Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

One of the Redskins BIGGEST continued failings, both sides of the ball: 3rd down conversions/ stops.


Gibbs Hog Heaven

Recommended Posts

3rd down efficiency, like you point out, has been low for most of Kyle's tenure.

It should be noted that the 3rd down rate improved from last to middle of the pack last year.

Yesterday, imo was more a case of execution then play calling.

Chris Carter made a throw away statement awhile back that always rung true to me:

'A dropped pass is like half a turnover' and they were part of the 3rd down failing from the Falcons game:

o The 1st 2 series ended in receiver drops, Davis then Moss (although the throw was a lil off target it was very catchable)

o Griff not being in rhythm on 3rd series and 6th series, where to my eye didn't get the ball out on time

o Holding, OL getting pushed back on 3rd short, Polumbus&Chester being beat as they doubled Abraham

But for the season though, I think the low 3rd down conversion rate are a reflection of the extra cautious approach on 3rd and long. As opposed to rookies like Luck and Tannehill that are attacking defenses on 3rd and long, Kyle has been largely making conservative calls.

---------- Post added October-9th-2012 at 05:12 PM ----------

s hard to pinpoint how/why the passing game doesn't convert more 3rd +7s.

And this lack of efficiency isn't new to this year.

Imo part of the problem is style of offense we're playing while highly explosive on 1st down is low efficiency.

Incomplete passes or negative/no gain plays on 1st down puts the offense behind 'schedule' and is more likely to lead to a third and long.

So the first part of the equation like LL said is to decrease the frequency of third and long by being more efficient on 1st down.

Which to me = run more on 1st down but 1st down defenses are often the best chance to create chunk or explosive plays in the passing game.

So there is a trade off more efficieny? Or more chunk yardage?......

But in away the above is besides the point because 3rd and +7 are going to happen they're an unavoidable eventuality.

I think the long term answer is to turn Griffin lose and allow him to attack with the passing game in 3rd and long situations.

Kyle is using Griffin in a very structured and protected but effective offense.

In many 3rd and long situations Kyle doesn't attack the way some other OC's would and Griffin decision making imo reflects that safe mindset.

When/if Kyle begins to transition the passing game to more rhythm spread shotgun passing e.g. (2x2 w/ Posse or 4 wide), Griffin will become more comfortable and find a rhythm in attack defenses that way we'll see the rate of 3rd and long conversions increase.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've made the point extensively in other threads that some of the blame for our exceedingly poor third down conversion rate should fall at the feet of Kyle. There are many members who feel that he really shouldn't be accountable for our horrendous numbers. I guess in my mind I'd be interested in seeing a breakdown of seeing how many third down conversions would have been made but for a player mistake--dropped pass, penalty, etc. One thing I have noted, and it's more observational than anything else and was really glaring vs. Atlanta is that even when we have a short distance on 3rd down--like 3rd and 4 or less, we seem unable to convert consistently or even semi-consistently. The third and long conversions are less troublesome because it's a down and distance that really favors the defense, but on 3rd and short, especially with a mobile QB, we should have the advantage.

The most successful teams in the league routinely pick up large chunks of yardage on 1st down, because second and short is the worst possible down and distance for a defense--an defense must be on its heels. I would think that the best way to fix our third down woes would be consistency on 1st down.

Regardless, I think the poor 3rd down conversion rate is a confluence of many factors: but execution (which falls on the players, assuming they've been put in a position to have a chance to succeed) and playcalling are to me at least the two factors that contribute most heavily to success or failure on 3rd down, or any down for that matter. I'd like us to move a little more up tempo on third down (would love to see RGIII in the no huddle, but I know it's probably too early for that) because it sometimes seems that we move too deliberately on third down and tense up a bit.

---------- Post added October-9th-2012 at 06:02 PM ----------

3rd down efficiency, like you point out, has been low for most of Kyle's tenure.

It should be noted that the 3rd down rate improved from last to middle of the pack last year.

Yesterday, imo was more a case of execution then play calling.

Chris Carter made a throw away statement awhile back that always rung true to me:

'A dropped pass is like half a turnover' and they were part of the 3rd down failing from the Falcons game:

o The 1st 2 series ended in receiver drops, Davis then Moss (although the throw was a lil off target it was very catchable)

o Griff not being in rhythm on 3rd series and 6th series, where to my eye didn't get the ball out on time

o Holding, OL getting pushed back on 3rd short, Polumbus&Chester being beat as they doubled Abraham

But for the season though, I think the low 3rd down conversion rate are a reflection of the extra cautious approach on 3rd and long. As opposed to rookies like Luck and Tannehill that are attacking defenses on 3rd and long, Kyle has been largely making conservative calls.

---------- Post added October-9th-2012 at 05:12 PM ----------

Which to me = run more on 1st down but 1st down defenses are often the best chance to create chunk or explosive plays in the passing game.

So there is a trade off more efficieny? Or more chunk yardage?......

I agree with everything you've said, but I think that getting a defense in 2 down and 5 or less gives generally gives an offense the best chance for an explosive play. 2nd and 1, 2 and 3 are really dangerous downs for a defense because the entire playbook is open.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In many 3rd and long situations Kyle doesn't attack the way some other OC's would and Griffin decision making imo reflects that safe mindset.

When it comes to Luck and Tannehill, I don't think it's a matter of not attacking on 3rd and long.

I think that those two teams do a better job of staying out of third and long.

Luck operates that WCO, rhythm, 5-step and the ball is out style of offense, and he completes a lot of high efficiency throws on first and second down along with modest gains in the run game on first and second down. In the games I've gone back and watched with Luck, I don't think he faces a lot of third and longs, and on those down I don't think Arians attacks defenses any better or worse than Kyle.

I think Tannehill is the same way.

I agree with you otherwise; we're typically aggressive on first and second down, and if we don't complete those passes or makes those passes, that leaves us with more 3rd and 7+ situations. I'd actually want to see Robert just drop back from center instead of being in the pistol or the gun so much a little more often than we do, since I feel like it's a tell that either a run or a play action pass is coming when he's under center. I feel like that's what hurts us on the boots and rollouts; seems like teams don't completely commit to it with Robert comes under center.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it was interesting to hear alot of the radio talking heads talk on Sunday about how the defense played pretty well but when the game was on the line could not make a critical stop. To me alot of that falls on the offense. When you are 1 for 9 on third down conversions, there are no sustainable drives and your defense spends alot of time on the field. That is exactly what happened on Sunday. Compounding that issue, when you have a defense that has depth issues like this defense, they are not going to be up to the task of critical stops at the end of the game when the game is on the line. Unless they solve this 3rd down conversion issue and have some time consuming sustainable drives, the result is going to be the same. As someone else mentioned, that starts with receivers catching the balls that are thrown to them and if they cant then regardless of how big of a free agent contract they signed. sit their ass on the bench until they learn how to make catches in critical situations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it was interesting to hear alot of the radio talking heads talk on Sunday about how the defense played pretty well but when the game was on the line could not make a critical stop. To me alot of that falls on the offense. When you are 1 for 9 on third down conversions, there are no sustainable drives and your defense spends alot of time on the field. That is exactly what happened on Sunday. Compounding that issue, when you have a defense that has depth issues like this defense, they are not going to be up to the task of critical stops at the end of the game when the game is on the line. Unless they solve this 3rd down conversion issue and have some time consuming sustainable drives, the result is going to be the same. As someone else mentioned, that starts with receivers catching the balls that are thrown to them and if they cant then regardless of how big of a free agent contract they signed. sit their ass on the bench until they learn how to make catches in critical situations.

I thought our gameplan would be to make sure falcons high powered offense stay off the field and we would own time of possession, but it seem like the Falcons implemented that plan against us. They dominated the time of possession by minimizing the big plays gaining consecutive first downs to let the time run. After RG3 went down, that is when I felt Falcons put the nail in the coffin because they didn't have to worry about Kirk Cousins winning the game for them. They put up 17 points in the 4th quarter and called it a day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing I have noted, and it's more observational than anything else and was really glaring vs. Atlanta is that even when we have a short distance on 3rd down--like 3rd and 4 or less, we seem unable to convert consistently or even semi-consistently.

I wonder what the numbers are for 3rd and less then 6.

I looked at 3rd + 6.

Maybe you could look those numbers up to see if they support your hunch?

It would be interesting and weird to find out that we're not good at converting 3rd and less then 6.

---------- Post added October-9th-2012 at 06:02 PM ----------

...but I think that getting a defense in 2 down and 5 or less gives generally gives an offense the best chance for an explosive play. 2nd and 1, 2 and 3 are really dangerous downs for a defense because the entire playbook is open.
I don't disgaree with the above but I didn't mean that 1st down is better then those downs listed above.

But, 1st down of the down and distances that happen most often over the course of a game are usually the best down for an offense to be unpredictable and therefore explosive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've made the point extensively in other threads that some of the blame for our exceedingly poor third down conversion rate should fall at the feet of Kyle. There are many members who feel that he really shouldn't be accountable for our horrendous numbers. I guess in my mind I'd be interested in seeing a breakdown of seeing how many third down conversions would have been made but for a player mistake--dropped pass, penalty, etc..... .

Well given we've only converted 156 out of a possible 487 third down situations (32%) through the 36 games Kyle's been in control of the O; if the figures where to show a large percentage of the failures have been from player mistakes/ penalties; that would lead onto an even bigger concerns.

A consistent lack of bad teaching/ preparation form the Coaches far above play calling. And bad talent evaluation to start with.

Hail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well given we've only converted 156 out of a possible 487 third down situations (32%) through the 36 games Kyle's been in control of the O; if the figures where to show a large percentage of the failures have been from player mistakes/ penalties; that would lead onto an even bigger concerns.

A consistent lack of bad teaching/ preparation form the Coaches far above play calling. And bad talent evaluation to start with.

Hail.

True--but I'm not sure how you separate bad teaching/preparation/coaching from play-calling. Don't they go hand in hand? If someone has been poorly prepared and/or coached, how can they be expected to execute well?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well given we've only converted 156 out of a possible 487 third down situations (32%) through the 36 games Kyle's been in control of the O; if the figures where to show a large percentage of the failures have been from player mistakes/ penalties; that would lead onto an even bigger concerns.

A consistent lack of bad teaching/ preparation form the Coaches far above play calling. And bad talent evaluation to start with.

Hail.

Would you consider the teams we fielded the last two years super talented?

Not excusing the third down conversion rate this season, I'm just saying. Coaching and preparation can only do so much when you have a bad quarterback with a bad o-line with bad receivers and bad running backs your first year, and then you have a bad quarterback with a barely mediocre o-line (and then you lose your left tackle) and barely average receivers (and then you lose your best offensive player the tight end) and only okay running backs.

I'd also like to say most aren't absolving Kyle of any and all criticism and are trying to be fair and even handed coaching and players wise. Others aren't...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder what the numbers are for 3rd and less then 6.

I looked at 3rd + 6.

Maybe you could look those numbers up to see if they support your hunch?

It would be interesting and weird to find out that we're not good at converting 3rd and less then 6. .....

Apologies for butting in, but in the Falcons game, which appears to be the one you guys are referencing, we were 0-3 from third and short downs. (There was no medium. It was either third and short, or third and long.).

We had two 3rd and 2'. And a 3rd and 3.

The 3rd and 2's where two Morris runs for -2 and 1 yard respectively. The former resulting in the missed 31 yard FG to go up by 10, which become 7-7 when Atlanta scored on their next possession. So a massive early swing there that cost us dear. The later resulting in a punt from the Atlanta 44.

The 3rd and 3 was the play Griff got taken out with the sack for a loss of 2 yards from the Atlanta 3, resulting in 3 and not 7 points to go up 10- 7 early in the second half. Another big swing.

---------- Post added October-9th-2012 at 07:52 PM ----------

Would you consider the teams we fielded the last two years super talented?

Not excusing the third down conversion rate this season, I'm just saying. Coaching and preparation can only do so much when you have a bad quarterback with a bad o-line with bad receivers and bad running backs your first year, and then you have a bad quarterback with a barely mediocre o-line (and then you lose your left tackle) and barely average receivers (and then you lose your best offensive player the tight end) and only okay running backs.

I'd also like to say most aren't absolving Kyle of any and all criticism and are trying to be fair and even handed coaching and players wise. Others aren't...

Are you suggesting I'm putting ALL the blame on the OC here man? Or did I read that wrong? (Which is entirely possible, and if so I apologise.).

Of course we've not had superior talent the last two years here. Or even this year in many positions come to that. But if the vast majority of those 331 failed third downs are indeed on player mistakes/ penalties; then you've got to start asking questions of what happens in practice regardless of sub standard talent.

That's a heck of a high number of fundamental mistakes and ill discipline if that is indeed the case. Both coaches and players would need to take a long hard look at themselves in that instance.

That said, without those figures, as much as certain players have to be held accountable for their own mistakes (some of the drops this past Sunday for example were inexcusable at this level); the main bulk would fall on the man the buck stops with IMHO. The one who designs the plays, and determines what we run in any given situation. Obviously to date he's consistently failed at finding a way to convert on crucial third downs through whatever reason. It might not seem fair, but the buck stops with him.

Hail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When it comes to Luck and Tannehill, I don't think it's a matter of not attacking on 3rd and long.

I think that those two teams do a better job of staying out of third and long.

Well here's the numbers for 3rd and 6+ yards from espn:

Tannehill......37 attempts/24 comp 64.9% 257 yards 7.3 YPA

Griffin...........25 attempts/16 comp 64.0% 145 yards 5.8 YPA

Luck.............21 attempts/8 comp 38.1% 125 yards 7.1 YPA

Its not that Griffin faces more 3rd and longs then Luck or Tannehill.

Tannehill has actually faced more then both Griffin and Luck by a good margin.

Griffin has only faced 4 more 3rd and longs then Luck.

I think the numbers reflect what I see with my eyes.

Kyle calls high percentage no-read completions like RB or TE screens where the onus for converting the yardage is not on the distance of the pass downfield but rather on the receiver to gain RAC, even if its unrealistic.

Calling a screen on 3rd and long is indicative of a careful mindset which probably carries over to the other 3rd and long playcalls.

So even on the non-screens I would wager that either the design of the play or the pre-play instuction to Griffin conveys 1 message: be careful.

Consequently Griffin takes checkdowns as opposed to attacking like this 3rd down call from the Bucs game:

This is a throw I would like to see Griffin makes.

We can only speculate on Kyle's intent or instructions to Griff on this play.

Maybe Griff was instructed to play it safe with the checkdown trying to gain some yards for a FG attempt? or Maybe it was Griff's on decision after going through his progressions.

But, my take on this play is:

there was a clean pocket and Griff had clear field vision, he should know they're in tampa-2

Ronde is the key zone defender along with the MLB

But Ronde breaks on Hankerson's route prior to Griffin releasing the ball:

l.jpg

If Griffin waits a couple of nano seconds longer he has a nice alley to throw to Davis-

My speculation is that if Griffin begins his progression with his eyes to the left reading/glancing quickly from the go route to Moss to Paul to Hankerson it would help get Davis more open against that coverage

I think this mindset is reflected and supported by the YPA attempt on 3rd and long of 5.8.

In the games I've gone back and watched with Luck, I don't think he faces a lot of third and longs, and on those down I don't think Arians attacks defenses any better or worse than Kyle.

I think Tannehill is the same way.

I would have agreed last year, where I thought Kyle's offense did a good job of creating open WRs.

But right now I think that both Arians and Sherman/Philbin do a better job of allowing their QB to attack or be aggressive in the passing game and there is a carry over to 3rd and long.

I've regularly see these QBs attack the weak areas of Cover-2 and in general throw into tighter coverage then Griffin.

Griffin is tightly managed and often has well defined and open reads within the passing game due to the action of the play design.

As a result he doesn't do a lot of rhythm drop back passing and imo doesn't find a rhythm.

But, we've seen him move the ball quite well in those rare instances like the end of the Bengals game.

I don't want to re-peat my whole thought but its right here:

http://www.extremeskins.com/showthread.php?369949-2012-Rookie-QB-Discussion&p=9186015&viewfull=1#post9186015

I'd actually want to see Robert just drop back from center instead of being in the pistol or the gun so much a little more often than we do, since I feel like it's a tell that either a run or a play action pass is coming when he's under center. I feel like that's what hurts us on the boots and rollouts; seems like teams don't completely commit to it with Robert comes under center.
I agree that there's a certain element of predictability while under center and defenses should expect an action pass or a zone run.

But, imo even that simple dichotomy still creates enough indecision when we're running the ball well to create effective play-action.

However if teams are over playing the boot-action then maybe there are ways to exploit those tendencies in the drop back passing game?

I think Kyle and Mike are still trying find their balance with Griffin.

The irony is that Griffin is so freakin gifted that even while they're experimenting the offense is still top 4 in points and yards.

I don't think Griffin needs to pass more, I like our balance but I think the formations and type of passing (rhythm drop back vs action) needs to be looked at going forward.

I still believe spread shotgun 2x2 with Posse personnel in an up-tempo offense is the ultimate and hopefully eventual direction this offense is moving.

I still think this offense has only scratched the surface of the possibilities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you suggesting I'm putting ALL the blame on the OC here man? Or did I read that wrong? (Which is entirely possible, and if so I apologise.).

Of course we've not had superior talent the last two years here. Or even this year in many positions come to that. But if the vast majority of those 331 failed third downs are indeed on player mistakes/ penalties; then you've got to start asking questions of what happens in practice regardless of sub standard talent.

That's a heck of a high number of fundamental mistakes and ill discipline if that is indeed the case. Both coaches and players would need to take a long hard look at themselves in that instance.

That said, without those figures, as much as certain players have to be held accountable for their own mistakes (some of the drops this past Sunday for example were inexcusable at this level); the main bulk would fall on the man the buck stops with IMHO. The one who designs the plays, and determines what we run in any given situation. Obviously to date he's consistently failed at finding a way to convert on crucial third downs through whatever reason. It might not seem fair, but the buck stops with him.

Hail.

I'm not saying the coach should be absolved. I'm saying that both go hand in hand, and people make assumptions based on little available evidence. (Not you, just saying in general.)

Strictly putting it on the playcaller, I think, is what I have an issue with.

Sometimes, of course it's just a bad call. It's only natural. Bad play calls happen.

But sometimes it's a bad quarterback decision or error.

Sometimes it's a sack.

Sometimes the back whiffs on a block, or gets stuffed in the backfield.

Sometimes a receiver drops a ball or runs a bad route.

It all works in concert is what I'm saying. And since we don't have the bulk of the necessary information to discern what happened on any given Sunday or any given play (mostly by virtue of not having every game from the last two years), I'm just arguing that we shouldn't rush to blame any one person.

ETA: I'm also not saying you're pinning all the blame on Kyle. Sorry if I didn't make that clear enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NP NLC. It's easy for things to get misunderstood on a message board.

And yeah, without all the info to hand, your right you can't pin all the blame on one person. Even if we did have, you probably would be foolish to as there's 11 players out there trying to execute what the coaches want to run. And human error is human error.

Some of the other threads and posts since the weekend laying everything at the door of the OC have been ridiculous in the extreme.

Hail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still think this offense has only scratched the surface of the possibilities.

Fair enough.

I'm working my way through the Colts versus Packers game, and I think the biggest difference is that Luck will try to make a throw on third down that Robert wouldn't. I'll agree with you on the screens on third down and what not; those are safe calls.

But I think what I see from Luck in pretty much every game I've watched of him is that he's willing to make some throws that he probably shouldn't. On third and long, I don't think the route combinations are that much different than what we run. Slants, in routes, crossing routes, comebacks. I think the difference is Luck throws those passes and Robert doesn't. I don't think the offense is more designed to attack; I just think Robert's a little more willing to check it down than Luck. Oddly enough.

I mean, here's what I've got as I was watching the Colts-Packers game (I haven't finished yet.)

Colts:

1st Quarter

3rd and 7: GUN. Luck throws underneath crossing route to T.Y Hilton. Tackled before the first down.

2nd Quarter

(10:42) 3rd and 12: GUN 2x2 set. Luck throws into double coverage. Stares it down. Nearly picked by Woodson.

(1:26) 3rd and 19: GUN Trips Right. Deep Comeback to Avery. Incomplete. Corner blankets Avery, route is short of the sticks by 5 yards.

3rd Quarter

(7:50) 3rd and 10: GUN: 2 WRs Stack Left, Wayne and TE Right. Luck sacked.

4th Quarter:

(8:08) 3rd and 8: GUN Empty Set, 4WRs and TE. Stick route to Fleener incomplete, almost pickked off.

(5:22) 3rd and 8: 2WR stack right, Hilton wide left, Fleener tight end, 1 RB. Incomplete on corner route. T.Y open. Ish.

(4:03) 3rd and 9: GUN, 3WR, 1TE, 1RB: Complete to Reggie Wayne on Deep crossing route.

Ultimately I think the question to ask is, "Is Robert being told not to make certain throws, or is that just the way Robert plays?" Robert didn't throw a lot of interceptions in college either. I think it's a bit of combo of both; Kyle trying to manage a rookie quarterback, and Robert trying to work within the system and not make a bad throw.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apologies for butting in, but in the Falcons game, which appears to be the one you guys are referencing, we were 0-3 from third and short downs. (There was no medium. It was either third and short, or third and long.).

We had two 3rd and 2'. And a 3rd and 3.

The 3rd and 2's where two Morris runs for -2 and 1 yard respectively. The former resulting in the missed 31 yard FG to go up by 10, which become 7-7 when Atlanta scored on their next possession. So a massive early swing there that cost us dear. The later resulting in a punt from the Atlanta 44.

The 3rd and 3 was the play Griff got taken out with the sack for a loss of 2 yards from the Atlanta 3, resulting in 3 and not 7 points to go up 10- 7 early in the second half. Another big swing.

Hail.

What apologies? These types of discussion are why I joined ES.

I have the game DVR but I don't have time to check right now, but I wonder what type of formation we were in for these 3rd and shorts?

I don't think our OL should or can be counted on to control the LOS in a tight formation on these types of downs and distances.

Imo these 3rd and shorts are where we should use the Griffin as a run threat in some type of read option play from a spread formation.

The second play I remember, I thought Griffin had Garcon on the initial hitch portion of his route, but I'm not sure if Griffin wasn't ready to throw because of a colapsing pocket or was he not ready to throw because he bailed on the pocket too early or did he simply just miss the progression?

I remember thinking that play didn't have a whole bunch of options and it lacked the creativity showed in the RZ in previous weeks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On third and long, I don't think the route combinations are that much different than what we run. Slants, in routes, crossing routes, comebacks. I think the difference is Luck throws those passes and Robert doesn't. I don't think the offense is more designed to attack; I just think Robert's a little more willing to check it down than Luck. Oddly enough.
Take a look at LL threads from last week about the 3rd and longs from the Bucs.

There were a couple of 3rd down calls that only have 1 receiver running a route that would yield a 1st down without significant RAC.

And all the Bucs we're doing was running Cover-2/Tampa-2 which had known beaters plays and throws that were not called or attempted.

Ultimately I think the question to ask is, "Is Robert being told not to make certain throws, or is that just the way Robert plays?" Robert didn't throw a lot of interceptions in college either. I think it's a bit of combo of both; Kyle trying to manage a rookie quarterback, and Robert trying to work within the system and not make a bad throw.
Like I said in the previous thread the RB and TE screens Kyle calls on thread down imo are indicative of his mindset on 3rd downs.

Some of the 3rd and long calls from the Bucs game imo are also an illistration of this mindset.

And if the OC has that mindset then I'm sure that mindset is going to be echoed in the QB room.

I can't imagine Griffin being gun shy, not in the slightest.

---------- Post added October-9th-2012 at 10:00 PM ----------

I don't have the game to hand sadly dg, or else I'd of looked and been more specific.

I only garnered that info from the game log.

Hail.

If I get a chance manana I'll post it, but right now the wife calls and I gotta go.

HTTR

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Take a look at LL threads from last week about the 3rd and longs from the Bucs.

There were a couple of 3rd down calls that only have 1 receiver running a route that would yield a 1st down without significant RAC.

And all the Bucs we're doing was running Cover-2/Tampa-2 which had known beaters plays and throws that were not called or attempted.

Like I said in the previous thread the RB and TE screens Kyle calls on thread down imo are indicative of his mindset on 3rd downs.

Some of the 3rd and long calls from the Bucs game imo are also an illistration of this mindset.

And if the OC has that mindset then I'm sure that mindset is going to be echoed in the QB room.

I can't imagine Griffin being gun shy, not in the slightest.

The downs and distances of those plays are as follows---

3rd and 10

3rd and 13

3rd and 17

3rd and long on the goal line

3rd and 20

3rd and 10 (he runs a draw, fumbles, Pierre recovers for a touchdown)

LL's article also says what I've been trying to say repeatedly; generally speaking, teams don't blitz Robert. They drop into heavy zones and force him to make throws into tight windows. I'm not implying that Robert is gun shy or "afraid". I'm saying Robert is smart.

The one throw you point out that you feel he could've/should've made is not an easy one to make. Is it one he could make? Yeah.

But it seems the only reason the linebacker falls off the coverage is because Robert's arm is ****ed to make the throw, and the linebacker is coming to make the tackle on Hank. You could make the argument that maybe if Robert pump fakes and get the linebacker to bite he could make the throw, but then you're counting on the safety not getting over to break up the pass.

Also, when you watch it back in real time, Robert went through his progression exactly the way he's supposed to; from deep to short. He's supposed to go from Pierre on the GO, to Santana on the Post, to Paul on the OUT, and Fred and Hankerson are his last reads on the play.

If Robert does wait the "extra nanosecond", the linebacker likely plays his coverage (because he's only creeping up because Robert's arm is ****ed), and Hank draws attention on the slant, which would leave Robert with nowhere to go with the ball.

Robert made a good decision instead of trying to force a pass into coverage. That's what I've been trying to tell people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LL's article also says what I've been trying to say repeatedly; generally speaking, teams don't blitz Robert. They drop into heavy zones and force him to make throws into tight windows. I'm not implying that Robert is gun shy or "afraid". I'm saying Robert is smart.
I'm curious what the numbers are that make you sure that teams don't blitz Griffin?

I agree that Griffin is smart but I'm not understanding what are you saying about the 3rd down conversions? That Griffin should check it down against heavy zone coverage?

The one throw you point out that you feel he could've/should've made is not

an easy one to make. Is it one he could make? Yeah.

Never said it was easy.

But it seems the only reason the linebacker falls off the coverage is because

Robert's arm is ****ed to make the throw, and the linebacker is coming to make

the tackle on Hank.

The linebacker is Ronde Barber and he's jumps Hankerson before Griffin loads to throw.

Ronde jumps Hankerson route because he's reading Griffin's helmet/eyes.

Also, when you watch it back in real time, Robert went through his

progression exactly the way he's supposed to; from deep to short.

We can only guess as to the progression.

Robert made a good decision instead of trying to force a pass into

coverage

That's your opinion.

And while that throw and those types of throws are difficult for a rookie QB, I've seen other rookie QBs attempt and make those types of throws.

And spinning it forward, imo those types of throws are routine Cover 2/Tampa-2 beater for a top 10-15 NFL QB.

---------- Post added October-9th-2012 at 11:19 PM ----------

And imo those types of throws are going to be critical to improving our 3rd down conversion percentage.

For a team that can run the ball and pass the ball well, our 3rd down conversion % is an outlier that we have the talent to improve.

---------- Post added October-9th-2012 at 11:20 PM ----------

And imo those types of throws are going to be critical to improving our 3rd down conversion percentage.

For a team that can run the ball and pass the ball well, our 3rd down conversion % is an outlier that we have the talent to improve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't have the game to hand sadly dg, or else I'd of looked and been more specific.

I only garnered that info from the game log.

Hail.

It was a tight power run formation.

Imo we don't have the type of superiority at the POA to telegraph our intent to run then successful run the ball.

Imo our best chances of converting 3rd and short whether we run or pass are spread formations that expand rather then compress.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was a tight power run formation.

Imo we don't have the type of superiority at the POA to telegraph our intent to run then successful run the ball.

Imo our best chances of converting 3rd and short whether we run or pass are spread formations that expand rather then compress.

Thanks man. Appreciate you taking the time to go back and look.

And I agree with the above. Running the QB draw out of that for one has sure as heck worked in the RZ.

Hail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks man. Appreciate you taking the time to go back and look.

And I agree with the above. Running the QB draw out of that for one has sure as heck worked in the RZ.

Hail.

Robert audibled on those plays though.

The defense had to show wide d-tackles. Then it was basically like stealing. If he didn't get that look he didn't call for that play, basically.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...