Passing: A Deeper Look

[BrunellMVP?]

hmmm interesting post, but i wonder, aren't most of brunell's "deep balls" mostly due to yards after catch? not that everyone doesn't benefit, but i think its a fair observation.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by BrunellMVP?

hmmm interesting post, but i wonder, aren't most of brunell's "deep balls" mostly due to yards after catch? not that everyone doesn't benefit, but i think its a fair observation.

Not in these cases. These are specifically passes that traveled 15 yards in the air before landing. That's the NFL's definition of a "deep pass"

[Monkeydad]

With Santana Moss, do we really NEED to go deep? Just dump if off to him and the ball will move 30 to 70 yards a lot of times. Same end result.

Besides, Brunell has shown he CAN go deep when needed. Lloyd caught a 52 yarder last week and we've watched Moss catch some, even game winners.

[Crat92]

Brunell had his day in the sun. It's time for a new day to dawn, and that new day is Jason Campbell! Hess, Brunell can be his mentor from the sidelines. Giving him that sound veteran advice! HAIL from MCUSA!

[Schneed10]

Whether a ball goes 15 yards in the air isn't a great measure of a "deep pass" in my opinion. The point of the deep pass is to stretch the defense out. To me, it's not a deep pass if it goes 16 yards through the air. It's a deep pass only if it's an attempt to get the ball over the safety's head. That's what we don't do often enough, and consequently we find ourselves facing cover 2 umbrellas in which the safeties are relatively shallow.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

Whether a ball goes 15 yards in the air isn't a great measure of a "deep pass" in my opinion. The point of the deep pass is to stretch the defense out. To me, it's not a deep pass if it goes 16 yards through the air. It's a deep pass only if it's an attempt to get the ball over the safety's head. That's what we don't do often enough, and consequently we find ourselves facing cover 2 umbrellas in which the safeties are relatively shallow.

Just going by the official definition. Personally, I feel a five-yard screen that goes 50 is more effective than a 15-yarder that goes for an extra 10. But people want to see bombs.

[onlydarksets]

Originally Posted by TAFKAS

Just going by the official definition. Personally, I feel a five-yard screen that goes 50 is more effective than a 15-yarder that goes for an extra 10. But people want to see bombs.

That's certainly simplifying the logic, but a bit misleading. I want to see wins, which requires the O to open up the field a bit, which requires the occasional long pass to stretch the safeties. So, yes, I want to see bombs, but not as an end unto itself (that's right, I said "unto").

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by onlydarksets

That's certainly simplifying the logic, but a bit misleading. I want to see wins, which requires the O to open up the field a bit, which requires the occasional long pass to stretch the safeties. So, yes, I want to see bombs, but not as an end unto itself (that's right, I said "unto").

I shouldn't generalize but I honestly believe (and I'm sure others would agree) that there are people here that would rather we lose with guns blazing than lose or even win playing a conservative game. For example, I think to win Sunday we have to play conservative, not engage in a shootout. But I'd be willing to be that if we pull off something like a 13-10 win there will still be people saying "Well that's not going to work when we go up against Donovan and the Eagles" or some such thing

[onlydarksets]

Originally Posted by TAFKAS

I shouldn't generalize but I honestly believe (and I'm sure others would agree) that there are people here that would rather we lose with guns blazing than lose or even win playing a conservative game. For example, I think to win Sunday we have to play conservative, not engage in a shootout. But I'd be willing to be that if we pull off something like a 13-10 win there will still be people saying "Well that's not going to work when we go up against Donovan and the Eagles" or some such thing

Fair enough - given where we are right now, I would agree that conservative offers a better chance for victory. However, I think we have the tools for a high-powered offense like Indy. For that to work, though, we have to demonstrate the capability of going deep (kinda like the Death Star - it's the threat more than the actual use that is most effective).

[gortiz]

pretty cool tafkas . .

Average of 5.3 "deep" attempts a game for MB

Average of 28.16 overall attempts a game

so about 18% of his passes travel 15 yards or more

[RiggoRules]

There was an article in ESPN the Magazine a few years back that explained and had a graphic that went through the Chiefs/Saunders offense.

Essentially, the idea was to not risk having a drive stall as a result of a number of short plays, but to score quickly through fewer big plays.

Also, rather than the QB making reads and check downs from left to right, the QB was to read, deep, middle and then short.

One of the things I suspect about #8 is that he is getting tunnel vision on #89 -- even when his pre-snap read should tell him that Moss is going to get doubled. Then, he stays locked on him too long, at that point, all he can do is look for something short.

Even if I'm wrong (and I may well be), it is a mathematical impossibility for there not to be at least one mismatch on every Redskins passing play.

When you have on the field Portis, Cooley, Moss, Randel-El and either Sellers or Lloyd, there has to be a mismatch somewhere. The NFL is a mismatch league.

[Longtimefan]

Sometimes a receiver does not have to be open by much to be considered open. We have one on one situations many times when our receiver may not be wide open, but open enough to make a play if the ball is delivered properly and on time. There is no way with the talented players we have on offense should defense's be able to play us the way they do. Cover 2 is beat down the seams of the defense, and with a TE like Cooley we should be able to get them out of that as a standard defense against us in a hurry, but the correct plays have to be called and run to make it work. Cooley should be our big playmaker against cover 2, once the defense begins to concentrate on him, Moss and Lloyd will see less coverage. We need to attack the middle of the field as opposed to all those passes outside the hashes. The big plays are there to be had in this offense, but they have to be set up properly.

[Crat92]

I couldn't have said it better myself! In fact I did say this(about the cover 2) in a different thread. You're exactly right LONGTIME, Cooley is the X-factor! @ this level, all that is required of the receiver is to get 1 step on the DB. The ball has to delivered on time and with some zip! In this league, being wide open is usually the result of blown coverage. It does not happen too often. The players are too good! HAIL from MCUSA!