If a pictures worth a thousand words…

[J. David Wannyheimer]

We have the fewest number of plays where the first or second look is wide open of any team I have seen this season.

I don't know how the progressions are designed in those plays, and unless you do, I'm not sure how you can say that.

What I can say is that I notice that our route combinations sometimes seem to be not very good. You see a lot of plays where you have 4 receivers running at around the same depth in the same area of the field, and nobody's open and there's just a swarm of red jerseys there. This is what I was bitching about with Lazor and the short passing game:

I didn't take that screen cap, because I'm lazy, but that's one that I think sums up exactly what I'm talking about well enough. You have three guys running around within literally about 5 yards (of real space) of each other, all in tight coverage, and your right tackle just got beat. You could get like one yard on a pass in the flat, I guess. Go Dolphins.

 

[Phinatic8u]

I don't know how the progressions are designed in those plays, and unless you do, I'm not sure how you can say that.

What I can say is that I notice that our route combinations sometimes seem to be not very good. You see a lot of plays where you have 4 receivers running at around the same depth in the same area of the field, and nobody's open and there's just a swarm of red jerseys there. This is what I was bitching about with Lazor and the short passing game:

I didn't take that screen cap, because I'm lazy, but that's one that I think sums up exactly what I'm talking about well enough. You have three guys running around within literally about 5 yards (of real space) of each other, all in tight coverage, and your right tackle just got beat. You could get like one yard on a pass in the flat, I guess. Go Dolphins.

Wallace in about 2 more seconds is wide open IMO.

I do agree with this tho, no need to have 3 shallow crosses on the same play lol.

 

[J. David Wannyheimer]

Wallace in about 2 more seconds is wide open IMO.

I do agree with this tho, no need to have 3 shallow crosses on the same play lol.

You look behind the line of scrimmage there and tell me if you think 2 seconds is gonna happen.

 

[J. David Wannyheimer]

Finally found a use for Twitter, a guy by the name of Ian Wharton has been posting some stills from the All-22 and commenting on 'em. These are good finds, shows good and bad plays by the QB, and good and bad play design from the OC. Here's one that shows a bad read by Tannehill, I believe this is the play that RobertHorry and hoops were talking about:

The slant to Landry probably isn't the worst throw in the world, but that ball should go to Hartline.

 

[Phinatic8u]

You look behind the line of scrimmage there and tell me if you think 2 seconds is gonna happen.

TBH I didn't

 

[dolpns13]

You do realize he was still in his drop right?

Jesus. Man. ****.

Dont Jesus man **** me hip hop.. He should have gotten in his drop quicker. Whats the point kid? Clay was open at some point wasnt he... Jesus. Man. ****.

 

[royalshank]

If you attended the games more often, then you would know almost every play any QB misses wide open players. I use to see Marino consistently not see wide open players. I'm not sure what play this was, but it looks like to me his progression was deep/mid to a short pass. If that's the case, what's the problem?

Wow - I saw Dan play a few times up here vs the Jests and what always stood out to me (which you don't get by watching on TV) was how dramatic the difference was in his ability to see 4 options faster than a lesser opponent could find one. I remember a game we were playing Neil O'Donnell and I had great seats like 5th row 20 or something like that. Dan was dealing to everyone - quick decisions, hitting the open guy and was in dominant form. But I wouldn't have appreciated it as much as watching O'Donnell hold the ball too long, not see wide open receivers who were literally doing jumping jacks at times calling for the ball w no one around them and Neil just never looked their way. With Dan you just didn't see that. That contrast was so incredible to me and really accentuated the difference in ability between elite and mediocre QBs.

By the way, I'm not commenting on the photo other than the OP got a nice shot there.

 

[FinfanInBuffalo]

I don't know how the progressions are designed in those plays, and unless you do, I'm not sure how you can say that.

What I can say is that I notice that our route combinations sometimes seem to be not very good. You see a lot of plays where you have 4 receivers running at around the same depth in the same area of the field, and nobody's open and there's just a swarm of red jerseys there. This is what I was bitching about with Lazor and the short passing game:

I didn't take that screen cap, because I'm lazy, but that's one that I think sums up exactly what I'm talking about well enough. You have three guys running around within literally about 5 yards (of real space) of each other, all in tight coverage, and your right tackle just got beat. You could get like one yard on a pass in the flat, I guess. Go Dolphins.

I can assume since I have not seen him stare down open receivers or throw immediately to wide open receivers.

The screen capture is a good example. He is looking to the center of the field. Nobody there is open. The wide open guy is in the flat. If he was the primary receiver, then Tannehill is screwing up more than any of us are realizing.

Ask yourself if any of the Dolphins receivers have had the day that Watkins had against the Dolphins? 6 or 7 catches completely uncontested. How about the RBs and TEs on the Chiefs? How many throws were to wide open players? They exploited the biggest weakness in our defense. We don't seem to be able to do that.

A possible defense of Lazor is that Philbin has noted that receivers are sometimes not running the routes properly. He specifically referred to depth and spacing. That play clearly had a depth and spacing issue. Maybe not by design.

 

[FinfanInBuffalo]

Wow - I saw Dan play a few times up here vs the Jests and what always stood out to me (which you don't get by watching on TV) was how dramatic the difference was in his ability to see 4 options faster than a lesser opponent could find one. I remember a game we were playing Neil O'Donnell and I had great seats like 5th row 20 or something like that. Dan was dealing to everyone - quick decisions, hitting the open guy and was in dominant form. But I wouldn't have appreciated it as much as watching O'Donnell hold the ball too long, not see wide open receivers who were literally doing jumping jacks at times calling for the ball w no one around them and Neil just never looked their way. With Dan you just didn't see that. That contrast was so incredible to me and really accentuated the difference in ability between elite and mediocre QBs.

By the way, I'm not commenting on the photo other than the OP got a nice shot there.

I can't be sure if it was true for his whole career, but early in his career, Marino was a coverage read QB not a progression read QB. In the documentary about Marino, both Bill Walsh and Don Shula refer to it. His ability to "see" the coverage as Shula called it was one of the things that made him great. Bill Walsh asked him (paraphrasing) "on this play, what was your primary read, what was your secondary read". Marino responded, "Coach, I just find the open guy and I'm going to hit him".

The difference here is that in a progression read system, if an earlier read is open enough, the QB never gets to the later read that might be more open. In those cases, it will look like he is "missing" open receivers. When you combine that with a mistrust of his OL, you may have a QB that is settling for less open, earlier options

Here is a good explanation of the two systems - http://smartfootball.com/quarterbacking/reading-grass-versus-reading-full-coverages-or-keying-specific-pass-defenders#sthash.CE482rAC.dpbs

 

[Fins1971]

Ask yourself if any of the Dolphins receivers have had the day that Watkins had against the Dolphins? 6 or 7 catches completely uncontested. How about the RBs and TEs on the Chiefs? How many throws were to wide open players? They exploited the biggest weakness in our defense. We don't seem to be able to do that.

A possible defense of Lazor is that Philbin has noted that receivers are sometimes not running the routes properly. He specifically referred to depth and spacing. That play clearly had a depth and spacing issue. Maybe not by design.

I really think it is due to the fact that we can not connect on the deep pass play. Nobody respects it right now. If you look at all the pictures shown in this thread there are 10 chiefs within 10-15 yards of LOS. The receivers cant get open because there are 5 chiefs guarding 4 receivers in a close area. You need a receiver going deep to draw 2 of those defenders and creating some space underneath. At Buffalo it was the same thing. Not knocking Tannehill but until we beat teams over the top several times this is going to continue to be the case IMO.

 

[FinfanInBuffalo]

I really think it is due to the fact that we can not connect on the deep pass play. Nobody respects it right now. If you look at all the pictures shown in this thread there are 10 chiefs within 10-15 yards of LOS. The receivers cant get open because there are 5 chiefs guarding 4 receivers in a close area. You need a receiver going deep to draw 2 of those defenders and creating some space underneath. At Buffalo it was the same thing. Not knocking Tannehill but until we beat teams over the top several times this is going to continue to be the case IMO.

I agree. Now combine that with the ability to generate pressure with only 4 rushers. It is no wonder that it looks like the other team is playing with more players.

 

[ohall]

Wow - I saw Dan play a few times up here vs the Jests and what always stood out to me (which you don't get by watching on TV) was how dramatic the difference was in his ability to see 4 options faster than a lesser opponent could find one. I remember a game we were playing Neil O'Donnell and I had great seats like 5th row 20 or something like that. Dan was dealing to everyone - quick decisions, hitting the open guy and was in dominant form. But I wouldn't have appreciated it as much as watching O'Donnell hold the ball too long, not see wide open receivers who were literally doing jumping jacks at times calling for the ball w no one around them and Neil just never looked their way. With Dan you just didn't see that. That contrast was so incredible to me and really accentuated the difference in ability between elite and mediocre QBs.

By the way, I'm not commenting on the photo other than the OP got a nice shot there.

Dan missed wide open players all the, they all do. Just like he had bad games and made mistakes all the time. What made Dan great was he had confidence in himself. That's what makes the great ones great. But to imply he didn't miss wide open players in most games IMO is kind of a silly thing to even imply.

Every game I ever went to see Dan play at some point, multiple times really during the game the boo birds would come out for Dan. People have a way of not remembering how things really were in Miami when he played. Why do you think they booed him, because he didn't miss wide open players or make a bad decision?

Every QB makes mistakes and misses wide open players.

 

[J. David Wannyheimer]

I really think it is due to the fact that we can not connect on the deep pass play. Nobody respects it right now. If you look at all the pictures shown in this thread there are 10 chiefs within 10-15 yards of LOS. The receivers cant get open because there are 5 chiefs guarding 4 receivers in a close area. You need a receiver going deep to draw 2 of those defenders and creating some space underneath. At Buffalo it was the same thing. Not knocking Tannehill but until we beat teams over the top several times this is going to continue to be the case IMO.

Yep. By my estimate, we tried four deep balls the first couple of weeks. Gotta try more than that. And here's what happened on the four:

1. bad throw
2. receiver couldn't keep feet in bounds on the sideline (had space IMO)
3. bad throw
4. drop

How about if you take 3-4 shots per game instead of dialing it back to 0? QB makes a bad throw on 50% of 'em, but maybe you don't have a drop on attempt #3, you pick up 50 yards, and you change the game.

 

[Phins117]

I don't understand it either. He also completely STARES DOWN the receiver before he throws it. Don't understand how he doesn't have more pics.

 

[Zounds]

Like the pic but what is down and distance?

Yep. A single frame tells us nothing about the play and the moving parts.