|
Deteriorata posted:And yea, the Lord did look down on the world that He had created as it celebrated the birth of His only son, and He saw people squabbling hilariously about football, and He saw that it was good. - The Book of Numbers and Numbering Exceptions, 50:79 "An act common to the game" is the old concept of a football move wearing a new hat. That's all it is. What they changed when it came back was to tell everyone what the definition was in the rulebook, rather than just having the rulebook say "does a football move" and then putting the definition in their philosophies document or whatever. "Second move" is a bad announcement; he's not making poo poo up, he just said something dumb under pressure. (And I still don't understand how they come up with some of the incomplete pass overturns that they come up with, either, especially since the new old football move specifically says that having an opportunity to take a step with the ball after getting two feet down counts as an act common to the game that completes the pass.)
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2012 12:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 12:01 |
|
|
Not sure if this is the place for this but: why does it seem like so many receivers have a hard time running routes correctly? I feel like people in TFF will bring up so and so's route running all the time, and it seems to me that a WR's first job is to run their route and, honestly, it doesn't seem like people of their athletic ability should have any difficulty. I must be missing something glaring or just misunderstanding entirely... or maybe I'm hallucinating.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2012 08:08
|
|
|
It's not specifically an athletic thing. It's a details and precision thing. People aren't suggesting they're actually running the wrong routes or anything like that. It's stuff like how crisply you execute your break, and if you're sloppy with your patterns. If the play calls for a 10 yard dig, then it needs to be a 10 yard dig. If the play calls for an 11 yard dig, then it needs to be an 11 yard dig. If you imagine they actually are the play diagram, you want them to have those crisp corners and precise angles, and not fuzzy or rounded off edges that bleed into other people's routes.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2012 09:18
|
|
|
Right, and I should have been more specific because that was essentially what I meant. It just seems like if you're some freakishly talented athlete and you spend literally years of your life learning to do something as simple as plant a foot and cut etc... you'd be good at it. And apparently some people aren't?
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2012 09:43
|
|
|
With all the choice and read routes that nearly all offenses at the college and pro level use it's also more about the receiver being able to break the route at just the right depth, angle and distance based off his read of the coverage to create separation and/or get into the zone holes. This stuff applies to the basic passing tree routes too, to an extent, running a slant is of course much less difficult than a seam read. To alter routes on the fly requires the receiver to be aware of the defense, correctly select the cut based the read, and the body control to execute this fluidly. Mediocre or bad receivers will have to slow down to make their adjustments, or will go through at full speed but commit some of the errors Badfinger referred to. There are tons of possible reasons why someone might not be good at this. Vision, motor program selection (can they quickly choose the correct course of action), agility, balance, strength etc.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2012 10:08
|
|
|
How much money can an UDFA make before he signs his first big contract? I mean, he plays lights out in the NFL, pro bowl selection, etc, but simply had bad luck in a lovely college program that made him go unnoticed by the scouts. And how does that compare to the money a complete bust for a top 3 pick gets? So he doesn't reach any of the incentive clauses.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2012 12:36
|
|
|
Also just saying "you're a world class athlete" is kind of downplaying how difficult it is to actually do all the things that are required, when you're dealing with the slim margins between correct and mistake that are the basis of every play in the NFL. Plus you're competing against other world class athletes, which kind of makes things a bit harder.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2012 13:25
|
|
|
On the route running I think another thing is we tend to just assume people can do it well if they work at it. After all it's a learned skill, at least to a greater degree than being tall or fast is. So we tend to compare everyone against whoever the best is we've seen at it, and we naturally get disappointed in them. For instance comparing Jerry Rice to any other receiver probably isn't going to work out too well for the other guy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2012 13:34
|
|
|
OperaMouse posted:How much money can an UDFA make before he signs his first big contract? Practice squad salaries are in the low six figures, and if he gets signed to an actual contract it'll likely be around that 300-500k per year range. As soon as a UDFA shows something they'll get signed to a real contract.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2012 17:10
|
|
|
Thanks guys... Another question: why are plays designed in a reactionary manner to defenses? The offense has the advantage in that they're the ones who know what they are running, why add reactionary delay to your routes by including on the fly reads? I've always thought that certain receivers were going to be covered by design on certain plays and the more coverage they can absorb the less coverage elsewhere. Due to the space of the field, it seems like having 3 open receivers means you have 3 less open receivers, whereas if you have 1 or 2 totally smothered receivers, the 3rd is most likely enjoying man to man and a greater chance for separation. You only have one ball to throw! Note that this is a totally amateur interpretation so go easy on me. As I think about this, and do some reading, it seems this might be too complex a question for here, but if anyone wants to give it a go I'd appreciate it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2012 18:46
|
|
|
Vaya con Dios!!! posted:Thanks guys... I think some of that, at least, comes from looking at coverages when they get to the line and figuring out if there's a mismatch. A receiver who might be #2 or #3 on the checklist may become #1 when they see who's covering him. On-the-fly reads may be about reading zones. i.e. If the linebacker is covering you off the line, break in; if it's a cornerback, break out. Or if the corner is blitzing, run a different route to give the QB a dumpoff option. Things like that. There's only so much that can be handled pre-snap. Most plays have fail-safe options in case the defense comes out in a formation you didn't expect or do something off trend. Others probably have better interpretations of what's going on, but that's my understanding of it, anyway.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2012 18:59
|
|
|
Vaya con Dios!!! posted:Thanks guys... One problem here is the assumption you make that only the offense knows what it's running. In fact, defenses also know what they're running--whether it's a blitz or not, and whether the coverage is zone or man or some combination. If you knew a defense was running the same coverage every play, say man coverage with a safety deep, then yeah, run a deep post to draw the safety and run a 10-yard cross underneath that. Then you'd be doing what you're suggesting, committing a guy to getting covered for the sake of opening someone else up. As it is, though, you don't know what the defense is doing. So running a fixed route with no mind for the defense could very easily result in nobody open, if the defense's play is designed worth a drat. It takes immediate adjustment from the receivers to see what coverage the D is playing and identify how they can get open.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2012 20:00
|
|
|
Vaya con Dios!!! posted:Another question: why are plays designed in a reactionary manner to defenses? The offense has the advantage in that they're the ones who know what they are running, why add reactionary delay to your routes by including on the fly reads? Reacting to your opponent is central to playing good football. There are numerous plays in football which are designed to give the offense an advantage by adjusting to the defense based on pre and post-snap reads. The offense still maintains the advantage because each player, acting on his assignment, knows what they need to do to execute the play correctly. Take a zone option run, a play quite ubiquitous in football at all levels (for good reason).  Lets go position by position: The line blocking assignments will be adjusted pre-snap. Linemen are responsible for a gap and will make combo calls depending on if they are covered/uncovered before the snap. I will bold the correct read based on the defensive pre-snap alignment. TE: D gap, combo Sam to the 2nd level if T is uncovered, solo block if T covered FST: C gap, Covered + G uncovered, combo to 2nd level, combo with TE if uncovered FSG: B gap, if covered combo with C to Mike, if uncovered combo with T to 2nd level C: A gap, solo block if defender is shaded to the front side, combo with G to 2nd level if A gap defender is back side BSG: A gap, with an A gap defender solo block, B gap defender combo to 2nd level with T BST: B Gap, with B gap defender combo to 2nd level with G, most dangerous man excluding option man if no B gap As we can see all the linemen are responsible for their playside gap. Slot: Block cover down X: Cut off block Z: Block cover Back: Open and take handoff at mesh point in front of QB aiming for inside leg of the FSG. QB: If backside DE chases inside zone keep ball, if DE stays home, hand-off So everything is fairly routine here. The linemen are basically blocking gaps not men, so while the finer details of which combination of the 5 will double to the 2nd level, what techniques they will use and which men they will block does change, the core concept is the same on each play. The decision of who will come off to the 2nd level is determined during the play. If the LB flows quick over the top to the playside, the player farthest to the playside will slide off and pick him up. If the LB flows to the backside, the player closer to the backside will come off. All the skill players have their assignments pretty much set in stone as well. The QB's option read is what makes this play so interesting (and awesome). A bread and butter play like this is repped so many times that making the read and executing the option on the fly is like second nature to a good QB. There should be no significant delay in the processing of the handoff or the keep, so there's essentially no downside for the offense to do this. In fact there is a huge upside. The offense has effectively removed the DE from the play by optioning off him. Usually the offense has 9 players to block 11. The ball carrier and QB are responsible for 2 unblocked counterparts. Optioning a defender removes him from the play in a way that he is essentially "blocked" despite not having to commit a blocker to do so. quote:I've always thought that certain receivers were going to be covered by design on certain plays and the more coverage they can absorb the less coverage elsewhere. Due to the space of the field, it seems like having 3 open receivers means you have 3 less open receivers, whereas if you have 1 or 2 totally smothered receivers, the 3rd is most likely enjoying man to man and a greater chance for separation. You only have one ball to throw! Success in the passing game is all about combining receivers via formation and route concepts into areas on the field that puts zone coverage in a situation where they are at a numbers disadvantage. It's not that receivers are covered by design, but good plays will force X defenders to cover X+1 receivers. The defender can commit to any receiver, and in doing so will always leave another open. Now lets tackle your original question about adjustments to routes in the passing game and why an offense should do this. It's much more common for DC's to disguise their coverages before the snap. What might have appeared to be an inverted Cover 3 pre-snap could turn out to be Tampa 2 post-snap. There are also athletic freaks like Ed Reed who can stand at the LoS pre-snap and then get back into deep middle coverage post-snap. The receivers will need to adjust their routes based on what happens after the snap to win the geometry battle against the defense. Lets take a look at the slot receiver or TE in the seam read vs 3 different types of basic coverage. *I didn't design these plays, but if I did, the playside back/receiver would be running an out or swing to the flats. This should really be single back trips right but this was the first seam read diagram I found in my playbooks.  So we've got 3 deep vertical routes, hoping to stretch the defense horizontally. In cover 2, we have 1 more receiver than the deep safeties can cover, so there's our numbers advantage, however the slot needs to run this to the right space on the field. Bad play design, or bad routes, are obvious when receivers occupy a space close enough to each other that 1 defender can guard both of them. The Y needs to turn this into a skinny post if he reads middle of the field open so that he maintains proper spacing between himself and the go routes. If the safeties are playing exceptionally deep so that the ball would be in the air for considerable time, the receiver should dig the route underneath them.  Now we have cover 3, so the numbers advantage of running 3 deep is neutralized. The seam becomes an in with the middle of the field closed. He should work across and stay flat to find the space behind the backers and in front of the safeties. The go routes in this instance also have a read built in, and this is convenient because it allows us to discuss adjustments to technique. If the corners are playing with big cushion it is unlikely you will get behind them, so the outside receivers will break an out on the 6th step and get the ball well before the CB can cover the distance he was giving up to protect deep. If they are playing up in press, it becomes man coverage for practical purposes. Get off the press and beat them deep.  Cover 1/Cover 0. The reads for the outside receivers are pretty similar to their cover 3 responsibilities. For the seam, we want to get head up leverage on the defender. With leverage even, work a fake to the outside and then break inside. The inside break should be flattened t cover 1, but against cover 0 you want to keep pushing vertically. If the FS has inside leverage work to get over the top. A good coach will rep this enough so that the cognitive process becomes nearly automatic. At the elite levels the degree of difference in athletic ability that can make or break performance is quite small. Some guys can't fully automate the cognitive side and/or don't have the super elite athletic talent to run great route consistently against other people of similar ability.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2012 22:17
|
|
|
Wow thanks for the writeup. You a coach?
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2012 22:58
|
|
|
I did coach for a couple of years. I'm in strength and conditioning now, so even though I'm no longer a football coach I'm still active within a program.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2012 00:01
|
|
|
I would love to coach some teenagers or something sometime, I have a ton of knowledge that's totally wasted on explaining why Mark Sanchez sucks to my roommate. Unfortunately Canada has a dearth of teams where you can volunteer
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2012 03:05
|
|
|
What is the requirement to be a restricted free agent, compared to an unrestricted free agent. I know in the NHL it just is based on age/years in league.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2012 03:11
|
|
|
Hockles posted:What is the requirement to be a restricted free agent, compared to an unrestricted free agent. I know in the NHL it just is based on age/years in league. RFAs are any free agent with fewer than 3 accrued seasons. This is different than just "3 years in the NFL" though, a player is only given an "accrued season" if they are on the active roster or IR for at least 6 games. This does not count time spent on PUP or the practice squad, so RFAs tend to be UDFAs who didn't get the standard 4 year deal coming out of school or low round draft picks who spent a year on the practice squad.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2012 04:08
|
|
|
Going back to the UDFA thing, one of the more fascinating recent rags-to-riches stories among those players would be Willie Parker. The Steelers gave him an extension of his low base salary with a big-rear end signing bonus after he blew up in his 2nd year for over 1400 total yards in the '05 season. Parker played out that deal then basically fell off the face of the earth. Big seasons in '06 and '07, about 50% production in '08, was virtually non-existent in '09, never played again. His big money came from the signing bonus, which (I believe) could've been pro-rated across the deal by the Steelers for cap purposes. But this isn't a salary cap thread, so I don't want to get into that. My main point was that if you are an UDFA who manages to set the world on fire, you can and will get paid... as long as you are healthy and productive for a couple of years afterwards.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2012 09:33
|
|
|
So if the Vikings win today they lock in a home-and-home series with the Packers. Does that happen much in the NFL? E: back to back games, specifically alternating home field Zorkon fucked around with this message at 13:51 on Dec 30, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2012 13:39
|
|
|
Zorkon posted:So if the Vikings win today they lock in a home-and-home series with the Packers. Does that happen much in the NFL? It happens on occasion. In 2009, 3 of the wild card games were rematches from week 17. Only one of them alternated home fields though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2012 14:50
|
|
|
Todd Marinovich's first two games were against the Chiefs in one of those things. I remember the announcers wouldn't shut the gently caress up about him in the first game despite the Chiefs being ahead (and I was young enough for that type of thing to bother me back then), then he was horrible the next week at Arrowhead. From wiki: quote:He did not start a game until Jay Schroeder was injured before the final week of the season, where he impressed observers with 23 completions in 40 passes for 243 yards against the Kansas City Chiefs in a close loss.[1] Because of this great debut he started the following week against the Chiefs in the playoffs, but was very poor, throwing for just 140 yards with 4 interceptions in a 10-6 loss and smashing a locker room mirror with his helmet after the game.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2012 16:17
|
|
|
edit: wrong thread
a neat cape fucked around with this message at 09:23 on Dec 31, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2012 16:19
|
|
|
I was watching the Texans/Colts game today and I didn't really understand the thought process behind one of the decisions. Colts are up 14-6, Houston scores a TD. It's early in the third quarter. Score is now 14-12 and they elect to kick an extra point rather than attempt a 2. In what scenario do you want to be down by one point as opposed to a chance to be down by 2 or tied? I know coaches are ultra conservative anyway, but I don't see the benefit there. Dierdorf or whoever on commentary seemed to think it was a smart play never to attempt 2 points outside the 4th quarter, but I don't really see why you'd need to consider the time left in the game there. Are they playing to allow a safety to win the game for them or something? Seems like an unlikely thing to be considering in that situation. I know later on in the game when the Texans were down by 12 as opposed to 11 it seemed like the wrong call, but that is obviously revisionist.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2012 06:05
|
|
|
Your goal, until you absolutely have to do otherwise, is to take every point you can every opportunity you can get. Going for 2 and not getting it means the next TD makes it a 2 possession game, and in the second half you have no idea when that next td will come, so you want to avoid putting yourself in a position where you're required to recover an onside kick under 2 minutes. There's still a lot of time left to play and you could conceivably answer another TD with 3 fg's in this scenario, or 2 fg's with a TD of your own to tie the game. The benefits of going for two there are really outweighed by the risk of lowering your odds of winning by getting down 2 scores. Or so goes the conventional thinking and the way I understand it. There might actually be a gamewinning % chance thing that would show otherwise there, but I'd be surprised if that were the case.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2012 07:13
|
|
|
So I'm seeing a Korean girl and she wants an explanation of football. Anyone know of a complete beginners guide that gives a succinct explanation in less advanced English? I've seen the wikipedia page but that might bore her too much. Her English is good but she'll take a little longer to read.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2013 13:30
|
|
|
Toussaint Louverture posted:So I'm seeing a Korean girl and she wants an explanation of football. Anyone know of a complete beginners guide that gives a succinct explanation in less advanced English? I've seen the wikipedia page but that might bore her too much. Her English is good but she'll take a little longer to read. I work in a Japanese office and every year I bring some of them to a UofM game or Lions game (This year it was the Lions-Colts game jesus christ). The best way is to print some B&W field diagrams out and sit down with a pen. First go over basic scoring before anything, because without any ultimate goal it can get frustrating. Then go over how the teams are designated offense and defense, and how the plaeyrs line up on the line of scrimmage. The LOS concept is necessary to explain downs and line to gain. The 1st down reset is always the most difficult concept for some reason. After the basic flow of the game is established, turn over the paper and start drawing Xs and Os to explain the flow of a single play. Just stick to something basic like a single back set on the offense and cover 2 on the defense. You can talk about whether people are lined up in their position because of rule or strategy. People want reasons for why things happen. People will pick it up at different rates. For one guy I did the above, after explaining blocking, he asked if it was possible to overload one side with receivers and have most of them block and throw to one of them. He came up with a screen play literally 10 minutes after learning his first football rule. Whatever you do, DON'T try to do the basics during a game, on TV or in real life. Most articles are too technical, and common events that sprout from technical rules aren't so obvious sometimes. Better to just do it yourself.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2013 18:39
|
|
|
~*MY GIRLFRIEND*~
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2013 20:05
|
|
|
Toussaint Louverture posted:So I'm seeing a Korean girl and she wants an explanation of football. Anyone know of a complete beginners guide that gives a succinct explanation in less advanced English? I've seen the wikipedia page but that might bore her too much. Her English is good but she'll take a little longer to read. As someone who's dating a non-native English speaker and who has done this I wouldn't even get into explaining plays, at least not for a game or two. Stick with how the game works (need to move a certain distance in a certain numbers of attempts, different methods of scoring or getting possession of the ball) and which players do what thing (passing, blocking, defense etc.). If you try to explain what a draw play is or why prevent defense is lame she's just going to lose interest, trust me. I was talking about this with my mom earlier and wasn't sure- if you bring a guy down from behind by his hair (like if he has dreads) is it a horse collar tackle? Or are you just a jerk?
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2013 20:26
|
|
|
C-Euro posted:As someone who's dating a non-native English speaker and who has done this I wouldn't even get into explaining plays, at least not for a game or two. Stick with how the game works (need to move a certain distance in a certain numbers of attempts, different methods of scoring or getting possession of the ball) and which players do what thing (passing, blocking, defense etc.). If you try to explain what a draw play is or why prevent defense is lame she's just going to lose interest, trust me. Hair is considered part of the uniform so you're just a
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2013 20:27
|
|
|
The correct response to someone being tackled by the hair is to talk about the "good old days" of Johnny Unitas with sensible haircuts when men were men and QBs were less "urban".
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2013 21:13
|
|
|
 Now there's a haircut you could set your watch to.
|
|
#
?
Jan 2, 2013 00:32
|
|
|
I just found a cool thing on Youtube, I didn't know these existed. Brian Billick (former coach of the Ravens) did little whiteboard demos for Fox Sports last year, and they're really cool for people who want to know a bit more of the advanced level stuff. It's a series called Billick 101. Here's a cool one on the Wide 9, if you're wondering why Juan Castillo just got fired (or why Detroit is essentially the only team that can run this alignment): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NNzGcVRbZws
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2013 04:13
|
|
|
Billick used to break down certain plays every week for the NFL Network, I guess he moved to Fox for whatever reason. It's great hearing a coach really break down a play. A++ Would watch again.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2013 05:31
|
|
|
Yeah, I don't know where he's at now. Some of the ones he does with other coaches are a bit hard to follow, but all the ones that are just him on his own are great. I wish someone would do a weekly 22-minute version of this, Playbook used to be super wonky but it's not anymore.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2013 05:50
|
|
|
Could someone tell me a bit about the different teams in the Canadian Football League, even if it's just conparisons to teams in the NFL? I am a bit curious about these teams but I would like to know a bit about the different teams cultures before I follow any of them.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2013 07:15
|
|
|
Blackula69 posted:I just found a cool thing on Youtube, I didn't know these existed. Brian Billick (former coach of the Ravens) did little whiteboard demos for Fox Sports last year, and they're really cool for people who want to know a bit more of the advanced level stuff. It's a series called Billick 101. Detroit can't even really run the wide 9 well at this point. They have a good DT/MLB group in place but they need an upgrade at defensive end since Avril had a down year and Kyle Vanden Bosh is cooked. They also don't really have particularly good OLBs and not really a starting caliber SS on the roster. They need to have an extremely good defensive draft to run this scheme effectively next year. e: poo poo, just realized this is the rookie thread. I'll leave this post up in case it's helpful to anyone, though. DrGonzo90 fucked around with this message at 08:57 on Jan 3, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2013 08:55
|
|
|
Blackula69 posted:Yeah, I don't know where he's at now. Some of the ones he does with other coaches are a bit hard to follow, but all the ones that are just him on his own are great. NFL Matchup on ESPN used to have Jaws breaking down plays and actually explaining defensive coverages and offensive option routes really well. Then they'd go from that little segment to letting Hodge yell POWER BACK ALLEYS WITH SEALS and just obliterated any interest you could have in actually watching it. But it comes on at like 4am sunday before the games, so you can dvr it and fast-forward through the lovely parts instead of watching whatever awful pre-game show you watch.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2013 09:56
|
|
|
The Dude Bro posted:Could someone tell me a bit about the different teams in the Canadian Football League, even if it's just conparisons to teams in the NFL? I am a bit curious about these teams but I would like to know a bit about the different teams cultures before I follow any of them. Saskatchewan: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dIaLtLKERJQ
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2013 13:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 12:01 |
|
|
I've forgotten the terms for them but I have noticed that mixed snap counts and hard counts seem to have disappeared. Is there a reason for this, am I just hallucinating? One thing I've noticed about the 49ers this year is that when they're playing poorly they seem to be getting owned on the OL a lot - defensive rushers and blitzers seem to regularly jump the snap - and it seems something simple like mixed snap counts could slow their step a little.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2013 15:37
|
|