Repetition, Repetiton, Repetition...

.

Why are Skins receivers creating drive-killing false start penalties? If we could solve that problem, we could win a couple more tight football games.

I have a theory about it.

The car you drive is probably the most evolved manmade system on the planet. The very first cars had to be started with a crank, outside, in the front of the car. Most women couldn't start it. Men broke arms when the crank didn't disengage.

Today's cars are much easier to operate. A child could start one. You car is much more complex than the first cars, but the complexity has been kept under the hood. That should be a common goal of all systems, including football systems. Make it simple to operate. Keep the complexity under the hood.

From what I've read, Archie Manning seems to have the right idea. I've read that Peyton had about 50 pass plays in his Indy playbook. The typical NFL playbook has about 150. And, I've read that, after Eli looked like a bust in his first year, Archie had his son suggest to his Giants coaches that they pare down the playbook to those passes that Eli felt most comfortable throwing.

It's simple math. Since your practice time is limited, you have three times as much time to practice 50 plays than you do with 150. The Manning brothers are not great passers. Their accuracy results, in part, from more practice time on fewer plays.

So, why does Logan Paulsen commit false start penalties? Most likely he's thinking about his assignment and not about the snap count. And... he does that because he hasn't practiced the play enough to just forget about his assignment.

Jim Haslett has said that the defense he's teaching takes three years to master. Mike Shanahan has said the same thing about his offense. If those statements are true, they are admissions of poor system design. They are too difficult to learn.

Every youth coach has been advised to apply the KISS principle. I think simplifying the scheme is a great idea at all levels. What many people don't realize is that simplifying the operation of systems is hard work. Keeping the complexity under the hood isn't easy.

Like a pistol formation quick slant or stretch run, because that seems to be the play we run constantly.

I agree that we should keep things simple....and from the looks of it based off of the plays we have been calling i THINK (dont know for sure) we are. Shanny said it take 3 years to master his system yet we are not running the same system we were running the last two years. Maybe the run game is the same but the passing game isn't. It seems to me we just run the same play over and over again. Read-option play...and the slot WR/TE up the seem. Of course we are running more plays than that but those plays are called a lot.

I also think Peyton/Eli had a hell of a lot more talent at WR/TE than we do. I dont think our WR's or TE's are very good. Which would prove your point that we should be using the KISS principle.

With the D.....i have no idea what is going on there. Everyone on the field looks lost. We cant generate any pressure and we cant cover anyone.

I can't speak much for the defense, but for the offense, check the stats on rookie QB's and how many false starts / illegal formation penalties they have. Watch vet QB's (esp the good ones) move their players into the proper places before the snap. Now watch for RGIII to do it. I think that will come for him, he's a smart kid. But right now you have Hankerson, Paulsen, Morgan, Morris, Robinson, Moss, and RGIII all playing in a new offense (or at least new to them in many regards from what they ran last year and they are still learning it. Frustrating to watch for sure, but when it clicks you can see how potent it will be.

As to the idea on how many plays are in the playbook, I haven't seen the Redskins run that many different looks / plays that would make me believe it's a large playbook issue.

according to Greg Cosell studying the offense for NFL Matchup, the Skins are running a very simple offense right now, they just cover the simplicity up with multiple formations

...As to the idea on how many plays are in the playbook, I haven't seen the Redskins run that many different looks / plays that would make me believe it's a large playbook issue.

Why do you think our receivers are false starting so much?

Repetition? Well, when the WRs are lining up off the LOS, I doubt repetition matters much as a brain cell. That blew my mind when I saw that TD called back, but then again its the mindset of the players. Seems that quite a few times a player is called for a penalty, they're the recepient of the ball, and are not paying attention to details. What a maroon.

Jim's defense takes 3 years to master? Hec, I can take a dump in 3 minutes, and it matches his scheme to a tee. I was so disappointed to see he still had a job at 5 p.m. monday, so unless the oplayers take it upon themselves to disregard his wonderful scheme, things will doubtfully get better; I hope i'm wrong, but this is the glaring problem, being we were in most every game until the defense plays their base prevent throughout the 4th qtr.

The bye week is the perfect time for the entire team to look back at their problems and make changes, and fast. The offensive issues are mainly with WRs not knowing how to catch or get separation, but a strong running game and QB play helps alot; the defense, well, its sad. Just sad. Fundamentals cannot be stressed enough, but until changes are made at the coaching level, it will not help matters much, and disheartens any offensive progress made...

according to Greg Cosell studying the offense for NFL Matchup, the Skins are running a very simple offense right now, they just cover the simplicity up with multiple formations

Why do you think our receivers are false starting so much?

Much of it might have to do that they simply aren't that good or at least not good yet. Aldrick Robinson and L. Hankerson can't seem to catch a ball. L Paulson is an undrafted free agent and learning his way. Be one thing if they were doing other things right frequently. But with no Fred Davis and no Garcon -- the Redskins just might have the worst receiving crew in the league.

---------- Post added November-6th-2012 at 07:45 AM ----------

Multiple formations add complexity. The receiver has to remember where he should line up. Hankerson drew a red zone penalty when he didn't line up on the LOS.

If they are running a very simple offense and you add a component where you don't disguise it much -- won't it be easy to stop, especially with a receiving crew that poses no threat?

Much of it might have to do that they simply aren't that good or at least not good yet. Aldrick Robinson and L. Hankerson can't seem to catch a ball. L Paulson is an undrafted free agent and learning his way. Be one thing if they were doing other things right frequently. But with no Fred Davis and no Garcon -- the Redskins just might have the worst receiving crew in the league.

If they are running a very simple offense and you add a component where you don't disguise it much -- won't it be easy to stop, especially with a receiving crew that poses no threat?

I can't make the logical connection between false starts and lack of talent. Lack of concentration seems more likely. So, I ask what causes it.

Maybe i am extrapolating from my experience at work. People who are competent and good, often are so for multiple things. People that are incompetent in one thing can often be incompetent at something else. I noticed in the games our rookie QB noticing guys out of place and realigning them before they play. RG 3 is clearly a competent, smart player. Hankerson who drops balls partly because of concentration issues might have other concentration problems too with other things -- that's my point.

Of course, but my point is that the scheme isn't simple when receivers have two things to think about rather than one.

I agree with that but its about trade offs. you got a rookie QB right now with an awful receiving crew. do you take penalties or take your chances of running a more predictable easy to read offense? They are already making it simple in terms of their routes since apparently they don't have that many.

In the 2010 preseason, Kyle was talking about installing 150 plays. Since the ZBS run game only requires six or seven, I assumed that the rest were pass plays.

Why do you think our receivers are false starting so much?

I think your repetition theory is pretty on point.

I'd like to see a breakdown of when our receivers are false starting, too. Sometimes it's on a motion. But if it's against mostly press coverage, it would likely be because they are nervous about getting off the jam.

Another reason is the snap count. I can't hear it on TV. You can usually hear a guy like Rodgers or Brady bark out the signals. I don't know how many silent snap counts we're working with, and I don't know how often Griff calls out a cadence, but I can't hear it on TV. When a receiver has to look in towards the football to see the snap because they can't hear the count (or there isn't one) it takes their eye off the coverage which means choice routes become more difficult to run, and if a DB is jamming them it becomes much more difficult.

Some receivers compensate by anticipating the snap count and jumping offsides.

Maybe i am extrapolating from my experience at work. People who are competent and good, often are so for multiple things. People that are incompetent in one thing can often be incompetent at something else. I noticed in the games our rookie QB noticing guys out of place and realigning them before they play. RG 3 is clearly a competent, smart player. Hankerson who drops balls partly because of concentration issues might have other concentration problems too with other things -- that's my point.

I agree with that but its about trade offs. you got a rookie QB right now with an awful receiving crew. do you take penalties or take your chances of running a more predictable easy to read offense? They are already making it simple in terms of their routes since apparently they don't have that many.

-- Penalties are drive killers

-- Take out the multiple formation, add more plays with the practice time

-- The same formation with multiple plays isn't all that predictable

-- If the play is run precisely, it's hard to stop even if the opponent knows it's coming

--If Greg Cosell can figure out that the multiple formations mean nothing so can our opponents

An offense that doesn't make mistakes has to be defensed to be stopped. It doesn't beat itself.

I agree.

Sometimes coaches fall in love with the dressing more then the steak.

---------- Post added November-6th-2012 at 08:31 AM ----------

I agree with that but its about trade offs. you got a rookie QB right now with an awful receiving crew. do you take penalties or take your chances of running a more predictable easy to read offense? They are already making it simple in terms of their routes since apparently they don't have that many.

Sure we can blame the individual player at the time, but when you see a pattern of procedure penalties by WRs I look to the position coach first, then the coordinator then the head coach.

By and large a well prepared player doesn't make procedure mistakes.

Edit: As a coach I would be open to simplifiying or removing anything that prevented my players form being able to play fast

I think your repetition theory is pretty on point.

I'd like to see a breakdown of when our receivers are false starting, too. Sometimes it's on a motion. But if it's against mostly press coverage, it would likely be because they are nervous about getting off the jam.

Another reason is the snap count. I can't hear it on TV. You can usually hear a guy like Rodgers or Brady bark out the signals. I don't know how many silent snap counts we're working with, and I don't know how often Griff calls out a cadence, but I can't hear it on TV. When a receiver has to look in towards the football to see the snap because they can't hear the count (or there isn't one) it takes their eye off the coverage which means choice routes become more difficult to run, and if a DB is jamming them it becomes much more difficult.

Some receivers compensate by anticipating the snap count and jumping offsides.

To keep things simple for the receivers, I would not add that in the pro game, but lots of very good coaches do.

If they are running a very simple offense and you add a component where you don't disguise it much -- won't it be easy to stop, especially with a receiving crew that poses no threat?

Smart football did a breakdown of Tom Moore/Peyton Manning offense and had very few formations and plays. I'll post it later if i get a chance.

...Smart football did a breakdown of Tom Moore/Peyton Manning offense and had very few formations and plays. I'll post it later if i get a chance.

“I can give the playbook,” [said former Colts backup quarterback, Jim] Sorgi. “There is not that many teams they’re going to play who don’t know what they’re going to do. It’s all about execution. Their coaches are like, ‘We’ll tell the other team what we’re doing. They got to stop us.’ That’s what they do. That’s what they’re all about. And not many teams have been able to stop them yet.”

http://smartfootball.com/offense/peyton-manning-and-tom-moores-indianapolis-colts-offense

The Colts’ offense was, structurally at least, among the simplest in the league for the entire time Manning was there. They used only a handful of formations — and almost always lined up Marvin Harrison (and later Pierre Garçon) split wide to the right and Reggie Wayne split wide to the left — ten or so core pass plays and just a couple of core runs. I know that sounds a little silly, especially since we’re constantly told that NFL playbooks are incredibly dense and huge and so on, but the Colts killed people with like fifteen, maybe twenty plays, and they did it for a decade.

http://www.extremeskins.com/showthread.php?373410-Repetition-Repetiton-Repetition...&p=9254763#post9254763

SIP brought up a good point. Multiple formations to run the same plays. Weigh the advantages v. disadvantages for us.

To keep things simple for the receivers, I would not add that in the pro game, but lots of very good coaches do.

I'm not sure I agree here, Oldfan. But I could be misinterpreting what you're saying.

In the pro game, we should absolutely be able to run plays out of multiple formations. Formations shouldn't be difficult to pick up on. And running plays out of different formations is as simple as knowing what routes are run by what receiver on a general basis.

Let's look at a drive concept. (The flanker drive is the play that Jerry Rice made a living on). The outter most receiver runs the drive (which is a drag) towards the middle of the field. The number two receiver, in Rice and the 49ers case, was generally the Y. The second receiver will run a 10-12 yard "In" route.

When you know that the outter most receiver runs the drive and the second receiver runs a deep in, you can run this concept from any formation.

If I have a two receiver set, I can add a motion for the slot receiver into the LOS and at the snap they run the deep in and the X receiver can run the drive concept.

Additionally, Mike Shanahan is a WCO coach. And West Coast Offensive coordinators like to tell their receivers what routes their running on each play. A typical play call in a WCO would be something like this:

[Formation] [strength of Formation][routes]

So: "I Weak Right X Fly Y Clobber Z Curl Fullback Swing"

Some teams like to include protections in the play call as well. Some like to call the protection at the LOS if they have a smart enough center/quarterback duo.

The issue is getting guys with FBI (football intelligence). Sometimes teams look for athletes because there are plenty of guys on a team that are smart, and that's the coaching staff. The coaches could mentally go on the field and play with the best of them. But physically they aren't there. So it's there job to make sure players know. And it's their job to know how to coach them, whether it's through auditory, visual or tactile presentation, their players have to have the information relayed to them appropriately. But you need to know your players and how to operate.

I think simplifying the scheme is a great idea at all levels.

Could not agree more. Making things simpler makes even more sense when RG3 can extend any play and turn a bad play good.

Of all the possible plays on a third down call why are they running an option play to Brandon Banks? Get out of your own ******* head Kyle!

Why not run the hurry up, line up in Pistol and let RG3 read the defense EVERY down? How does a defense stop this?

I see this team being the poor man's greatest show on turf if they can get Garcon healthy, add another solid receiver and two solid or one superstar OL.

Haslett has more than enough talent to field a middle of the road defense, he's coached himself out of a job this year.

I'm not sure I agree here, Oldfan. But I could be misinterpreting what you're saying.

In the pro game, we should absolutely be able to run plays out of multiple formations. Formations shouldn't be difficult to pick up on. And running plays out of different formations is as simple as knowing what routes are run by what receiver on a general basis.

What I was thinking about was eliminating the penalties for illegal formation caused more frequently when a team uses multiple formations to run the same group of plays. Are those multiple formations effective enough in disguising the plays to warrant their use? I had in mind a brief cost/benefit reply.

---------- Post added November-6th-2012 at 09:17 AM ----------

Could not agree more. Making things simpler makes even more sense when RG3 can extend any play and turn a bad play good....

My fault. I didn't make my question clear. Your reply didn't cover what I had in mind but was interesting nevertheless.

What I was thinking about was eliminating the penalties for illegal formation caused more frequently when a team uses multiple formations to run the same group of plays. Are those multiple formations effective enough in disguising the plays to warrant their use? I had in mind a brief cost/benefit reply.

Okay, that makes sense to me. Absolutely there should be a cost/benefit ratio weighed, and I believe right now we are doing too much. I think that speaks to our FBI and our level of coaching. Not necessarily the part about relaying information. That may or may not be operating sufficiently. The part I'm concerned with is if that information is being relayed by our position coaches effectively, that's a personnel issue. They either can't do it or they aren't smart enough to grasp it, which falls on Mike Shanahan's shoulders. If the information isn't being relayed effectively, that's a coaching issue. That falls on the position coach, which ultimately falls on Mike Shanahan.

Being the head coach is a *****.

In the 2010 preseason, Kyle was talking about installing 150 plays. Since the ZBS run game only requires six or seven, I assumed that the rest were pass plays.

Why do you think our receivers are false starting so much?

I would imagine the 150 play comment was over the course of a season. Each week most teams add 5-10 new plays designed specifically for that weeks opponent.

as to why they are false starting / lining up wrong I stated:

"I can't speak much for the defense, but for the offense, check the stats on rookie QB's and how many false starts / illegal formation penalties they have. Watch vet QB's (esp the good ones) move their players into the proper places before the snap. Now watch for RGIII to do it. I think that will come for him, he's a smart kid. But right now you have Hankerson, Paulsen, Morgan, Morris, Robinson, Moss, and RGIII all playing in a new offense (or at least new to them in many regards from what they ran last year and they are still learning it. Frustrating to watch for sure, but when it clicks you can see how potent it will be. "

When a severe lack of talent on offense prevents you from being a big play offense, the chance of a drive killing penalty increases with every additional play. I saw it several times last week. The team would be consistently moving down the field getting first downs, then BAM, 10 yard holding penalty, and the drive is killed, or the red zone opportunity is killed.

I would imagine the 150 play comment was over the course of a season. Each week most teams add 5-10 new plays designed specifically for that weeks opponent.

as to why they are false starting / lining up wrong I stated:

"I can't speak much for the defense, but for the offense, check the stats on rookie QB's and how many false starts / illegal formation penalties they have. Watch vet QB's (esp the good ones) move their players into the proper places before the snap. Now watch for RGIII to do it. I think that will come for him, he's a smart kid. But right now you have Hankerson, Paulsen, Morgan, Morris, Robinson, Moss, and RGIII all playing in a new offense (or at least new to them in many regards from what they ran last year and they are still learning it. Frustrating to watch for sure, but when it clicks you can see how potent it will be.

---------- Post added November-6th-2012 at 09:34 AM ----------

When a severe lack of talent on offense prevents you from being a big play offense, the chance of a drive killing penalty increases with every additional play. I saw it several times last week. The team would be consistently moving down the field getting first downs, then BAM, 10 yard holding penalty, and the drive is killed, or the red zone opportunity is killed.

---------- Post added November-6th-2012 at 09:37 AM ----------

Okay, that makes sense to me. Absolutely there should be a cost/benefit ratio weighed, and I believe right now we are doing too much. I think that speaks to our FBI and our level of coaching. Not necessarily the part about relaying information. That may or may not be operating sufficiently. The part I'm concerned with is if that information is being relayed by our position coaches effectively, that's a personnel issue. They either can't do it or they aren't smart enough to grasp it, which falls on Mike Shanahan's shoulders. If the information isn't being relayed effectively, that's a coaching issue. That falls on the position coach, which ultimately falls on Mike Shanahan.

Being the head coach is a *****.