Thursday, December 29, 2011

The Three Step Drop

Finally... it's here. After all the waiting it's not even that big of an article. But it's done, so there.

So today we're going to look at the three step drop, a play that is very much a double edged sword and somewhat misunderstood at that.

For a start we need to get the obvious point out of the way that the three step drop isn't specifically a play in its own right, but a series of plays which share common footwork for the quarterback. I find it useful though to think of them as just small variations on a single play as it helps to keep in perspective the fact that they all share the same strengths (high completion percentage/easy yards) and the same weaknesses (few tacklers to stop a defender in the event of an interception/the ease of the pass tempts its overuse) .

Now my biggest bug is the way people on TV talk about the three step drop. How many times for example have you heard this choice phrase; "a three step drop, ball control offense..."?

That's a classic phrase used to describe the West Coast Offense as run by Bill Walsh, a name that I would hasten to add that he notoriously did not approve of, not least because most of the ground work for his offense was laid in Cincinnati, Ohio, as the offensive coordinator of the Bengals under Paul Brown.

It's also an incorrect assertion that the "West Coast Offense" was based around the three step drop. Having sat down in the past with a pen and paper and actually logged the pass attempts during old 49ers games (when Walsh was in charge), I can tell you that at most the three step drop constituted maybe 25% of the passing plays, and that's only in selected games (like Super Bowl 19).

In general the "ball control" aspect of Walsh's offense was made up of five step drops, the idea being that it's a relatively easy completion that often results in a first down. In addition, many of the seven step passes called involved clearing space for the running backs coming out of the backfield, who then provided easy dump offs to the quarterback while setting up the running back in space (maybe a post in itself at a future date).

As for the three step drop, Walsh himself said on numerous occasions in books, interviews, seminars, articles etc, that the three step drop was more of an opportunity play. It's not something you really plan to use and send in as a call to the quarterback; rather the play is something that the quarterback audibles to when the opportunity presents itself.

That opportunity usually comes when the defensive coverage is set too softly, giving the receivers far too much of a cushion (the corners align too deep away from the wide receivers). Under these conditions they are likely to turn and retreat if a receiver launches aggressively out of his starting stance and will then not have enough time to react to a quick, short throw.

The three main routes run by receivers off the three step drop are; the quick hook, the quick slant and the quick out. A fourth route is the quick fade, with the ball typically being caught about 20 yards deep, as opposed to the 40 yards that you would expect off a proper fade route coupled to a 5 step drop. The quick fade is normally used as an adjustment by the receiver to bump and run coverage, or down in the red zone by taller receivers. We'll look at all four routes over the course of this article.

We'll start I think with the quick out.

The quick out is a route that has really fallen heavily out of favour in modern football, which is somewhat surprising given that my research suggests that this was Walsh's favoured use of the three step drop. Certainly I've seen the likes of Dwight Clark and Freddie Solomon catch more quick outs than any other kind of quick route.

Like all quick passes the quick out is very difficult to stop if performed correctly, but can go horribly wrong if done incorrectly. Indeed the reason this route has fallen out of favour may be related to the fact that an interception of a quick out almost always results in a defensive touchdown. It'll be obvious why this happens when looking at a diagram of the play. For simplicities sake I've removed everyone from the play except the corner, receiver and quarterback;


You'll have to excuse me for not using a curved line for the route but such is the way of Microsoft, who it seems insist on making everything about their products as difficult and frustrating to use as humanly possible. Suffice to say that in actuality that route would be a nice smooth turn made after about 5 yards. Typically if the receiver has his inside foot forward (which you do now, don't you receivers? I said don't you!) then he'll break off his fourth step. In the case of our receiver in the diagram he would have his left foot forward and the footwork would be; right, left, right, left (cut to the outside).

By the time the receiver has levelled out his route (horizontally) he'll be about 7 yards deep and heading towards the sideline. If he makes the catch then chances are he'll run out of bounds shortly afterwards, unless he happens to be exceptionally agile or has lined up in such a way as to give himself more space.

That's an intriguing point so we'll just touch on it briefly. By lining up a few yards closer inside to the offensive line than normal the receiver can create more space for himself outside, allowing him the opportunity to catch the ball and run with it, but this does tend to tip off the defense and an experienced corner will smell that somethings up.

Once he's made his break, the receiver turns back immediately to look for the football. At this point the receiver is watching for the ball and not where he's going, so it's easy for a receiver to lose track of his route. If he starts to lose ground (comes back toward the line of scrimmage) that's not ideal, but it's not exactly the end of the world. However if the receiver gains ground (goes deeper) that can be dangerous, as it brings him closer to the covering corner. As with everything football related only through thorough and repeated practise will the receiver develop the proper sense of positioning and depth.

As for the quarterback, he unsurprisingly takes three steps back, turns and throws. There are three important points that need to be observed though. Firstly, and probably the most critical, is that the quarterback keeps his eyes centered down field during his drop. If he turns and looks at the receiver as he's dropping back then he will tip off the throw and a corner in zone will almost certainly jump the route. The quarterback must keep his eyes locked down the middle of the field, either focusing on the middle linebacker, a safety, or the goal post in order to help him from tipping off the throw.

Secondly, the quarterback must take the three quickest steps he can. Depth is not so much a concern as the timing of the drop. It's a three step drop, so it's not like he's going to be holding the ball for ages while the pass rush closes in. Thus it is more important for the quarterback to get the timing right than to get separation from the pass rush. He takes three quick steps, then as his third step hits he pivots on the ball of that foot, turning to the receiver and making the throw. For a right handed quarterback the footwork would be; right, left, right (pivot on this step) and then throw. Speed is the key, although a coach should be aware (especially with a young quarterback) of the quarterback taking this to the extreme and taking three silly little steps.

Thirdly the quarterback must make sure the pass does not get intercepted. If it is then there is nobody between the defender and the goal line to stop him running it in.

The advice given by Walsh was for the quarterback to fire the ball directly at his mans hip, not trying to lead him at all, but just firing a bullet right through his near hip. Now I'm going to disagree hear a little and suggest an alternative, but before you e-mail me complaining that you taught your kid my preferred approach and he got picked off for six, just remember that Bill Walsh won three Super Bowls (and probably should have stayed on for a fourth) while my Super Bowl trophy cabinet is currently empty, and doubtless will remain so forever barring an extraordinary stroke of luck.

See the problem I have with throwing the ball directly at the receivers hip is that your inviting a pass that gets thrown short and behind the receiver, which then gets picked off. Anytime you see the intermediate out (10-12 yards) get picked off, this is usually the primary cause. Personally I prefer to see the quarterback zing that thing in at just a little over shoulder height, while trying to put the ball just out in front of him.

The trouble with this approach is that it sometimes (when thrown badly) leads to the receiver being brought back down hill and going out of bounds for just a six yard gain, as well as making it slightly harder for the receiver to make a clean catch and turn upfield for extra yards. But given the nature of the quick out (a short pass with the receiver running into the side line) I personally feel this is acceptable, especially as I think it reduces the risk of interception.

Again, it's one of those things that the quarterback and receiver have to work hard on in practise in order to develop an understanding where they both know what the other is going to do before they even do it.

The last point about the quick out relates to the offensive tackles. It is absolutely essential for the offensive tackles to cut block their assigned man in order to keep his hands down. If they allow the pass rusher to observe the quarterback and to use their hands then they will likely tip the ball, and a tip in this situation is likely to lead to an interception. The offensive tackle can afford to take one punch step back, sometimes two, then he must cut aggressively at the pass rushers knees.

Whether he hits or not is largely irrelevant. What matters most is that the cut is done aggressively and in such a manner as to force the defender to reactively dodge and bring his hands down to fend off the cut block. The reaction of the defensive man is more important than whether the tackle actually blocks him. This is a quick pass, so even if the tackle fails to make contact then it matters little; the pass rusher will not have time to get to the quarterback (if he does, then it's time to start looking for a new quarterback).

In addition, any offensive guard who finds himself with a man in a three technique (aligned on his outside shoulder) should also use the cut, just to be safe. If the defender slants hard inside across the guards face then this is not so much of an issue, but if the defender shoots the gap between the guard and the tackle then the guard needs to cut, otherwise the defender has a chance of blasting through into the passing lane, albeit it a small one. Best not to take chances.

From a play construction point of view, the coach should be aware that he musn't incorporate outside flares by the backs or the tight end, as doing so is likely to drag linebackers right into the passing lane. If you have a tight end then he should be sent inside to hook up over the ball. Backs should either be incorporated into the protection or made to run routes either through the line or just quick hooks into the position where the offensive tackles originally lined up.

Lastly, the quarterback needs to know when to check into this play, or when to check out of it if you have called it in from the sideline.

If you've given him this play as part of your audible system then usually it's going to be used in lieu of a running play or on a second down when the distance to go is 7 yards or less. What he's looking for is the distance of the corners off of the receivers (the cushion). Ideally you want the corners as far back as possible, 10 yards or more (standard Cover 3), though anything down to about 7 yards deep is ok.

However your quarterback needs to be aware that the closer the corners are to the receivers, the more likely it is that the coverage is being disguised. He should try and get a good look at the safeties, especially paying attention to see if they are shifted unusually far across to one side or the other. This could suggest that one of the corners will bail out, the safeties will rotate across and the opposite corner will sit underneath at a 5 yard depth ("Cloud" Corner), leaving him right in the passing lane.

The quarterback should be looking right down the field anyway when the ball is snapped (remember, he's trying not to tip off the pass) so he should see the safeties rotating across. If that's the case then he needs to throw away from the rotation; if both safeties shift across to the right (from QB's perspective) then chances are the right corner is in "Cloud" and the left corner is bailing out into Cover 3. The rotation is "to the right" so the quarterback looks left, being wary of any linebacker dropping off into the curl/flat position to that side.

If this is a play that has been sent in to the quarterback or was part of an opening script of plays, then the quarterback needs to be ready to check out of the play if the corners are playing too tight against the receivers. The receivers can change their routes to quick fades if that approach takes your fancy, but beware of the safeties and understand that such an automatic reaction can easily be exploited in future.

For those who've fallen asleep by now I can only apologise. That was supposed to be a short summary of the key points. At this rate I'll still be here writing this during the Super Bowl. On the plus side, most of that stuff above applies to other plays so it's useful to know.

The next play is probably the least popular of all the three step plays and that's the quick hook. The quick hook is designed to get five cheap yards from the throw, as well as whatever additional yards the receiver can get with his feet. This is probably better suited to receivers with above average run after the catch skills.


Basically this is just like any other hooking pattern, where the receiver runs full speed off the line to sell a deep pattern and force the defender back, only to break down quickly and turn back to the quarterback. The only major difference between this and an intermediate hook is that the receiver stops and turns much quicker.

As a result he doesn't have the same momentum as a receiver running an intermediate hook would, so instead of having to get low and take four quick steps at the top of his route to slow himself down, often the receiver running the quick hook can just stop almost dead in his tracks. He also need not come back towards the ball in the same way that he would on an intermediate pattern. Instead the ball comes to him.

In fact the diagram I've put up probably is a little misleading, but as long time readers will have already guessed I'm too lazy to go back and change it. Really the receiver stops and just kind of flips his hips on the spot. The footwork for this receiver (being on the right side with his left foot forward (inside foot forward!)) would be; right, left, right, left, right (pivot back to the quarterback).

That fourth step (a left) can be slightly longer than normal in order to help the receiver dig in and slow down. The fifth step (right) is used to pivot on. The receiver puts the ball of this foot down and turns, finding his balance with his left foot. If anything he actually ends up drifting towards the sideline with that balance step. He must be careful though not to move about too much. By the time he turns the ball should be coming almost directly at him.

Switching to the quarterbacks perspective, the quarterback should put this pass on the receivers outside shoulder as he turns. You do not want to pull the receiver inside and indeed if the pass is aimed to the inside shoulder and then thrown errantly it can end up right in the hands of a closing defender. Keep the pass towards the outside.

The quarterback should take three normal steps, pivot and throw. You do not want the receiver standing around waiting for the pass, as this will only invite defenders to close on him and pick it off. By the time the ball is released the receiver should just be turning and getting his feet set. On the other hand if you go to quickly the receiver will not have enough time to turn and make the catch.

The offensive line still need to be cutting and the coach still needs to be wary of using routes with the backs or tight end that might drag defenders into the passing lane. If executed properly and with the right receiver this play has a surprisingly good potential for yards after the catch.

Next is the quick slant;


Without doubt this is the most common and popular three step play used by contemporary offenses. The quick slant offers the best opportunity for the receiver to catch the ball in stride and run for extra yards, as evidenced by the occasional three step slant that you see going all the way for a touchdown. It's also - at least in my opinion - the most dangerous.

With the receiver coming inside you're bringing him into a situation where he can be bracketed by defenders on both sides and where any catch can potentially end with him taking a clout right in the face at high speed while in a largely defenseless position. Buyer beware, as they say.

To help mitigate that problem is not unusual to have the receiver line up a little further outside. Given that receivers often line up quite wide as it is, this "cheating" into position has a greater chance of going unnoticed by the defender.

The receiver lines up with his inside foot forward and takes three steps off the snap before making his break. In the case above it would be; right, left, right (break inside on this step). The receivers main concern after that is to angle hard inside. The perfect angle is considered 45 degrees, but it really depends. If the corner back is sitting way off and giving the receiver a large cushion, he can sometimes afford to take a slightly more vertical angle. If the corner is only 5-8 yards off at the snap, then the receiver might actually have to take a slightly sharper cut inside.

The absolute key is that he crosses the defenders face and gets in front of him. You cannot end up in a situation where the receiver is running shoulder to shoulder with the defender. He must cross that mans face and put himself between the defender and the ball. The ball we be thrown ideally a little bit in front of him or if not then right between his numbers.

Again this is where I diverge from the conventional wisdom. Typically quarterbacks are coached to hold the receiver up a little, throwing the ball right at him and making him pause slightly. Personally I think this is a waste. I would much rather see the receiver catch the ball in stride and have a better opportunity to make this play into a big gain.

If he fails to make the catch then the ball should be hitting him and bouncing away, not getting picked off. If the ball is thrown at his hip by mistake then he should still have a chance of reaching back and grabbing it. If the receiver runs his route too vertically with a corner in close proximity then the corner can under cut him and catch a pass that is too short, or the corner can ride on top of the route and interfere even with a well thrown pass. That's why it is so essential for the receiver to break hard inside and cut off the defender.

Now before we talk about the quarterback it is important to cover the linemen's responsibilities and the general play design first, to put into context what we are going to ask the quarterback to do.

The first thing is the play design. Whereas before we tried to avoid doing anything with the backs or tight end that might pull a defender into the passing lane, now we have to be aware that the natural drop of the linebackers presents the problem. If they drop back into their normal zones then they will be sitting right in the path of the throw.

Instead we now need to actively pull them out of position using the backs or the tight end. This is the very definition of the term "Flare Control", using the running backs routes to control the movement of the linebackers.

Ideally what we're looking for is to have a tight end or running back run immediately out wide into the flat on the same side as the slant. This is designed to pull the outside linebacker covering on that side (or whoever is dropping off into that hook zone) away towards the sideline. If they stay firmly put then the quarterback can just dump the ball off to the back, but if they move across then the quarterback should be able to throw the ball in behind them.

The linemen also need to be aware that - perhaps with the exception of the center - they all need to cut their respective pass rushers. With the receiver coming inside it is critical that there are no hands flapping about to break up the passing lane. However because this play takes a little longer to develop the linemen should be cognisant of the fact that they can now take two or three quick steps before cutting, especially as the quarterback may need to go to a secondary receiver if the passing lane to his primary receiver is cluttered. If the linemen cut too early they give the defenders a chance to recover.

As for the quarterback, now he needs to take the three biggest steps he can. Again the coach needs to be watchful, especially with young players, that the quarterback doesn't take this advice to the extreme. Just three of the biggest steps the quarterback can naturally take, even if its a little slower. This creates time for the receiver to get the correct depth and then pick up some speed as he breaks inside. It also gives the linebackers time to clear out of the passing lane if indeed they are drawn off.

This is where the quarterback now looks for his read. Having kept his eyes straight downfield as he drops back, using his peripheral vision to spy on the linebackers, now he must turn towards the expected passing lane and identify the linebacker who should otherwise have been dropping into it. If the linebacker is standing in the lane or is close enough to break on the pass then the quarterback must hitch up and find a secondary receiver.

If the linebacker is running past the lane on the way to covering a back out of the backfield then the quarterback must anticipate that the linebacker cannot turn in time and then zip it in behind him. He must try and put the ball just a little bit out in front of the receiver, allowing him to catch it in stride and run with it for maximum effect. Ideally the quarterback should try and keep this pass down a little, more towards the players numbers. If he misses the pass he does not want the ball carrying into the arms of a waiting safety.

Unlike the quick hitch and the quick out, the quick slant can still be used if the corner is playing down a little tighter, say 4-5 yards off. It's still not ideal,  but acceptable. Again the receiver must be conscious to break hard inside and not let the defender get a decent position. However even this play will normally not work well against bump and run coverage as the disruption off the line plays too much havoc with the timing.

The only alternative in that case, providing you have called in the three step drop and the quarterback as no way of audibling out of it, is for the receiver to run a quick fade, which can also be a useful play down by the goal line;


In the case of the quick fade, pretty much everything changes. Unlike the other three step passes that are used when the corners back off and give the receivers a big cushion, the quick fade is better when the corner comes down short and gives the receiver only a small cushion. Normally this is an automatic adjustment that the receiver makes because he finds himself facing a close corner when a quick play has been called.

Because this is usually an adjustment by the receiver, often the offensive line will have no idea and still cut, which is fine, except that now it's not such a big issue if they can't get their mans hands down.

The quarterback is going to take three big steps and will need to hitch up before throwing this pass. He's going to loft it high and to the outside, where only the receiver can get it. All too often quarterbacks seem to worry that they will throw it in such a way that the receiver ends up going out of bounds and as a result they over compensate and pull the ball inside.

This is even worse than the receiver going out of bounds. The pass must absolutely remain on the outside. Only one of two things can be allowed to happen; either the receiver catches the pass or the ball goes out of bounds. That's it. Under no circumstances can the quarterback afford to pull the ball inside.

The receiver in turn needs to play his part. He needs to get around the corner, then press him inward, trying to keep his route vertical and leaving himself some space (ideally about 5 yards) to the outside to work with. The quarterback drops the ball into this area and the receivers fades away from the defender to get it.

In some cases the quarterback may need to put the ball on the back shoulder of the receiver. This stems from problems with the receiver getting separation in such a short period of time. Usually the quick fade is caught between 15-20 yards from the Line of Scrimmage, which isn't much time to get clear of a good corner. Therefore it may be easier for the quarterback to hold the receiver up a little with the back shoulder throw. If the receiver is even with or past the defender, then the quarterback should lead the receiver as normal.

Something that the coach can do to help this play (if it's a pre-planned call) is to use the tight end running a vertical route to occupy the safety and stop him coming across to interfere. In addition, it's useful to instruct the quarterback to look for physical mismatches, with a tall receiver against a shorter corner being the ideal opportunity to test this quick fade.

So there you have it, a brief look at the three step drop. The three main points to emphasise out of this are, 1) that the three step drop is of more use as an audible than a game planned call made from the sidelines, 2) that it's a relatively easy completion, but does carry some significant risks with it for what is ultimately often just a very modest gain, so coaches shouldn't get too drawn in by the allure of such passes and 3) that the real key to making passes like this successful is the timing between the receiver and the quarterback, an understanding that can only be built with hard work on the practise field.

If you enjoyed this article then please pass on a link to others you may think will enjoy it, or find some benefit from it, and if you have any questions, or you'd like to request an article, or you just want to send me a cheque for an exorbitant amount of money then you can e-mail me at;

keepingthechainsmoving@live.co.uk

Wednesday, December 28, 2011

Some observations from Week 16

One of these days I'll actually post my article about the three step drop. By the time I do, the damn play will have been banned from football, along with all forms of contact in football.

Anyway, the reason for the delay is because I want to pick up a couple of the main points coming out of the weekends games and I guess I might generally just run down some of the games, as and when things come to mind of interest. There are two main issues that I want to address though.

The first is to do with the Eagles and their defensive coordinator position currently held by Juan Castillo, the former offensive line coach. Basically with Steve Spagnuolo of the Rams likely to get the chop at the end of the season, many people are lining him up to replace Castillo as the Eagles Defensive coordinator for next year.

And I simply want to ask; why? In fact, let me ask you another question, just out of interest; Which team leads the NFL in sacks right now?

Answer; the Philadelphia Eagles.

See while everyone has been busy lately criticising Castillo for his schemes, people seem to have over looked the fact that the Eagles are actually one of the better defenses out there. They're not perfect, not by any means, but they're pretty good. They'll need some tweaking in the off season; getting the coverages sorted out to make the best use of the available talent, as well as sitting down with that young linebacker corps and watching some film to explain to them better about run fits etc. But otherwise that's not a bad defense and it can only get better in the off season with the right work.

The problem with the Eagles is not their defense. The problem with the Eagles is their offense.

Simply put, it sucks. And has sucked for most of 2011. The Eagles are practically in a league of their own when it comes to getting down into the red zone and then not producing a score. They are brilliant for 80 yards as they rip great chunks out of people in the open field, then they clam up (and stink it up) in those last 20 yards.

Juan Castillo is not the man to blame for the Eagles woes, it's Andy Reid. He's the guy that has at his disposal LeSean McCoy, Ronnine Brown, Mike Vick, Vince Young, DeSean Jackson, Riley Cooper, Jeremy Maclin, Jason Avant, Brent Celek and Jason Peters, to name just a few. That's an offense that a heck of a lot of teams in the NFL would kill for. And yet that is also an offense that has struggled to put points on the board when it mattered most, not to mention the hoard of turnovers they've given up.

All this finger waving at Castillo is pure bullshit. It's a distraction from the real issue here, which is that Andy Reid is struggling to get to his side of the "Dream Team" working the way it should. While the Panthers and Broncos have adjusted their respective offenses to accommodate the running abilities of their quarterbacks, what have the Eagles done? What adjustments have they made to get the most out of Vick?

And what about LeSean McCoy? McCoy is the second leading rusher in the league by yards. He leads the league in touchdowns with 17, which is three more than Cam Newton and five more than the closest running back (Marshawn Lynch). He leads the league in runs of 20+ yards with 14. And perhaps most tellingly, he leads the league in rushes for a first down, with 84, which is sixteen more than the next player on the list, Maurice Jones-Drew.

Yet he only averages 18 carries a game?

You have without doubt one of the most explosive players in the entire NFL on your team, yet you feed him the ball less than the 49ers feed Gore, or the Falcons feed Michael Turner. An especially odd decision given how much trouble the Eagles have had in the red zone.

All this means that I can't take criticism and talk of Juan Castillo being fired seriously. I don't mean that he wont get fired, just that I don't think he should. Considering this is his first season as a defensive coordinator I think he's done really well so far and again, I think an off season of work and preparation by the Eagles could yield some great results.

The question is whether the Eagles offense can lift its game next season and start to actually make that defensive work count for something. The Eagles have the personnel to make a Super Bowl run, I think everyone agrees on that. But until Andy Reid stops making excuses - and people stop making excuses for Andy Reid - then this same old sorry, tired Eagles saga will just repeat itself again season after season.

Now I'm going to take an interlude in my ramblings before I get to the second major issue I wanted to address, and talk about the Panthers. Mainly to give them a lot of credit for their 48-16 win against the Buccaneers.

All thoughts about the Buccaneers horrible run defense aside, I was impressed by the Panthers actually making use of running backs DeAngelo Williams and Jonathan Stewart, who I've long pronounced to be the best running back tandem in the NFL. Long time readers will be aware that this has been a hobby horse of mine for a while, bemoaning the John Fox/Jake Delhomme era because of the absolute abandonment of an otherwise excellent running game.

It was nice then to see it revived on Saturday. It also points to what is - in my opinion - one of the funniest things about the Cam Newton story. When Cam throws the ball a lot he invariably racks up the yards, rushes for a score, does his stupid Superman celebration... and then the Panthers still end up losing the game. On the other hand when the Panthers manage the game better and lean on their rushing attack, they often end up winning, and doing so comfortably.

C'est la vie, as they often say in France (along with "We Surrender!!").

I was also excited about the 49ers win over the Seahawks, although there was a slight downer in that they gave up their first rushing touchdown of the season. Naturally people have been hailing Jim Harbaugh again, as they have been all season long, but forgive me if I don't hang a poster of the guy on the wall just yet.

See I'm a 49ers fan and as a result I've endured misery for years now. I'm delighted that finally the 49ers are winning games and going back to the playoffs, even doing so in style. However I don't see what Jim Harbaugh has to do with it. Harbaugh is an offensive coach, not a defensive coach. And this 49ers offense has been almost as bad as those that preceded it. Alright, so maybe they haven't turned the ball over as much this year, and maybe there hasn't been as many sacks this year, but fundamentally the offense still sucks balls.

On the other hand I still don't hear anyone talking about Vic Fangio. Without looking at Wikipedia, can you even tell me who Vic Fangio is? If you didn't know already then you've probably guessed that Fangio is the defensive coordinator of the 49ers. It's this man and his defensive staff who should be getting the plaudits, along with whoever the specific people were that drafted or approved the signing of Justin Smith, Aldon Smith, Issac Sopoaga, Ray McDonald, Navorro Bowman, Ahmad Brooks, Patrick Willis, Parys Haralson, Chris Culliver and Carlos Rogers, to name just a few.

I don't blame Harbaugh, there's not really a lot he can do about it. He doesn't write the articles in the press or force people to talk about him on sports radio. I just think it's unfair that he's getting all the credit for something that essentially happens on the opposite side of the ball. That's not to say that he doesn't have some influence on it - I'd be shocked if he didn't - but most of the donkey work throughout the year will have been done by Fangio and his staff, work for which they are not getting their dues.

Vic, in the incredibly unlikely event that you're reading this, I thank you and your staff on behalf of 49ers fans everywhere.

Also congratulations to Drew Brees who has now surpassed Dan Marino for the single season passing yardage record. I'm undecided yet as to whether this should be considered more or less of an achievement than when Marino set the record. Not that it really matters that much, either way it's still a heck of a thing to have done.

The question is whether or not you think that it's easier to break the record now because teams throw the ball more than they did back then, or whether you think that it's precisely because teams throw it more now - which means that defenses are built to stop the pass - that makes Brees's achievement superior. An interesting debate to have over a pint I think.

One quarterback who wasn't setting any records though was Tim Tebow. I'd be gutted to see Tebow and the Broncos stumble at such a late stage, but it was inevitable that he was going to have a shitty game at one point. No fourth quarter heroics this time. Just four fourth quarter picks.

It should be noted that once again the Broncos receivers continued to demonstrate why there will be little demand for their services in the offseason, dropping passes like the ball was smeared in shit. Of course as always that doesn't fit the main press narrative, so we very rarely get even an acknowledgement of that fact. The Broncos defense also struggled for a change, which means the Broncos season now comes down to the final game against the Chiefs; win and they're in the playoffs. Or they can lose, and if the Chargers beat the Raiders then they're still in, but that's playing it risky.

Right, finally back on track and the other thing that I originally wanted to talk about, which was Joe Webb and the Vikings.

One play after Adrian Peterson suffered a sick looking injury to his knee (he could be doubtful even for week one of the 2012 season), quarterback Christian Ponder suffered a concussion and was eventually yanked from the game. In his place came Joe Webb. Webb went on to throw for two touchdowns and run in another with his feet. After the game the press went wild. Everywhere you look now, people are calling for Joe Webb to be the starter next year. My advice? Just hold the fuck up a second. Let's just recap Webb's numbers from Saturday's game shall we?

4/5 for 84 yards and 2 touchdowns.

Yes, four of five. He threw five passes and now all of a sudden people are putting him up on a pedestal and talking about him like he's the greatest thing to happen to the Vikings since they dumped Brad Childress. All this despite the various warning signs around the league about this kind of thing, namely Caleb Haine, Matt Cassel and Kevin Kolb.

Those are three names that should remind people that sometimes things aren't always what they seem. Yes, sometimes players have great games, or at least very good games. But one or two good games does not suddenly anoint someone with starting quarterback traits. It's a good place to begin, but long term success is not guaranteed.

Now don't get me wrong, Webb is a good player and has done well in every appearance he's had off the bench and in pres-season in Minnesota. But people are talking about him like he's the instant answer to all of Minnesota's many woes, and I'm just a little amazed at how quickly people are prepared to give up on Ponder, a first round pick who has done pretty well in his first few showings.

There is still one game left this year and I suspect the Vikings will be unlikely to throw Ponder back into the fray just for that single meaningless game. That means Webb could get the chance to start an actual regular season game for a change. I'm willing to bet that it may not quite be the touchdown bonanza that people think it will, depending on what kind of team the Bears put out.

I'll just finish by reminding people that in his last five starts as quarterback (not including this week), Ponder has lead the Vikings offense to score an average of 23 points per game. When Ponder went down injured this week the game was tied at 10-10, so it wasn't like Joe Webb came on and turned around a lost game either. In an age of instant gratification I'm beginning to worry that everyone involved in the football world has lost their sense of perspective.

So that's Week 16 in the books. Pick wise I came in at 13-3 for week 16, taking my season tally to 159-84, which I've just discovered is better than any of the analysts at FoxSports.com (both for the week and the season) and only two behind Accuscore and Pigskin Pick'em (both of whom I beat for the week) with one garbage week left to go.

Tomorrow I expect to put up my article on the three step drop. Slightly ironic that a post about the quick passing game has taken so long to be released.

Saturday, December 24, 2011

A very Merry set of Week 16 picks

Ugh!

While everyone else is preparing for the Holiday period, I spent the entire day at work. Then tomorrow, on the very eve of Christmas day, I'm going to be spending the whole God damn day fitting a carpet. That's life I guess.

So tonight I'm going to lay out my Week 16 picks and then wish you all a Merry Christmas, before ducking back in on Tuesday with my article on the three step drop.

So I already nailed one pick by backing the Colts - more through luck than anything - though I do have to say that I don't understand the criticism being levelled at T.J. Yates for that game, given that he went 13/16 and actually played pretty well. One man a team does not make.

Anyway, here's the rest of my Week 16 picks (don't forget that most of the games are played tomorrow night!)

- Ravens over Browns; because as bad as the Ravens have been at times, they're fighting for the division and the Browns are still bad. If Seneca Wallace plays, expect the Browns to give the Ravens a run for their money.
- Broncos over Bills; because I'm not done being a Tebow fan-boy just yet. Tebow looked better as a pure passer against the Patriots, though the Broncos are still plagued by drops. And I mean that in the Bubonic plague sense. Funny how the Tebow detractors in the mainstream press always leave that part out when talking about him.
- Panthers over Buccaneers; because the Buccaneers couldn't even win a "Best NFL Team in Tampa Bay" competition right now.
- Bengals over Cardinals; perhaps I'm not giving the Cardinals enough credit here, but the Bengals still have some gas left in the tank.
- Raiders over Chiefs; I don't care who the Chiefs beat last week, they still suck right now on offense.
- Patriots over Dolphins; Brady is looking MVP good right now.
- Giants over Jets; I know I should have given up on the Giants by now, but that means backing the Jets and Mark Sanchez, and that's not going to happen.
- Steelers over Rams; because even without Big Ben (Charlie Batch will start for the Steelers) and James Harrison, the Steelers should (he says) be able to overcome the Rams. Could be a tight run thing, which shows just how important Roethlisberger is to the Steelers.
- Titans over Jaguars; because I just can't stop hating on the Jags. They don't exactly do themselves many favours in that regard.
- Redskins over Vikings; because the Redskins have been surprisingly good of late. And the Vikings suck.
- Chargers over Lions; this is a hell of a leap of faith, but the Chargers are playing very good football and look generally pretty healthy right now. The Lions are still over rated.
Eagles over Cowboys; because the Eagles pass rush should give Romo nightmares and the Cowboys are still the biggest under achievers in the NFL right now. They sink to the level of their opponents, and routinely below even that.
- 49ers over Seahawks; because Marion Barber is out for the Seahawks, which means their entire offense is missing. Not that the 49ers have one either, but their defense is much better. This should actually be a great game, even if you're not a 49ers whore like me, providing you enjoy the merits of strong defensive football.
- Packers over Bears; with the Bears QB situation the way it is, this could end up as a blowout. I have no idea why NBC is showing this. It's unlikely to stay a close contest for long, even if the Packers pull Rodgers for Matt Flynn.
- Saints over Falcons; because the Falcons aren't that good.

So like I said, remember that most of those games are on tomorrow! The Packers/Bears is the Sunday Night Game on Christmas Day and the Saints/Falcons is the Monday Night Game on Boxing Day.

I'll see you all again on Tuesday. Until then; have a very Merry Christmas, please don't and drive, enjoy yourselves and I hope you get everything that you wanted. I'll see you next week.

Thursday, December 22, 2011

Thursday Night Pick

In case I can't get my article on the three step drop off tonight, I still need to cover myself for the Thursday night game.

And you know what, I'm going to give Dan Orlovsky some love and take the Colts to beat the Texans. As stupid as that may sound.

Wednesday, December 21, 2011

Week 15 results

What happened? I - like many - was stunned at some of the results this weekend. I ended up 10-6 for my picks this week because of some frankly shocking turn ups for the books. That leaves me 146-81 now after 15 weeks. Only two more weeks of the season to go :(

The first thing I was surprised to see was Tony Romo not blowing a Cowboys game... (alright, that was a low blow). I was more impressed with Felix Jones's running. Over 100 yards for a change. Then we had Reggie Bush putting up over 200 yards against the Bills! Reggie Bush. Running. For over 200 yards? That's just a little mind boggling for me.

The Seahawks dumped on the Bears as Chicago found new and interesting ways to turn the ball over. The loss of Cutler and Forte has basically crippled their offense. The Texans know that feeling too, as without Matt Schaub they look markedly worse on offense, though credit to Carolina who made some plays on defense for a change.

Then we have two of the WTF results. The Colts winning without Peyton Manning? And they looked surprisingly good in the process. Dan Orlovsky's time with Houston has obviously served him well, coupled with running back Donald Brown finally having a game worth talking about. Meanwhile the Packers self destructed, with drops plaguing their afternoon. A lot of people have pointed to the rushing touchdown that was actually a fumble and Mike McCarthy not challenging it, but for me that's just running away from the fact that the Packers hit a wall precisely at the worst possible moment, what with the playoffs just a few weeks away.

That's also not being fair to Chiefs outside linebacker Tamba Hali who had three sacks to cap a great game. Hali is an excellent player and took advantage of a worn down Packers O-line, which is going to be a huge story of the next few weeks and could put their chances of repeating in trouble. Just one of the many reasons why it's so hard to repeat as Super Bowl champions, because even when you're playing great a rash of injuries can ruin a season. We'll see.

Drew Brees was his usual self, destroying the Vikings with 412 yards and 5 touchdowns. That guy is having an unbelievable season. The Vikings defense was showing its flaws though. The secondary needs a major over haul, as does the interior pass rush. No good having Jared Allen and company screaming off the edge when you leave so much space up the middle for Brees to comfortably shuffle into.

Then Eli Manning lets me down again. Three picks and three sacks were costly in a tight game. I can't believe the Redskins won that one. Rex Grossman was solid but by no means spectacular and the Giants really should have won it. Some of the officiating appears to have left a hell of a lot to be desired.

The Bengals handed the Rams another loss. Not overly convincing in the win, but they did enough to get the job done. Now I know the Rams were missing Sam Bradford, but they still look bad. I think Steve Spagnuolo is going to have a hard time keeping his job next year if things don't markedly improve, if he even makes it that far.

I think Jim Schwartz is safe though. For now at least. The Lions still look less than impressive to me. They trailed badly against the Raiders after a poor initial showing, but somehow Calvin Johnson kept finding himself loosely covered, if covered at all, and picked up 214 yards and 2 touchdowns. Matthew Stafford continues to look sketchy. The near 400 yards and 4 touchdowns belies the fact that the Lions were chasing the game right up until the dying minutes of the fourth quarter and that Stafford had to throw 52 times, missing on 23 of those.

Arizona struggled past Cleveland in over time, with John Skelton pulling out another win... somehow. The Browns pass rush was in much better shape this time, but sadly the offense was still very lacking.

For once though, that wasn't the Broncos problem. Well... kind of. The offense played much better, the receivers actually caught a few of the passes this time and the Broncos put up 23. But fumbles, including two from Tebow really messed things up and the defense can't be expected to contain Tom Brady when you turn the ball over three times. Although Elvis Dumervil did get a satisfying hit on Brady, knocking him down flat, while doing a good job of keeping his head down and not giving up a penalty.

The Eagles did me proud this week in the picks by finally getting a win over the Jets. I'm still a little stunned as to how they did it. They fumbled the ball 5 times, losing three of those, and Vick threw an interception for good measure, but luckily for them the Jets are horrible right now, especially on offense. LeSean McCoy's three rushing touchdowns were a highlight for the Eagles, along with Jason Babin putting another 3 sacks on the board. The linebacking play for the Eagles was a bit better and you know, next season they may just have a shot. May.

Baltimore getting blown off the field by San Diego was a stunner. I couldn't believe my eyes. The Chargers actually looked pretty good for a change and Baltimore were pretty horrendous. Antwan Barnes filled his boots with four sacks and the Chargers running game actually got going for a change. Ray Rice wasn't so lucky for the Ravens; just 10 carries. Still, he turned them into 57 yards. It's a worrying trend for the Ravens offense, what with the lack of touches for Rice, and honestly I'll be surprised if Cam Cameron is still OC in Baltimore next year, especially as the pressure in the press and even among the team itself has been building. It really is unacceptable for your best player to have so few touches.

And finally, I have no complaints about the Monday Night game. Even though I blew a pick and the power demands at Candlestick blew two generators, as a 49ers fan I loved it. The defense was fantastic, not least because the Steelers O-line looked horrible. Roethlisberger actually played well at times despite his injury and put up over 300 yards, but the turnovers were crucial. Aldon smith had another great game and just generally I couldn't be anymore pleased. Well I could have, if I'd taken the 49ers. But I didn't and it doesn't matter. We're going to the playoffs and might even have a shot at the big game, albeit a slim one. Alex Smith still sucks.

Right, that's that done. Hopefully tomorrow or Thursday I'll do some diagram drawing again, this time looking at the three step drop, and if I can find enough time in the run up to Christmas then I also want to take a quick peek at next years Free Agent list.

Sunday, December 18, 2011

Week 15 picks

And I'm taking...

- Dallas over Tampa Bay, because the Buccaneers are truly horrid at the moment. That's not to say the Cowboys are kicking butt, but they're a better team at least on paper.

- Miami over Buffalo, because despite being a little banged up, Miami should have enough to overcome the stumbling Bills.

- Seahawks over Bears, which was a hard one to bring myself to pick, but the fact is that a Forte and Cutler less Bears are even worse than the Seahawks.

- Texans over the Panthers, because the Texans still have a defense capable of keeping them in a game, unlike Carolina.

- Titans over Colts. Just... you know why.

- Packers over Chiefs. See above.

- Saints over Vikings. The Vikings secondary against the Saints passing attack is a horrendous mismatch.

- Giants over Redskins, because I think the Giants have been unlucky at times and still pack a mean punch.

- Bengals over Rams, because it's the Rams.

- Lions over Raiders, because the Raiders injury list could be practically overlayed on their roster and you wouldn't be able to tell the difference.

- Cardinals over Browns, because the Cardinals have been surprisingly good lately and the Browns... well they're the Browns.

- Patriots over Broncos, because as much as I love Tebow and the Broncos, they surely can't beat the Patriots. Can they? No way...

- Eagles over Jets, because if the Eagles are going to win another game this year then this basically is their best shot.

- Ravens over Chargers, because the Ravens are less likely to kill themselves in this one, though doubtless they'll give it a damn good shot.

- Steelers over 49ers, because I'm a 49ers fan and even I have to admit, with a heavy heart, that our team has basically bullshitted it's way to a 10-3 record.


So that's my Week 15 picks. I can't believe we only have three weekends of regular season football left. Where does all the time go? Anyway, two things on my schedule for the coming week. I want to look at the three step drop in a little more detail and also take a look at the potential free agent market for 2012. Not necessarily in that order.

And as Christmas approaches I think you should embrace the Christmas spirit (put that vodka down, that's not what I meant) and give an early gift to someone. Namely the URL to my blog...

Thursday, December 15, 2011

Todd Haley, Ricky Stanzi, the deep pass and a Thursday night pick. But no Partridge in a pear tree

So this week Todd Haley was fired - somewhat out of the blue - as the Head Coach of the Kansas City Chiefs.

With Haley's departure there was a void, and that void has been filled (for now) by Romeo Crennel. One of Crennels first acts was to announce to the team and the press that the God awful Tyler Palko has been relegated down the Quarterback chart... all the way to third place. Kyle Orton will start this week, providing he's fully recovered and healthy enough to play. If not then the gauntlet will fall to Ricky Stanzi, the rookie out of Iowa.

Good.

Other than correctly predicting the round in which Stanzi would be taken, which had as much do with skill as predicting lottery numbers, I was really high on Stanzi pre-draft. At one point I had him pegged number one among the quarterbacks in the 2011 draft, but later revised that in favour of Ponder by a smidgen.

That still makes Stanzi number two though. I just really liked what I saw from Stanzi at Iowa. Some of the underneath passes were a little errant under pressure and his footwork in the pocket was sometimes a little heavy, but generally speaking he was really good. It helped that he played for a team that ran a lot, so he had plenty of play action opportunities, and also that his receivers were pretty good. But that doesn't take away from the fact that Stanzi had a great deep pass, slotting the ball in beautifully over his receivers shoulders.

That's what I'm hoping to see if the Chiefs go with Stanzi; deep passes to unlock the potential of guys like Dwayne Bowe and Jonathan Baldwin.

The deep passing game has always interested me. It's not so much the idea of making big plays that appeals, although obviously that's a big part of it! The thing that interests me the most is the genuine stretch of the defense that is achieved through throwing the ball deep.

Coaches often talk about "spreading the field" and "making the defense protect every blade of grass". But it's surprising how few teams genuinely do this. There are a lot of teams that run "spread" offenses, that force the defense to string themselves out horizontally to cover four or five wide receivers, but a lot of these teams seem to neglect the deep pass.

The threat of the 40 yard fade pass down the sideline does so much for an offense. It forces the corners to play looser, sitting back a little more in order to avoid getting blown past. It makes safeties conscious of the need to protect the deep middle of the field, making them slower to react to run plays as they understand all too well the consequences of biting on what turns out to be a play action fake.

It even affects the linebackers. Now in this regard we're talking more about the deep-in passes, breaking across the middle of the field at a 15 yard depth, but the effect is still the same. It forces them be wary of run action, in case they bite on something that isn't really there and get burned over the top.

That - to me at least - is what stretching the field is truly about. Sending wide receivers and tight ends to attack the middle to deep areas of the field (10-40 yards), while letting the fullback and tail back (I'm an I-formation guy, just in case my numerous posts about running the ball hadn't given that away) work the spaces underneath, both in the flats to the sides and in front of the linebackers.

Again, the key to a stretch like that is not just to make the defence cover the whole width of the field, but to also cover much of it's length at the same time, combining routes in such a way as to force defenders to make tough choices about how far they're prepared to go in any one direction, lest they leave a gaping hole somewhere else;

Just some of the dizzying array of pass route options

I think it's safe to say looking at the diagram above that the defense has it's hands full on every passing play, but only when a team fully exploits the potential of the passing game by using all of the available routes in various combinations to confuse defenses and cause hesitation in their decision making, which is the absolute bane of any defense.

Defensive players are always taught to trust their eyes and play fast. Defensive Coordinators (the good ones at least) are always looking for ways to simplify their schemes as much as they can get away with, particularly by simplifying the reads their players have to make. The coaches want to make it as easy as possible for their players - at least from a mental perspective - to identify what's going on and to respond to it.

The longer a defensive player has to wait before reacting, the less time he has to actually get to the ball and make a play. At the NFL level, even a slight hesitation can be costly. By stretching the defense out both horizontally and vertically you can force defenders to wait longer before making choices; whether to sit short or drop back deep, whether to go inside or out.

An offense that stretches the defense horizontally but not vertically is doing the defense a favour, making it easier for them to play soft zones underneath or to bring heavy pressure combined with tight initial coverage. Teams that stretch the defense vertically but not horizontally are not much better, permitting the defense the advantage of sitting back and pinning the offense into tight throwing windows.

An offense that pulls the defense around both horizontally and vertically gives itself breathing room. It drags defenders out of position and it creates passing lanes (and running lanes). It also gives the quarterback options, giving him the chance to throw deep for a big gain, throw an intermediate pass for ball control or just a check down to help set up a convertible down and distance for the next play.

By the simple expedient of mixing up the routes - and with a bit of forward planning - an offense can make the defenses job several times harder with little additional effort on their own part. I'll be watching the Chiefs closely this week if Stanzi plays to see whether they use the deep pass to help take some of the pressure off the rookie quarterback.

And I'll be taking Atlanta over Jacksonville in tomorrow nights game.

Tuesday, December 13, 2011

Week 14 results

What a great weekend of football! I can honestly say I don't think I've enjoyed football as much as I did this week. Some great games and some crazy results.

I'm surprised how well the Titans did against the Saints and credit to Jake Locker who nearly came back and one that thing. Washington taking New England to the limit was pretty crazy. The Redskins are a tough team to figure out right now. Some better tackling and they'd be in much better shape going into the final few weeks of the season.

The Cowboys/Giants game on Sunday night was great, but you have to feel a little sorry for Tony Romo for a change. There were plays near the end when it should have been wrapped up, but drops gave New York a way back into it.

Speaking of drops and bad plays, congratulations to Tampa Bay for practially handing that game back over to Jacksonville. That was stinker.

And more drops plagued the Broncos and Tim Tebow this week. At one point Tebow was something like 4/15, despite hitting multiple receivers in the hands. Still, he kept it together and put together some great late/overtime drives, helped by another drop, this time Bears running back Marion Barber coughing it up on a run. The one thing that people over look about Tebow is how rare it is for him to turn the ball over, which avoids putting the defense in tough spots. I think the Broncos should get themselves a sure handed receiver or two as a priority this off season, as everything else seems to be working quite well. A new receivers coach would help too!

And I clap my hands to John Skelton of the Cardinals. I still have no idea how he does it, but does it he does. If you see what I mean? 4-1 in his appearances now with the Cardinals. A lot of people appear surprised by the 49ers loss, but I've trying to say for weeks now that we're basically in the same boat as the Bronocs; great defense, so-so offense. Our receivers are fine, but Alex Smith still struggles. It's basically the opposite offensive problem that the Broncos have.

But really the result of the week had to be the Falcons come back against the Panthers. They were getting slaughtered at one point, until they managed to bring it back from the dead, with a few helpful turnovers from Cam Newton.

And it's with Cam that I want to stay for a while.

If you cast your mind back pre-draft, a lot of the issues people were having with Newton centered around the whole "entertainer and an Icon" type statements that he'd made. A big worry, for me included, was that Newton would become a "me first" person in the NFL, instead of a "we first" person who put the team ahead of his personal gain and fame.

The Superman touchdown celebrations aside, Cam has been very careful this season to avoid anything that would appear, overtly or otherwise, to be selfish or unteamwork(?) like. He's been a good soldier on and off the field for Carolina this year. Until he gave an interview with ESPN that is. I'll link it here, and then again at the end.

Now there's some good and some bad so in the interest of balance we bring up both.

The start is good. When asked about his critics he explains that he doesn't have time to worry about them and that when people say that he can't do something he doesn't care, he'll give it a go anyway. That's all positive and certainly for someone who's been under as much scrutiny as he has, that's exactly the right attitude to assume. It doesn't do him any good to dwell on the negative opinions out there.

But then it starts to go downhill. Lions and safari's aside, Cam in a round about kind of way basically says that the Panthers organisation have a losing attitude. I'm not sure the comments about having to turn it around or leave the house went down well either. I'd imagine though the knife that will stick in the backs of some of his team mates is the comment about "trying to get everyone on my level."

Don't get me wrong, Cam has surpassed my expectations of what he would be capable of in the NFL. He's having a pretty good rookie year. However, I think it's a rather audacious claim to say that he's automatically above the rest of the team in performance. He's thrown more interceptions than touchdowns, and been sacked 30 times now for the loss of 221 yards, along with 5 fumbles. The 13 rushing touchdowns certainly weight heavily back in his favour. But his red zone performance has been lacking, with a completion percentage that drops below 40%

He's still playing well, but to claim you're on a level above everyone else is quite something, especially as it's fairly obvious that the talents of Steve Smith, especially when it comes to catching under thrown jump balls, have had a huge influence on his passing numbers.

He goes on to explain that sometimes he'll see team mates, after they've made a bad play, shake it off and say something like "it's ok, we'll get it the next time", compared to himself where he feels like he's more annoyed with his bad plays, the insinutation being that he cares more.

Well personally I find that hard to buy. I've seen Cam throw picks and take sacks, then walk off the field with a huge smile on his face. That then strikes me as being somewhat hypocritical to accuse others of not caring, or at least not showing that they care, when their quarterback has displayed a similar attribute.

It does end on a good note though, talking about preparation over luck, which is critical to any high level athlete. He at least seems to be well aware of the heavy demands that are expected of a quarterback to prepare for each game.

All in all, some good, some bad. I worry though about that attitude of being the best guy on the team and if everyone else could just lift their game up to his level then everything would be fine. I can't imagine there's many people sitting in that Panthers locker room, especially after Sunday's game where he threw an incredibly silly pick, who would agree that if everyone could just play like Cam then all will be well.

Again, you can watch the interview here, though I warn you that sometimes the picture glitches out, although the audio is usually fine.

Pick wise, first off I just noticed that I labelled my week 14 picks as being week 13. Consistency fail. It was indeed week 14 and I ended up 11-4 for the week, which puts my season tally up to 136-75. I suddenly love picking games again!

Sunday, December 11, 2011

Week 13 picks

Right then. Week 14 picks.

Ravens over Colts; Need I explain? Although Dan Orlovsky actually looks much better than Curtis Painter so there's a chance this wont be quite the walk over that it might otherwise seem.
Falcons over Panthers; As if the Panthers needed any more problems, their left tackle is missing. Against the Falcons pass rush that could be the difference.
Bengals over Texans; Because Andre Johnson is out again.
Lions over Vikings; The Vikings are probably going to be missing Adrian Peterson this week and maybe Christian Ponder too.
Buccaneers over Jaguars; C'mon Tampa. You can't be THAT bad. Can you?
Dolphins over Eagles; Because the Eagles are that bad.
Jets over Chiefs; And so are the Chiefs.
Saints over Titans; Even with Chris Johnson, beating the Saints is tough.
Patriots over Redskins; Brady to Hernandez... touchdown!
49ers over Cardinals; Even without Patrick Willis we should be able to beat Arizona.
Broncos over Bears; No Jay Cutler or Forte for the Bears, but Von Miller is back for the Broncos.
Packers over Raiders; Rodgers vs Palmer = no contest.
Chargers over Bills; Because someone has to win this game.
Giants over Cowboys; The Giants are still a pretty good team.
Seahawks over Rams; What a primetime clash.

I was going to talk about Cam Newton, but now I don't have the time so that'll have to wait till tomorrow or Monday.

Saturday, December 10, 2011

Tim Tebow and the option

Ahhh! Peace and quiet at last.

Time then to take a look at the Denver Broncos offense and in particular the option read/zone read (depending on your preferred terminology) that has propelled Tim Tebow to even higher levels of stardom, predominantly because it's seen as a contrary offense and because the option isn't supposed to work in the NFL... despite the fact that it's been working nicely all season for a number of teams.

This is probably the main reason that we need to look at this, because despite the immense success that Denver has been having people still seem to believe that such an offense can't work in the NFL. This, even in the face of week after week of evidence that should have dispelled that myth, a bit like the Lions being rated as a play off team (sorry Lions fans).

There are several reasons why this play works so well, not least because the Broncos offensive line is pretty good at run blocking, even if their pass protection is... shall we say, underwhelming? Then there's the fact that Tim Tebow ran this play God knows how many times during his college career with Florida, so he has a very good feel for the play and knowing when to keep the ball and when to give it to the running back.

But fundamentally it's about numbers.

See the problem that every offense has is that on any given run play they are basically short handed by two men; the quarterback and the running back. The quarterback hands the ball off and is in no position to block anyone, even if he were inclined to do so. The running back is carrying the ball and thus is also exempted from blocking duties. That leaves only nine men left to block eleven, and to be honest at least two of those blockers are likely to be wide receivers so it's more like seven on eleven, minus any cornerbacks who take the Deion Sanders "business decision" approach to tackling. Option plays try to remedy that problem to a degree.

Now I can already hear all the coaches out there currently repeating the oft used mantra of "It's about Jimmy's and Joe's, not X's and O's!" which when translated from coach speak into normal person speak, roughly means; "Winning in Football is about teaching players the skills of the game, motivating them and using an offense they can understand, not drawing pretty diagrams," or words to that effect.

And while broadly speaking I agree with that sentence, I also think pretty diagrams (or even ugly ones like mine) have an important role to play in helping offenses to mitigate some of their deficiencies, while maximising their potential. Option plays are a great example.

Basically the play involves the offense purposely leaving one player completely unblocked. Now that might sound like quite a stupid thing to do, but the offense has a plan. What they're going to do is to make that unblocked defender make a choice. They're going to give him two conflicting options and make him pick one. Let's throw up a quick diagram so we have a better idea of what I'm talking about;


As you can see in my superbly drawn diagram (stop laughing) I've circled the unblocked defensive player in red. The offense is going to make this player chose between chasing after the running back or staying "home" to defend against the quarterback. Due to the direction that the offensive players are running in (opposites), it's impossible for the defensive end to cover both men on the play. If he's to have any chance of making an impact then he has to make a decision and he has to make it early, committing himself to his decision.

This is where the "option" in option football comes in. The quarterback has the option of either giving the ball to the running back or keeping it himself, depending on the reaction of the unblocked defender; if he races hard down the line then the quaterback keeps the ball and runs around the exposed end himself. If the defender sits back cautiously and just watches the quarterback, or even comes hard up the field on a pass rush, then the QB hands it off to the back (imagine someone like Jared Allen trying to chase a running back down from behind when the back has a 4-5 yard head start).

To give himself a bit more time to make the read and to be sure of the defenders decision, the quarterback will often take two small sliding steps in the direction the running back is headed, all the while with his body turned towards the unblocked defender and the ball extended out into the path of the back (the "mesh" that you're always hearing about). He then either gives it to the back or pulls it out and takes it himself.

It's because this "give/take" decision has to be made in such a short time window - and because of the trickiness of the ball handling - that it really helps immensely to have an experienced quarterback (at least with regards to this play) like Tebow in there running it. This is not a play that you want to just run on a whim with any old quarterback, because the consequences of a bad read or a mishandled mesh can be serious, with your quarterback running right into the arms of a 270 pound defensive linemen or a fumble that is likely to bounce towards the waiting defense.

Now hopefully, after we've gone to all that trouble to fake out the end defender, our linemen should have made their blocks. Depending on the front used by the defense the offensive line will either have a numbers advantage, or at the very least have one on one blocks across the board ("a hat on a hat" as they say). Let's take a look at how this play can end up panning out;


As demonstrated once more by my elite drawing skills you can see at the top that when the end crashes down (or he could just be sitting in that hole) the quarterback will give the ball to the back. That leaves us with six linemen blocking six defenders and a running back looking for a hole. At the bottom you can see the unblocked defensive lineman is pressing hard down the line trying to get to the running back which - along with the blocks of the offensive line - leaves the backside of the play wide open for the quarterback to pull the ball and run through. In actuality the quarterback would take a slightly more horizontal first few steps just to make sure he got around that end ok, but I'm too lazy to go back and adjust the diagram now.

So we've seen how the option read/zone read works (the "zone" in "zone read" comes from the offensive linemen using zone blocking). The question now switches to the opposite side of the ball and the defense's perspective. Simply put; how do you stop this play?

The common approach touted by your TV talking head of choice is likely to go something along the lines of "you play sound, disciplined, assignment football". That is to say that each of the defensive players should stick to their normal run gap and fill it in exactly the same way that they would against any other running play.

Which is probably one of the worst things that you could do against this play.

See the problem you have by playing disciplined, assignment football is that your defensive end, the unblocked guy, is going to sit at "home" and play contain on the edge. He's going to attack downfield at the snap (he has to assume the offense might try and pass) but the second that he sees the quarterback making the read during the mesh with the running back, he's going to stop and start protecting the edge of the defense.

And the quarterbacks just going to hand the ball off every time to the running back.

With the end standing still he's effectively taken himself out of the play, which is precisely what the offense wants. In fact it's probably the best outcome for the offense, because it means you're giving the ball to your dedicated running back and not risking your quarterback taking a big hit. This is worth just settling on for a second because this is - at least in my opinion - going to be the primary limiting factor for this play in the NFL.

Not many coaches are going to be willing to risk their multi-million dollar quarterback taking too many lumps over the course of a full 16 game season every year. While it won't stop the zone read - any play that can surprise a defense and get yards will stay in the NFL for as long as it's effective - I do think that we'll see less and less of it as guys like Tebow and Cam Newton develop as passers. We'll still get the odd treat, just not as often.

Anyway, back to the defense. So if they can't play assignment football to beat the zone read, then what can they do? The simple answer is for the defense to pull a fast one and install a special defensive play just to counter the zone read. Now that might sound like a lot of effort for the defense just for the sake of one play, but it's really only a subtle variation on the way they would normally defend a play like this.

They key for the defense is understanding that the quarterbacks decision of whether to give or take is based on what the unblocked defensive man does. As we've seen, if the unblocked man drives hard down the line then the quarterback will pull the ball back and try to take it around the end himself.

With that in mind the defense can now take the initiative away from the offense and force the offenses hand. All you do is you tell that defensive end to crash down the line the second he sees the zone read play developing, safe in the knowledge that the quarterback will see it, take the ball, and run it himself around the edge. Now here's the clever bit.

Knowing that you've got the quarterback to react as planned (he sees the end crashing so he takes and runs) you now get your linebacker on that side to forget about chasing the running back and tell him that the second he recognises a zone read he should come charging down and fill the outside gap. The quarterback will come flying around the edge thinking he's in for a big gain when suddenly...

BOOM!!

He gets blown up by your linebacker scraping around the edge. Let's have a look at that in a diagram form. I know you can't wait to see more of my artistic talents on display;


As you can see from the large "BOOM!!" marker, the defense has tricked the quarterback into keeping the ball and trying to run around the edge, where he's met by the linebacker making a deliberate and immediate move towards the edge. In reality, obviously the quarterback often sees the linebacker coming and more often than not takes evasive action as only a quarterback can; by diving or sliding immediately into the dirt/plastic.

Which now puts the ball firmly back in the offenses court. If the defense is going to force the quarterback to carry it (he can try handing it off but if the running back so much as hesitates then he's dead meat) and the linebacker is just going to come down and fill that gap, what does the offense do now? Zone read stuffed?

Not quite yet.

If the defense is going to force the quarterback to keep it around the end and then bring a different player down to fill gap, then the logical reaction to this is to introduce another offensive player into the mix and simply read off the second defender; a triple option (quarterback, running back, wide receiver).

The best way to achieve this is to line up a receiver in the slot to the right (presuming the offense is set to the right as in the diagrams above) and then send that receiver in motion behind the quarterback (you can also line him up to the quarterbacks right side in a shotgun/split backs look). Just as he's approaching the rear of the quarterback you snap the ball and the quarterback makes the zone read as normal.

If he sees the unblocked defensive end chasing down the line then he keeps the ball and takes it around the end as he normally would on a zone read, except that now he's going to have a wide receiver running outside of him ready to receive a pitch. The quarterback is now looking out for that linebacker coming down to fill the gap. If he goes towards the quarterback then the quarterback pitches it to the receiver. If the linebacker tries to get wide and cover the receiver then the quarterback keeps it himself and runs right up through the ensuing hole.

Here's how it looks;


The wide receiver has to be careful to maintain the correct pitch relationship with the quarterback, making sure to stay slightly behind the quarterback so that any pitch doesn't go forward. If the quarterback crosses the line of scrimmage and then has to pitch the ball forward that's going to draw a flag.

Once again the offense has the defense in a bind. No matter what the linebacker does, he's going to be wrong. If he tries to take the quarterback then the ball is going to get pitched to the receiver. If the linebacker takes the receiver then he's going to let the quarterback run free inside of him.

All is not lost for the defense though. They will likely have a nickel back on the field covering the slot receiver, so when that receiver motions across the field the nickelback might get across in time to help out (or be as much help as a nickel back can be when it comes to tackling...)

Alternatively the defense can bring the free safety down and involve him in the option dilemma. In this case the defense can play a little game where they make the quarterback try and figure out whether the linebacker is covering him or whether the safety is. If the defense uses the linebacker to cover the wide receiver and brings the safety down to take the quarterback, then the quarterback can end up keeping the ball, running inside and running straight into the safety.

From there the offense can play its own games, by sending the slot receiver in motion, faking the initial step of the triple option play... but then having the fullback cut back to the outside and dive at the legs of the defensive end. Meanwhile the wide receiver stops and comes rushing back towards the quarterback to receiver a hand off going to the right, as the offense now plays a classic outside zone run;


And then of course there is play-action to be had off of that....

I think we'll leave it there for now. Suffice to say that the back and forth that started with a simple zone read can go on for hours as defenses figure out new ways of adjusting to and manipulating the offensive reads, while offense's finds new ways to make it harder for the defense to know who's being read, and hampering their efforts to cheat into position to take away certain plays, applying the constraint theory of offense.

That's one of the things that's so enjoyable about football; the back and forth that goes on between the coaches. And proof I feel that sometimes the X's and O's of football can be just as important as the Jimmy's and Joe's.

And even the Tim Tebow's.
Tomorrow I'll do my picks for this weekend and have a quick word about an interview that Cam Newton gave to ESPN, which I don't have time to write about now. See you then.

P.S. Thanks to Teoita for the inspiration for this article! If you have something you think I should write about or a subject you'd like to know more about, you can e-mail me at; keepingthechainsmoving@live.co.uk

Friday, December 09, 2011

£%$*^&>

Or as it's otherwise known; delay to Tebow/Broncos offense/option article. You can't leave some people unattended for more than a few hours for their own safety. That's all I'm saying. At least I got the Steelers pick right, which was basically a gimme. Normal service will resume tomorrow.

Ahhhhhhhhhhh

Forgot to make a Thursday night pick. I think it goes without saying (so why say it then?) that I'm taking the Steelers over the Browns. I'm now also about to sit down and write about the Broncos offense.

Wednesday, December 07, 2011

Euerika!

Well, kind of. I had an e-mail from long time reader Teoita, who made a perfect suggestion for something to write about this week; the Broncos offense. Specifically the option read or zone read, depending on which terminology set you prefer. It may take a day or two but it's an eminently worthy suggestion and should make an interesting topic.

So keep checking-in over the next few days and hopefully we can all sit around and share in the warm glow that is option football.

Tuesday, December 06, 2011

Update 12/06/11

Looking back at Week 13, not a bad week for me pick wise. 12-4, which takes my season tally to 125-71. Kicking butt compared to last year. My thanks though to the Chiefs in particular, who stole a pick from me with a hail mary pass.

Now the dilema begins. I just can't think what to write about. I'm having one of those mental blocks that sometimes you get, where you have a whole ton of stuff going on in front of you, but for some reason you can't seem to pluck any one thought out from among the morass and turn it into a meaningful article.

I'm tempted to take another look at the Bears run game - and power running in general - just to pick up some threads that I think I left hanging last time I covered them. I'm not sure about that though.

If you have any clever ideas, e-mail them to me; keepingthechainsmoving@live.co.uk

Sunday, December 04, 2011

Nearly forgot...

.... with bags hanging from my eyes (I've been awake for 24 hours) I have to make my picks for week 13. I started successfully this week with the Seahawks over the Eagles. All I'm going to do for the rest of the games is write who I think wins, not even explanations this week. I'm soooooo tired;

TITANS over Bills,
BEARS over Chiefs,
FALCONS over Texans,
DOLPHINS over Raiders,
BRONCOS over Vikings,
COLTS over Patriots (I'm just kidding, fuck that. PATRIOTS over COLTS),
STEELERS over Bengals,
BUCCANEERS over Panthers,
JETS over Redskins,
RAVENS over Browns,
COWBOYS over Cardinals,
PACKERS over Giants,
49ERS over Rams,
SAINTS over Lions,
CHARGERS over Jaguars,

Ta da!!!

Thursday, December 01, 2011

Passing lanes and Blaine Gabbert.

So I'd had a fun week last week (kind of) and I needed to atone for my behaviour with a bit of self inflicted punishment, which explains why I was watching videos on NFL.com.

One video that caught my eye in particular was this one, breaking down some of Matthew Staffords interceptions from the game against the Bears. One play really stood out for me because it gives me an opportunity to take a look at something that a lot of people forget about when we wonder "why didn't the quarterback throw the ball to xyz across the middle etc?"

The answers are many to that kind of question, but one important reason often has to do with throwing lanes. Just so we're all on the same page, we're talking about the path from the quarterback to the receiver, along which the ball will have to travel.

There are basically two things that can obstruct a throwing lane. One is a defensive player, the other is an offensive lineman. How much of an obstruction certain players cause depends on the throw being made. A deep bomb on a 40 yard fade pass has to be lofted so high and with such an arc just to get it down the field that throwing lanes are seldom a concern.

But as the pass becomes progressively more flat in nature, we're talking shorter passes often between 5-15 yards from the line of scrimmage, suddenly the freedom of the throwing lane from obstructions becomes a big issue. I want to show you a screen capture taken from that video to illustrate my point. I haven't edited this or done anything to the picture;


The presenter Brian Baldinger was talking about Stafford looking across the middle and seeing his tight end covered. Well I disagree. For me, the tight end is open there, at least by the standards of the NFL. A quarterback at this level needs to be able to fit the ball into just that kind of window, right into his gut in order to help the receiver to protect himself.

The problem is not the coverage though, it's the center. You should be able to seem him under that vision graphic. The problem is if Stafford throws the ball to the middle now, he'll likely hit the center in the back and have the pass deflected. I think that's why Stafford went wide and got picked off.

It's a good question though; how many of us think about things like passing lanes on a regular bases. I'd be interested to know just how many defensive coordinators have a package in their play book whereby the defensive linemen are taught to attack the offensive line face to face, filling the passing lanes with their hands, while other defenders drop off and fill the remaining passing lanes in coverage.

Below I've put up a hypothetical example;


As you can see the linebackers are in a position to interrupt most of the passing lanes, while the rushing defenders fight through the linemen instead of going around them, pushing them back into their own quarterback while being ready to jump and get their hands up.

It's not something I could see a team doing more than just a few plays per game, but I think it's an interesting thought exercise and I think it's a good reminder for offensive coaches to think about passing lanes and not just passing routes when working with quarterbacks.

The other thing I quickly wanted to harp on, and this relates to quarterbacks, is Blaine Gabbert. I stumbled across this ProFootballTalk.com article the other day that had this interesting line in it; "The rookie has zero pocket presence. He feels pressure when it’s not there and takes too long to make decisions"

My response to this would be; no shit.

How long ago did I say that? This long ago.

"Gabbert will probably collapse in the face of pressure in the NFL. Very rarely did I see him stand in the pocket and let routes develop down field. Everything was coming out of his hands as quick as a flash. On the few occasions that he did try and hold the ball, he almost immediately bailed out of the pocket and ran for his life, even if it was just a three man rush.

He just seems to have zero experience of standing up to a proper rush...

...The people then that I blame are the people putting Gabbert up there on the pedestal as the number one QB in the 2011 draft class, because I don't think he's anything near that....

...But to tout him as a franchise QB at all, let alone a day one franchise kid, is a big mistake in my opinion."

This is what has been frustrating me so much lately. Think of all the TV analysts, the draft experts, the NFL scouts who were tipping off the TV guys. Not once did anyone talk about this stuff, they loved Gabbert. Now all of a sudden everyone is an expert in picking out his faults having watched a significant amount of him in the NFL.

I just don't get it. They were watching the same film I was. In fact that's wrong, they had access to way more film from way more angles than I could ever dream about, and still missed it. It's all there. Just go back and watch any Missouri game. It's not hard to spot, especially now you know what you're looking for.

And I guess all this boils down to frustration, due primarily to envy I guess. I go to bed knowing that somewhere out there a whole bunch of scouts, TV people etc are all earning fairly big money for their opinions on players, and they can't even pick up a simple thing like this Gabbert situation.

It just annoys me and I enjoy venting. So there.

Now in all the rushing about this week I didn't get the chance to recap my picks from week 12 but I was 13-3 for the week so I'm pretty happy with that, and I'm now 113-67 for the season. For tomorrow nights game I will take... the Seahawks. Because the Eagles don't stop the run all that well and the Seahawks are kind of leaning that way lately. Should be a really good game though.