over running the Chargers line. They finished with one sack.

Perhaps more remarkable was the play of Mark Sanchez, who completed 18 of his 33 passes, for less yards than Rivers, with one interception but crucially 3 touchdowns to Plaxico Burress. I found this amusing mainly because ProFootballTalk.com spent the first part of the season praising Burress, then have spent the last couple of weeks trashing him, then went into utter back track mode yesterday when mentioning his scores, as if they hadn't said a bad word about him all season.

Shonne Greene ran over 100 yards for the Jets as New York finally managed to find some of that "ground and pound" that Rex Ryan is always harping on about. Just don't mention that a quarter of the yards came on one carry alone. Still, it's an improvement for the Jets. Kind of.

Bears @ Buccaneers
Well, as it turned out well over 70,000 fans arrived at Wembley to watch the Buccaneers and the Bears. I suspect there were a lot of discount tickets among them. Anyway, game on, and once again the Buccaneers offense imploded. With injuries to LaGarrette Blount and Earnest Graham it left only Kregg Lumpkin is a viable back for Tampa. 8 carries for 15 yards tells that story. So the Buc's turned to Josh Freeman and 51 passes later he'd thrown 4 interceptions and just two touchdowns, The Buc's were 4/14 on third down and 1/4 in the red zone. Also, I'm not sure if it's my eyesight, but I'm pretty sure that Freeman keeps lining up in the shotgun just 3 or so yards deep, instead of the usual 5? Weird.

The Bears offense responded in pretty nifty fashion for a change. Ok, so they were only a little better on third down than the Buc's and Cutler was 17/32 with just one touchdown and two interceptions, but Matt Forte was again came up trumps for the Bears, with 25 carries for 145 yards and a TD. There was also an interesting play in that game where the Bears pulled both the center and guard for a touchdown run, so we''l take a look at that later in the week.

Texans @ Titans
Hmm, now I distinctly remember someone I know saying that they didn't think the Texans offense would get going without Andre Johnson and that the Titans defense was more stout than people are giving them credit for. I wonder who said that? Surely it wasn't me? Oh wait... yeah it was. Whoops!

It was just a slaughter. Schaub threw close to 300 yards and had two touchdowns. The Texans had 222 net rushing yards, with Arian Foster carrying 25 times for 115 yards and two touchdowns, plus another 104 yards from 15 carries by Ben Tate. Foster wasn't done though, catching 5 passes for 119 yards and another touchdown, which is one of the play action plays I'll look at when I do my post later this week about play action off of zone running.

The bigger picture here though is the Titans offense. Or rather, lack of offense. Hasselbeck made just 14/30 with two interceptions. Chris Johnson was booed off the field with his ten carries for 18 yards. It was just non existent play from the Titans. No offense, no defense, no tackling. Even the Texans kicker Neil Rackers embarrassed them, by running down hill to lay a hit on Mark Mariani during a kick return. Proof here.

Steelers @ Cardinals
Ok, so this was an optimistic pick me taking the Cardinals. I did my old trick of trying to second guess what the coaches would game plan for and got burned. Specifically, Chris "Beanie" Wells got just 12 carries. I also didn't account for Roethlisberger seemingly having shaken off his foot injury. He was mobile and looked much more comfortable in the pocket, shifting around to avoid the rush and hitting 26/39 for 361 yards and 3 touchdowns in a very impressive performance, including another deep shot over the top to Mike Wallace for a 95 yard score.

Kevin Kolb could only watch in admiration. He still put over 250 yards and 2 touchdowns, but the Steelers pass rush made its presence felt, with LaMaar Woodley getting two sacks. The Cardinals still managed to scrape together 23 first downs, which is pretty good. You just get the sense that there is a hump lying in the road ahead of the Cardinals and if they could just get over that, then they'd have a pretty good season again. Priority one in the offseason; pass rushing outside linebackers.

Chiefs @ Raiders
This was never really going to go any other way. Kyle Boller thre three picks to start with, but then I was frankly stunned to see Carson Palmer enter the game, as if that was going to make a huge change. It didn't, and another 3 picks later the Raiders were done for, shut out, with Palmer completing just 8/21 passes. Matt Cassel tried to get in on the fun for the Chiefs, but he only managed two interceptions, leaving the Chiefs plus four in that regard. Notable among the picks for the Chiefs were Brandon Flowers who had two, one returned for a touchdown, and second year safety Kendrick Lewis, from last years rookie watch list, who had a pick six as well.

Rams @ Cowboys
This was basically a bye in terms of picking the winner. Even with the return to action of Steven Jackson, the result wasn't really in doubt. A.J. Feeley tried his hardest, but it was a bit of an uphill struggle against what is still a very good Cowboys defense. For once though the spotlight was off of Tony Romo, who made 14/24 with 2 touchdowns and no interceptions. And it fell on rookie DeMarco Murray, who carried 25 times for 253 yards and a touchdown, which is a single game rushing record for the Cowboys. The blocking up front was excellent and once Murray hit the open field his speed was very impressive.

Packers @ Vikings
I thought I was just being optimistic picking the Vikings. It was more of a moral support kind of thing for Ponder. Damn thing nearly paid off! Ponder was... ok. 13/32, 2 touchdowns, 2 interceptions. There were some big throws, there were some very nice throws. But you can see that he's only spent a week taking snaps with the first team. Some of the passes were well off, but you get the feeling a bit more time with his receivers will sort out some of those problems.

The Packers? Well they were the Packers. Rodgers was 24/30, over 300 yards and 3 touchdowns. James Starks put in some unsung work at running back with 75 yards off 13 carries. The big winner was Greg Jennings, who exploited some truly awful coverage to pick up 147 yards and a touchdown. And that's really where the Vikings are falling down right now. With Winfield still out and Chris Cook being remanded in custody, the Vikings secondary is rapidly falling apart.

(Just read that the Vikings have waived receiver Bernard Berrian).

Colts @ Saints
I left this before the end of the third quarter. The result wasn't exactly in doubt. It was a case of "how many?" would the Saints win by. The answer was 62-7, tied for the fourth highest deficit in NFL history since the merger. Drew Brees was just electric. 31/35, for 325 yards and 5 touchdowns. Tack on 236 yards net rushing. 6/8 on third down. 7/8 in the red zone.

The only good thing to come out of the game for the Colts was the play of rookie running back Delone Carter, who had 89 yards and a touchdown on 10 carries, emphasising the fact that despite being a pass first team the Colts run blocking technique is actually pretty good.

A dark cloud now hangs over Indianapolis though. There is almost constant talk about Jim Caldwell losing his job, and the possibility that the the Polian's might go to, the reasoning being that their failure to develop a plan B behind Manning is what has lead to this mess.

It does look pretty serious. Without Manning, the Colts offense is practically non-existent. More worrisome is that the defense - used to playing while ahead and having plenty of rest as Manning kept the other teams offense off the field - are getting badly exposed. They kept throwing the same two zone defenses at Brees, with minimal pass rush, and he just kept picking it apart like a pro bowl quarterback should. The Colts are almost entirely reliant on Freeney and Mathis for pressure, and don't seem to have a defensive plan B outside of Cover 2 and Tampa 2. It makes for grim watching.

Ravens @ Jaguars
And finally, the Ravens swoop to bail me out of a bad week of picks... what the fuuu, fudge? Are you kidding me? The Jaguars?

The Ravens averaged about 3.6 yards per pass, in what has to be the biggest upset not just of this week, but of the entire season. I don't believe it. I don't think anyone can. The Jaguars didn't even score a touchdown. Blaine Gabbert had another terrible game, making just 9/20 for 93 yards. But 30 carries for 105 yards by Maurice Jones-Drew (who also fumbled three times), plus an interception and an important fumble recovery were enough for the Jaguars.

After the game, Ravens linebacker Terrell Suggs bemoaned his teams offensive play calling. And to be fair, he has a point. The Ravens defense played their part, laying down four sacks, three forced fumbles and containing the Jaguars pass offense. The Ravens offense however didn't pull their weight. Ray Rice, pro bowl running back and widely acknowledged best offensive player on that team, had 8 carries for 28 yards. Flacco meanwhile made 21/38, for just 137 yards, 1 touchdown, 1 interception.

Now a lot of people aimed their displeasure at John Harbaugh for trying an onside kick with two minutes left, two timeouts and down by only 2 points, but I don't think you can really blame him that much for that. He was rolling the dice a little sure, but it's not the cause for the Ravens loss. That offense is. They didn't even have to do anything amazing. Just one field goal prior to the touchdown probably would have sealed the game. Just one field goal was all they really needed and they couldn't even produce that.

They were 2/12 on third down (Jaguars; 2/14). 34 net rushing yards. 112 net passing (off 38 attempts plus three sacks). On a day when the Jaguars were 0/3 in the red zone, the Ravens just needed to get into the red zone more than once and that probably would have done it. The Ravens looked gutted afterwards, and well they should. The Jaguars opened the door for them and practically begged them to run off with the game. They didn't.


So thanks to the Ravens, that leaves me 7-6 for week 7, by far my worst week. That brings my season tally to 61-42. I hate the Ravens. And the Texans. And the Panthers.

Next up, taking a look at play-action off the zone running game. That'll likely be up tomorrow. Till then, enjoy your day and hit the old facebook or Google like button thing. Hell, I don't even know what the Google like button does.

Saturday, October 22, 2011

Week 7 picks

As much as I might try to put if off, I can't. Picks must be made. There are some games I'm quitely confident about, others.... not so much.

Before we get to that though, my new book has arrived; "Building a Champion; on football and the making of the 49ers," by Bill Walsh w/Glenn Dickey. I bought more for the insights of Walsh than for it being about the 49ers and from what I've read so far it's a good book. The main reason I bring this up is because I want to give credit to Thrift Books of Auburn, Washington (www.thriftbooks.com) for their excellent service. The book crossed the Atlantic and got here in less than a week, and arrived in exactly the condition described; a little worn (it was printed in 1991) but otherwise in good shape. I also want to credit the publisher, St. Martin's Press, who clearly had decided that back in the early '90's there simply weren't enough books that, when closed, had a pus yellow colouring to edge of the pages. So they set about rectifying this gross injustice.

Nice. On with the picks.

Redskins @ Panthers
If the Panthers are going to win a second game this season, this might just be the moment when it happens. The Redskins have problems in the back end of their defense and the Panthers have the right tools to exploit it. I moan about Cam Newton a lot but one thing he can do is launch that ball like a you-know-what. And I may sometimes moan about Steve Smith, but one thing he can do is catch jump balls like a you-know-what. The question is can the Panthers keep Newton's jersey clean long enough for this to happen?

You've got Brian Orakpo and Ryan Kerrigan, both of whom will be out for blood against Carolina. This is, I think, a Redskins team that wants to avenge last weeks lost. I don't expect Rex Grossman will play, likely benched in favour of John Beck and I think the interception feast that the Redskins served up last week will effectively bully themselves into running it a bit more this week, which is something they do very well.

I think that combination, a Redskins offense that wont turn it over so much, coupled with an angry defense looking to take out some frustration on a rookie quarterback will pay dividends. For that reason, I'm saying Redskins win.

Seahawks @ Browns
And here the fun begins. I don't like the Seahawks. It has nothing to do with my allegiance to the Red and Gold of San Francisco (well maybe a little) and everything to do with the Seahawks just not being a particularly good football team. I think last year they caught a huge break... in that they play in the NFC West. I think most people would agree that if Seattle were a little more to the right of it's current location and the Seahawks found themselves playing in the NFC North, they wouldn't have made the playoffs.

In the intervening months between the 2010 and 2011 seasons, I don't think the Seahawks have addressed their more serious issues. They still don't have a consistent quarterback (Charlie Whitehurst is slated to start) and they still don't have enough play making ability on offense. The defense has gotten better, that's true. But it's still weak at the corners and it's still weak at the linebacker spot.

Are the Browns good enough though? Peyton Hillis is out so scratch that one off your list. Is it going to be another 60 pass attempt day for Colt McCoy? And if so, who does he throw to? Josh Cribbs is improving, but he's not there yet. Massaquoi is ok, without being great, and Greg Little gets better by the week, but he's still a rookie that needs a bit of work. You know what? For one more week I'm going to put aside my niggles about the Browns team and back them. Mainly because that's how bad I think the Seahawks are. Browns win.

Falcons @ Lions
Another tough one, principally because I don't like either of these teams right now! The Lions, I still maintain, are over rated. They didn't get beat by a super elite 49ers team last week, they get exposed by an average 49ers team. The Falcons maybe don't have the defense that the 49ers do, but they certainly have a better offense.

They have better receivers and more of them. They have a better quarterback. They have a better overall running back. The offensive line... perhaps not so much. And when your offensive line is potentially worse than the current 49ers, that's an issue. A big one. The only saving grace for the Falcons in this regard is that the Lions D-line hasn't played like we all thought it would.

Everyone thought that Suh, Fairley, Vanden Bosch and Avril would make a dominant front line. That just hasn't happened. Avril in particular has been a let down. After putting up 8.5 sacks last year and being a real force on the edge, he has just 2 so far this year. Suh had ten sacks last year, two this year. Fairley has played two games, both off the bench, and hasn't had a tackle yet. Like the Eagles dream team, this dream line just isn't living up to the hype.

That's why I think I like Atlanta a little more in this one. Last week everything came together for them, and let's not forget they pushed the Green Packers quite hard earlier in the season. They're not the complete package right now, and I'm not even sure they'll make the playoffs, but right now I think they're better than the Lions. Falcons win.

Broncos @ Dolphins
I've been backing Tim Tebow since the day the kid was drafted. It would look pretty stupid if I backed out now. That's why I'm sticking with the Broncos for this one. It has nothing to do with a Dolphins defense that can't generate pressure on the quarterback, can't cover receivers down field and can't seem to make tackles in the open field. Broncos win.

Chargers @ Jets
Another battle without an obvious winner. On the one hand you have the Jersey pulling Jets, who are still finding ways to generate pressure despite a lack of what might be called "elite" talent up front. They're having trouble stopping the run and offensively they still look horrific, but I don't think it's as easy as that to dismiss them from this game.

The reason is because the Chargers are struggling. They've really missed Antonio Gates and without him red zone scoring has been an issue. Phillip Rivers doesn't look as confident as he did in the pre-season and just generally you get this impression of the Chargers looking a little lost. The defense is still holding teams down yardage wise, but turnovers and sacks have dried up, which is problematic given the offenses own struggles with holding onto the ball.

In the end, for me it comes down to the Jets offense. Or rather, the fact that they don't really have one. If the Chargers D can just hold them to small-modest gains per play and force them to drive up the field with perfect execution, then the Jets offense will eventually begin to unravel as it has a dangerous want of doing. Offensively the Chargers run game could find a good match against the Jets D, and really just one or two scores could be enough to decide this. My only apprehension is the Chargers special teams coverage versus Joe McKnight returning kicks for the Jets! Chargers win.

Bears @ Buccaneers
The Bears and the Buccaneers travel to London where they will be met by literally hundreds of fans. I'm joking of course... they'll be lucky if that many people show up. I got a phone call yesterday from the ticket agent offering me tickets at what I would describe as "loss mitigation" prices. If it wasn't for an uncertain transport situation I might have bitten.

Anyway, focusing on what will happen on the field, who do I like? Well after watching the Bears against the Vikings, it's absolutely the Bears. No offense intended to Tampa, but the Bears finally pulled together all their disparate problems into a working solution. They ran the ball well. They protected Cutler. They made great use of play-action passing. They stopped Peterson a few times and got after the quarterback with vigour. It was probably the most complete performance I've seen out of the Bears in maybe two or three seasons.

That gives me a certain level of confidence in them, something I'm not sure about when I talk about the Buccaneers. They just seem so up and down on offense, one week finding the groove and not the next. At least the Bears have always kind of been working towards getting it right, learning in stages. The Buccaneers just seem to flail back and forth between good and goodness gracious me that was bad.

Defensively they're getting a lot of hype but I'm not sure how much of it is justified. Yes, they have their moments. But again, it's just not consistent enough. The front seven occasionally plays great, occasionally plays like they're back in high school. On balance I trust the Bears more than I do the Buccaneers. Bears win.

Texans @ Titans
Houston vs Tennessee. A right old Southern brawl as the two most likely candidates for the AFC South title go at it in a crucial battle. And I really don't know who to pick. The Texans without Andre Johnson had their struggles last week. My word did they struggle. But how will the Titans cope with a still impressive Texans defense?

The Titans bye week gave them the opportunity to sit down and really assess what they're doing offensively. Or more to the point, to help them assess how to get Chris Johnson more involved and how to get him over his current slump. Not only has he not run the ball as well, but he hasn't had as much of an impact in the passing game either. The Titans defense also needed to regroup after the Steelers game. Prior to that game they had held teams to 16, 13, 14 and 13 points. Then against Pittsburgh they gave up 38 points in one huge chunk. The bye couldn't have been better timed for the Titans.

I just worry about the Texans ability to score points. Even without Andre Johnson this hasn't been the explosive scoring offense that we're used to from Houston. Against a defense like Tennessee (if they can rekindle their earlier form) then I doubt the Texans ability to stay in the game. I'm going for a Titans win.

Steelers @ Cardinals
You have no idea how tempted I am to take the Cardinals. Just bear with, I can explain. See, the Steelers exploded two weeks ago against the Titans, with Roethlisberger playing his best game all season. But then next week he comes back and against the Jaguars? 17 points. The Jaguars don't even have a pass rush on any normal day, but the Steelers O-line was so bad they somehow managed to make the Jaguars D look good. Even with the Steelers defense playing the way it was, Pittsburgh still struggled.

Now granted, this is the Cardinals they're playing. The same Arizona Cardinals who have lost four on the bounce. The same Cardinals that lost to Seattle and picked up their sole win this season against Carolina. But There's just something about the Steelers that makes me nervous, and there is something about the Cardinals that makes me optimistic. Chris 'Beanie' Wells had three touchdowns against the Giants and I think he could form the spear head of a rushing attack that the Steelers might struggle with thanks to injuries to guys like James Harrison and Casey Hampton.

God help me, but I'm going to take a leap of (misplaced) faith. Cardinals win.

Chiefs @ Raiders
I can tell you now that I'm not taking the Raiders. That sounds almost bizarre just saying it, so I can only imagine what it would sound like for you reading it. This is a Chiefs team that scored just 10 points in its first two games of the season, while giving up 89. That's absolutely horrendous. But since then things have picked up. The Chiefs narrowly lost to the Chargers and then won two games in a row. Alright, so those two games were the Vikings and the Colts, but that's beside the point. They've been getting better. Matt Cassel has been getting better, Dwayne Bowe has been getting better, and the Chiefs seem to have settled on Jackie Battle as their new lead running back.

Oh and then there's the small matter that the Raiders QB choice this week is between; a) Terrelle Pryor, who only joined the team in the supplementary draft, b) Kyle Boller, who needs no further introduction or c) Carson Palmer, who has been with the team a whole three days, which are coincidentally the first three days he's spent with any team this season.

That means it all comes down to Darren McFadden in the running game, and Jacoby Ford, Darius Heyward-Bey and Denarius Moore is the passing/special teams game to come up with some big plays and push the team onwards. I don't see that happening. It's just not reliable enough to expect those guys to make big plays against a Chiefs defense that can go when it chooses to. On that note, Chiefs win.

Rams @ Cowboys
Surely even the Cowboys can't blow this one? Surely? Cowboys win (if they lose this, I'm never picking them again this season and I will make and burn a voodoo doll of Tony Romo in revenge).

Packers @ Vikings
If you thought me taking the Cardinals over the Steelers was scary, wait till you hear my thought process on this one. Because there's a part of me that just can't get over all the sketchy moments that the Packers have had. The Falcons game that they should have put away more comfortably. The Rams game where they fell asleep for the entire second half. Letting the Panthers of all people back into their week 2 game. I know I shouldn't, but I just can't stop doubting the Packers.

What makes it worse is that I'm optimistic about the Vikings. Even Vikings fans aren't at that stage yet. They're just getting over the fact that Ponder will start and they don't have to watch McNabb anymore. And yet here's me about to stick a rocket up the backsides of the Vikings and hype their offense perhaps a bit more than it really deserves.

Because I like Ponder. For me, he was the best quarterback in the 2011 draft and while many people were surprised he was taken where he was, I think it was a good bad pick. They got the quarterback they wanted and a good quarterback is what they got. He's perhaps being thrown into the fire a little earlier than planned, but hey, it had to come some time.

Of course the major benefit that Ponder has is the guy standing behind him in the backfield; one Adrian Peterson. And the Vikings have already shown that early in games they can lean on Peterson for yards and scores. Hopefully the dynamic that Ponder will bring to the table is the ability to punish teams for loading up the box against the run.

On top of that, the Vikings pass rush may not be all that consistent, but they have shown in the past that they've largely got the number of the Packers offensive tackles. Robsion is a good compliment to Jared Allen. The only probably really with this master plan is the Vikings secondary matched up with the Packers receivers. That's a mismatch that heavily favours the Packers.

Still, I'm going to do it. I'm going to bite on the chance and take yet another leap of faith. At this rate this week could either go really, really well for me, or be a complete write off/disaster/ruinous week for picks. Here goes nothing (maybe literally), Vikings win.

Colts @ Saints
You have to admire the Colts. They've actually gradually been picking up their game. They're finding plays that work for Curtis Painter and they're gradually pushing the ball down field more and more with each passing week. The problem they have is that as the offense picks up, so the defense seems to increasingly be adopting the attitude of 'it's ok, those guys will pick up the slack' and every week seem to fade away just a little more.

That's why I can't back Indianapolis. They've come so close a couple of times now, but 'so close' is still not 'actually won'. And while you couldn't pick a better team to play against if you're looking to revitalise your offense, with the Saints D back to it's old ways of giving up big yards and not creating turnovers, that Saints offense is probably going to be too much for the Colts to handle. Saints win.

Ravens @ Jaguars
Are you kidding? The Jaguars are probably the worst overall team in the NFL right now. You could argue it's a toss up perhaps between four or five teams, but for me the Jaguars are the lowest of the low. At least all the other teams have certain bright spots or certain hopes for the future. The Jaguars don't. Especially not against a Ravens team that is beginning to put together an offense that actually picks up some of the slack when their excellent defense has a down week. Ravens win.

Friday, October 21, 2011

A word on Tom Brady

Todays topic then is Tom Brady, the wild haired wonder of New England, who looks more like he should be shooting commercials for shampoo than playing football, and who will forever be known as much for "that" fumble which has become synonumous with the Tuck rule and for "that" low hit which has lead to what some call the "Brady" rule, as he will be for the fact he's won three Super Bowls, won a whole bunch of games, set a bunch of records and generally been - along with Peyton Manning - in an elite class of quarterbacks quite apart from the rest of the pack.

What I want to look at though is something odd about Brady that I noticed a while back when he played the Dolphins on Monday Night Football in week one. It's an issue that I'm surprised hasn't been picked on more by defensive coaches, because it's actually considered a fairly serious flaw. Well, it is in lesser quarterbacks at least, who lack the accuracy and decision making of someone like Brady.

The problem is that - surprisingly - Brady has a major tendency to stare down his receivers. I don't just mean a quick look down before he throws. I mean from the snap to the release, he often fixes his eyes right on a receiver and never looks off. In a moment we're going to look at some video, but for now we'll just address quickly some of the problems with this and some of the factors that seem to mitigate it.

The main issue when a quarterback stares down his receivers is that you tip of what you're thinking. You're basically telling the defense who you plan to throw the ball to. There are certainly times that you can get away with this, especially against man coverage when the defenders are busy looking at the receivers and not the quarterback.

Where this becomes a more serious issue is against zone defenses, where the defenders are dropping back and reading the quarterbacks eyes. By looking at a quarterback who is staring down his receivers, the defenders are able to figure out who the intended target is and to close in on him. In particular, safeties and dropping linebackers can take more of a gamble against a "stare down" quarterback displacing to the edges of their zone of responsibility in order to improve their chances of getting the pick.

This works especially well when accompanied by pressure, which forces the quarterback to make a quick read and throw. A linebacker spying on the quarterback knows the pressure is coming and that if the quarterback is to have any chance of getting the ball out then he needs to make the throw quickly, so when he sees the direction the quarterbacks eyes are headed he can bite and go looking to make the big play.

With safeties you see the effect more in single high coverage and with a free safety who has buckets of mobility, say someone like an Ed Reed of the Ravens. Sitting in the middle of the field they can read the quarterbacks eyes and at the snap follow where he's looking, zooming across to appear out of seemingly nowhere to make the interception.

Now of course it's not as easy as all that. Any over reaction by the defense creates a tendency that can then be exploited by a savvy offensive coordinator and a savvy quarterback... like Brady. It also helps to have receivers like Brady does. They're quick, have great hands and their route running (apart from maybe Chad Ochocinco) is among the best in the league.

There's also the element of how the plays are put together that works in the Patriots favour. I've seen Patriots playbooks from the mid-2000's and I imagine the same basic concepts are still in use today that were back then. If that's true then it means they're still often packaging routes together that are designed to work halves of the field.

To give you an example, they might have a four receiver set with a running back in the backfield, where two receivers on one side of the field are running routes designed to compliment each other. On the other side, the other two receivers will be running two different routes, again designed to work together, and possibly with the backs route incorporated to add another level of coordination.

The advantage of this kind of scheme is that you can put together a single pass play that is designed to beat two different types of coverage. The two receivers on the right side could be running a route combination designed to beat a Cover 2, zone defense, while the receivers on the left can run a route combination designed to beat man coverage.

All you need now is say.... a top tier veteran quarterback with great accuracy, pretty good arm strength and a good understanding of how defenses are put together and how to recognise them. Like Tom Brady for example. Throw in a little motion to try and tip the defenses hand, combined with your quarterbacks knowledge of the various defensive 'tells' that exist, such as the alignment of the safeties on the hash marks and how they line themselves up over the receivers, and what you have is a recipe for helping Brady to break down his reads into much smaller chunks.

Now instead of reading the entire field, he can anticipate the coverage he's going to face and select the receiver combination he thinks will work best against that coverage. At the snap he looks right across to that side and starts keying the defenders for the tell tale signs that let him confirm the coverage. Then it's simply a case of reading how the defenders are responding to the routes and hitting the open guy.

Of course if those defenders happen to be looking right back at you and reading you for tell tale signs, then the whole merry go round begins again....

Right, enough of the theoretical side, let's get to the practical and start looking at some videos. Now, given that I don't have access to the NFL's extensive library of end zone tapes, we're going to have to do this the hard way. That means you're going to have to turn down your speakers, unless you happen to enjoy listening to McDonald's and Papa John's commercials, and brave the world of hurt that is NFL.com's video library.

1) Our first play is from the Dolphins game and it's the 10 yard TD pass to Gronkowski. The Patriots have a receiver in motion and looking at their reaction to it plus the alignment of the safeties, you can bet Brady sees cover-2. To the right he has his tight end on an out and the outside receiver running up and over the defense on something approximating a post. The outside corner gets pulled inwards and Brady hits Gronkowski. Watch his head though (you get a better look on the replay). Brady is watching that thing all the way; http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-fantasy/09000d5d8222fd2e/QB-Brady-to-TE-Gronkowski-10-yd-pass-TD

2) Next, same game, this time the Patriots are down at the two. Brady has two receivers left and sees the blitzing safety coming from a mile away, pointing him out to his line. As soon as he has the ball in his hands he looks immediately left to Welker. Not the greatest example of the stare down (it's a blitz read) but just a good example of Brady's quality thrown in there; http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-fantasy/09000d5d82230718/QB-Brady-to-WR-Welker-2-yd-pass-TD

3) Still the Dolphins game, Brady gets man coverage across the board in an empty set, single high safety. As soon as the ball is in his hands he's looking at Hernandez for the throw. Here's where it gets interesting. I'm wondering that if safety was dropping back and reading Brady's eyes, might he have got across for the break up? http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-fantasy/09000d5d822307cc/QB-Brady-to-TE-Hernandez-30-yd-pass

4) This is Brady to Welker in the Raiders game and gives us a great shot of Brady staring it down all the way. He's literally just standing there, looking, looking, looking, then throws: http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-fantasy/09000d5d822c5f5c/QB-Brady-to-WR-Welker-32-yd-pass

5) Again from the Raiders game, this play-action pass gives us a great look from behind the line on the replay. You see Brady just fix right in on Welker after the play fake. It's literally tunnel vision. And this highlights what I was talking about a while back with playing bump and run. When the Browns did that to Welker last year it put Brady in a bind, because everytime he looked straight at Welker there was nothing there to be had, forcing Brady to then revert to reading the field. If Welker had been bumped or delayed on this route, Brady would have found himself holding that ball and awful long time: http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-fantasy/09000d5d822c6563/QB-Brady-to-WR-Welker-28-yd-pass

6) This next example demonstrates precisely that problem. It's actually a sack from the Jets game. Brady only has one receiver to his left and he locks right in on the guy. The coverage is tight and Brady just stands there holding the ball, waiting for his guy to come open. At which point he gets taken down; http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-fantasy/09000d5d822fa5a4/Jets-defense-sack-9-yd-loss

7) This next play sees Brady looking for Deion Branch to his right, who he hits on a out (word of advice Branch, the reason you're running an out route during the two minute drill is so you can get out of bounds easier and stop the clock, not cut inside and get tackled, costing your team nearly 20 seconds). The stare down is intense; http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-fantasy/09000d5d822fa5f8/QB-Brady-to-WR-Branch-29-yd-pass

8) Another sack this time, from the Cowboys game. This is short yardage and the Cowboys make an effort to get their hands on the Patriots receivers. Brady looks right and holds his vision there. By the time he realises there is nothing on and looks back to the middle he's sacked. Again this is one of the problems with making pre-snap decisions on where the ball is going; http://www.nfl.com/videos/new-england-patriots/09000d5d8232df24/Cowboys-defense-sack-5-yd-loss

9) And one more sack for luck (as opposed to "suck for Luck"). Again we see Brady look left right off the bat and hold his vision there, eventually letting the pressure get home; http://www.nfl.com/videos/new-england-patriots/09000d5d8232e525/Cowboys-defense-sack-8-yd-loss

10) From the Cowboys game again, it's the 5-yd TD pass to Welker. Brady sees the defense and makes an adjustment, then takes a few peeks across to his left at Welker before the snap, followed by a quite obvious look to finish before the ball comes. Then as soon as it's in his hands, he's looking at Welker all the way. If Welker gets jammed, the pressure would probably get home as Brady likely wouldn't have enough time to reset; http://www.nfl.com/videos/dallas-cowboys/09000d5d8232ebbb/QB-Brady-to-WR-Welker-5-yd-pass-TD

Annnnnd to finish, we go back to that Patriots/Dolphins games courtesy of some complete random Pats fan on YouTube, who posted every offensive snap for the Patriots in that game, in two parts. He also posted the whole NFL Films documentary 'A Football Life; Bill Belichick', both parts 1 and 2. Here's the user ID so you can find those if you're interested.

And here's the Patriots offense. Just try and ignore everything else and focus on Brady's head, especially when they do the replays with the Skycam, still the best camera angle in football. It's a stare down master class.





Well I hope you enjoyed watching those vids (and the horrific amount of commercials). The conclusion? It's not a deal breaker, staring down the receivers. Not with someone like Brady. But it does throw up some interesting ideas for game planning to beat one of the most prolific passers of the contemporary generation. I'd be interested to know what NFL defensive coordinators do to exploit such a vulnerability if anything.

More importantly for me it reaffirms something I've always believed in when it comes to Football and life; everybody has a weakness. Find yours, so you can cover it up. And find your opponents, so you can exploit it.

I'll be back tomorrow with my picks.

Thursday, October 20, 2011

The Inside Zone

And I promise I wont complain about Eli Manning this time.

Before we look at the inside zone you need to have read the article on the outside zone, as references will be made back to it. The reason for this is because the plays are so similar.

Really the big difference between the two is the intention of where to send the running back. In the outside zone play, the running back uses the position of the tight end as his aiming mark. He makes a mental note of the spot where the tight end is lined up, and at the snap of the ball is running towards that spot. The goal of the offensive line is then to get outside of the defense and pin them in, allowing the back to get around the end of the line and upfield. Really, if the back has to cut inside then it's sort of a "plan B" situation, often as a reaction to the end tackle having been beaten to the outside.

The inside zone does kind of the opposite. Now the goal is to attack the gap between the offensive guard and the offensive tackle. At no point really should the back find himself running outside of the tackle. He has to get inside and get penetration through the middle of the defense. This play compliments the outside zone for precisely that reason; when the defense starts to cheat and overplay the outside zone, it makes it easier to block them with the inside zone.

The inside zone also shares many of the benefits that the outside zone does in terms of being 'Front Ambiguous', that is to say that it can be used against a wide variety of defensive fronts without the need for any major changes in the way the play is blocked. This helps to reduce the number of plays in the offense, which in turn permits greater repetition of the remaining plays in practice, honing the skills of the players to a finer edge.

To start with then we need to look at the rules that the offensive linemen use. The good thing about this is that they use precisely the same rules as they do with the outside zone. If you have a down lineman covering any part of your body then you are "covered". If not, you are "uncovered". And just like in the outside zone the linemen will decide whether to work together or whether to work alone based on these rules.

The uncovered linemen must work to their playside, helping their covered team mate if necessary. The covered linemen must check their team mate to the backside (or non-playside, if that makes it easier for you). If that man is also covered, you're on your own. If he's uncovered, he'll help you out.

And this is where the main difference comes in. In the outside zone, the preference was to get covered linemen who had help to come out of their stance, hit the defensive linemen over them, and then work up to the linebacker level, letting their backside team mate take over the block on the defensive linemen. The covered linemen with help only really stayed on his original man if that defender made a hard move to the playside.

Now we want our offensive linemen to focus a little more on blocking the defensive linemen. There is no major rush to get up to get wide or to get up onto the linebackers. The uncovered linemen in the outside zone would take a very much horizontal first step, looking to get across and cut off the D-line. Now all our linemen can afford to take a slightly shorter, more controlled first step that goes up towards the D-line, as opposed to laterally across their face.

At this point we'll do a diagram  review, just so we can get a better idea of what we're looking at;


Hopefully now you have a better idea of what the offensive linemen are doing and what they're looking for.

The key to this play is double teams on the defensive linemen, then working up to the linebackers. If the D-lineman goes inside then the backside linemen will take over the block and the playside linemen will work up to the next level and get the linebacker. If the D-lineman goes outside, then the playside linemen stays on him and the backside guy will go up to the linebacker. And if he tries to stay head up on the playside linemen, then the two will work together to drive him back, until one of them can come off and get the linebacker, depending on how things pan out.

The next thing to look at is the running back. In the outside zone, the running back was using the tight end as his original land mark and then he made the decision to cut based on a read of the second defensive lineman to the playside of the center. If that guy went hard outside then he switched his read to the first down defensive lineman and read that guy.

Now with the inside zone we want the running back to start off by aiming at the "B" gap between the playside guard and the playside tackle, using that as his landmark. Some teams like the running back to make a more specific read of the defensive front and then aim at either the inside hip of the tackle or the outside hip of the guard, but I personally find that cumbersome and largely irrelevant for this discussion.

The decision as to where the running back will end up cutting is based on the first down defensive linemen to the playside of the center (remember in the outside zone he read the second man). If this defender works his way to the outside (playside) then the back cuts inside of him. If he tries to drive inside then the back works to get outside of him.

Here's what it looks like;


So in this case the running back reads the block of the defensive tackle and cuts off of him. If that man presses to the playside then the back cuts up inside. If the man presses inside then he cuts around him and up through the resulting wide gap between the guard and the tight end. The block on the "Mike" middle linebacker is determined by the actions of the Nose Tackle. If he drives hard laterally and blocks off the center then that will leave the backside guard with the opportunity to go up and get the backer. If the guard and center can pin him and stop him moving, that will allow the guard to take over the block and the center can go up for the Mike.

There are also two more things we need to be aware of here. First, if the Nose tackle does press hard across the face of the center then that would give him the opportunity to tackle the running back if the back tries to cut inside. For this reason, the back has the option to read the nose tackle after making his first read and to then cut behind him.

This is doable, but risky, as it presents the opportunity for the back to end up dancing about behind the line of scrimmage when really one of the mantras of zone running is "one cut and get up field!", the idea being to remove the chance of negative plays. How much freedom the back has to cut behind the nose really depends on the coaches and their judgement, which will likely be influenced by the quality of the back.

A bigger, slower running back is unlikely to be given too much leeway, especially if he's young and/or inexperienced in this system. A smaller back, with much better cutting ability and/or more experience in the system is likely to be given the green light to cut back as far as he sees fit.

The second thing of note is that some teams have tried to completely avoid the situation above where the back has to potentially read the Nose Tackle by devising methods for making checks at the line of scrimmage to change the play a little.

The first of these methods is to ask the playside guard and tackle to execute a "fold" block. This is where the offensive tackle blocks down on the defensive tackle who is covering the "B" gap, and the offensive guard pulls back off the line and goes around the block of the tackle and up to get the Sam linebacker. The second solution is to simply run away from that defensive tackle, flipping the play as it were, by the quarterback making a check at the line.

The best method I've seen of doing this is to use a "Red/White" call. Obviously you can use any two names you like, but the Red/White concept seems to have gained some traction with many coaches at all three levels. The basic explanation of this is that when a "B" gap is covered (even if just partially) with a defensive tackle, that's referred to as Red. When a "B" gap is uncovered (there will still be a linebacker lurking about 5 or so yards back), then that is referred to as White. Ideally you want to run to the white side and away from the red side. Here's how it looks when you run away from that covered "B" gap;



As you can see we now get the full back going up to get the Will linebacker and we now have two double teams right up the middle of the defense. Now the running back would read the Nose tackle as his first read. If he has to cut back inside of him he'll have a much easier time of it, thanks to the double team on the other defensive tackle.

So there you go, the inside zone. Coupled with the outside zone and a few other runs you can actually put together quite a formidable rushing attack without having to have a hundred different ways to run the ball. The play action possibilities are also pretty good, especially when you substitute the Fullback for a second tight end and start messing around with things like lining him up on the playside and having him run all the way across the formation to block the back side of the play.

Maybe next week we'll take a look at just that?

Tomorrow I'll be back to look at Tom Brady and hopefully I can dig out some video clips to show you what I was talking about with his vision. Till then, enjoy your day.