Is the play calling holding the offense back?

[deep9er]

The problem is that making the move to Kaep is ONLY really going to pay any real kind of dividends if the Niners open the offense up and take advantage of his talents. Running the same offense that you ran with Smith isnt going to do anything other than take you as far as what Smith could have taken you anyway ( and that is a best case scenario). If you are making this move then you need to make it, you need to go with it 100% and do what you need to do to have it make sense. Otherwise it just looks like you are losing a ton of experience and playing the same QB.

everyone has his own specifics of "opening up the offense", so there is no right answer. but just wondering what this mean to you?

just passing more? passing downfield more? 'trick' plays? Kaep to run more options? other?

 

[yossarian]

A couple things here...

1. I don't think it would be wise to send a first year starter in there with guns-a-blazin...

2. Harbaugh is protecting his investment. He has to justify the QB change and make the media forget about #11. He can't do that if they are calling risky plays that cause TO's...

3. The team has practiced and executed conservative play calls since Harbaugh has arrived. I don't think you can just change everything over night...

You can see small wrinkles added each week, but it will be a slower proccess then some would like...

+1 --- How many flea flickers for example with Moss running 60 yards downfield would we expect to see Smith run? I think Harbaugh is by nature conservative, but he knew Kaep's gifts when he pushed to draft him -- athletic, running, canon for an arm -- I think we need to give Harbaugh enough credit to think that he drafted the dude to take advantage of his gifts, you can't do it on the run in the middle of the season without training camps very easily. Maybe this means he shouldn't have made the change this late (although I don't think so), the offense in place now is meant to take advantage of Smith's strengths and weaknesses, lets be a little patient.

 

[deep9er]

the below is taken from Matt Barrows...and is just for info to digest, not to make a point.

The second half also included two well-conceived plays that went for naught. The first was the flea flicker from Kaepernick to Randy Moss that was on the money but fell from the receiver's grasp. On the next play, offensive coordinator Greg Roman called a change-of-direction run for LaMichael James that gained 14 yards but was called back on a Mike Iupati holding call. Iupati leads the 49ers with eight penalties this season.

******************************
Kaepernick attempted 27 passes (including four sacks). Eighteen of them were out of the shotgun, nine were from under center. The 49ers, of course, mainly threw the ball out of the shotgun, but there were some runs mixed in, notably Frank Gore's 19-yard up-the-middle run at the beginning of the fourth quarter that set up Anthony Dixon's touchdown.

******************************
The 49ers ran the read-option three times on the final scoring drive. Of course, the play that everyone will remember is Kaepernick's 50-yard score. He tied his own franchise record (set last week) for longest run by a 49ers quarterback.

Read more here: 49ers Blog and Q&A: Film review: What makes Aldon Smith's achievement even more remarkable




again, everyone has his own definition, but to me the play calling isn't conservative. recall last week the pitch play too, which isn't a conservative play (don't focus on the result).

it was also well reported our running plays aren't straight forward either? they mix up the formations and personnel, so in a sense that isn't conservative.

 

[Bemular]

mahalo for the explanation. yeah it is broader whereas i was asking for specifics?

you said it was more coaching philosophy as opposed to play calling, so i'm still not sure what the difference is? to me, play calling is a result of your coaching philosophy.

anyway, don't need to respond.

You received your specifics. Play calling = Roman; Philosophy = Harbaugh. Harbaugh determines what plays go in "the book"; Roman calls the plays that are in the book.

The question asked if it was play-calling - I'm saying, I think it goes higher than that.

 

[Stokes1931]

The problem is that making the move to Kaep is ONLY really going to pay any real kind of dividends if the Niners open the offense up and take advantage of his talents. Running the same offense that you ran with Smith isnt going to do anything other than take you as far as what Smith could have taken you anyway ( and that is a best case scenario). If you are making this move then you need to make it, you need to go with it 100% and do what you need to do to have it make sense. Otherwise it just looks like you are losing a ton of experience and playing the same QB.

Two thoughts:

1) It is hard to change QB's mid-season. The offense was geared to maximize Alex Smith's skill set: short passes, short drops, ball control, keep it safe. Kaep has a different skill set, he can throw the deep ball, and deep outs. I don't think the 49ers have adjusted enough to make use of Kaep's skills. Either because Harbs is cautious, or maybe because Harbs is not really all in on Kaep, so the offense is not totally retooled for him yet. We'd get better results with Kaep plays called for Kaep, rather than Alex Smith plays called for Kaep. There are signs, that option pitch has sure worked well a couple of times, and blew up once.

2) Personally, as a 49er fan from the dark days of the mid-late 1970's, I am just spoiled with anything in the red and gold being less than the Montana/Rice/Clark/Young days. Harbs is not that kind of coach, but I'd love to see that offense return. Those were fun days, usually.

 

[deep9er]

You received your specifics. Play calling = Roman; Philosophy = Harbaugh. Harbaugh determines what plays go in "the book"; Roman calls the plays that are in the book.

The question asked if it was play-calling - I'm saying, I think it goes higher than that.

the below is what i was just wondering about, it is on the passing game only, and it is weak because of coaching philosophy (more of it, not only).

This is an interesting question because judging our offense from one perspective we have one of the top offenses in the league in both rushing & passing; however, judging our offense from the more traditional perspective, we accept that we are solid in our running game but weak in our passing game.

The difference, IMO, has more to do with coaching philosophy than offensive play calling.


ok, so Harbaugh puts the plays in the book, and Roman pick the plays from the book. so if the passing game is weak, then Roman is picking the wrong passing plays? this means it is more play calling as opposed to coaching philosophy?

 

[rmilia1]

everyone has his own specifics of "opening up the offense", so there is no right answer. but just wondering what this mean to you?

just passing more? passing downfield more? 'trick' plays? Kaep to run more options? other?

I have no clue but I am also not the guy that switched QB's either. I assume that when you go away from a guy that has a 104 QB rating, the 7th best QBR in the league, has won 80% of his starts for the last year and a half that you are doing it because you feel like the other guy gives you more dynamic playmaking, so I guess Id expect more dynamic play calling. Otherwise the move is fucking stupid

 

[deep9er]

I have no clue but I am also not the guy that switched QB's either. I assume that when you go away from a guy that has a 104 QB rating, the 7th best QBR in the league, has won 80% of his starts for the last year and a half that you are doing it because you feel like the other guy gives you more dynamic playmaking, so I guess Id expect more dynamic play calling. Otherwise the move is fucking stupid

ok, no problem. again, there is no right or wrong answer.


just that when i read posts like these, can't help think you should focus more on execution? not what play is called, but why it didn't work?

not all plays will work, but it appears you're saying why isn't enough of them?

 

[Bemular]

the below is what i was just wondering about, it is on the passing game only, and it is weak because of coaching philosophy (more of it, not only).

This is an interesting question because judging our offense from one perspective we have one of the top offenses in the league in both rushing & passing; however, judging our offense from the more traditional perspective, we accept that we are solid in our running game but weak in our passing game.

The difference, IMO, has more to do with coaching philosophy than offensive play calling.


ok, so Harbaugh puts the plays in the book, and Roman pick the plays from the book. so if the passing game is weak, then Roman is picking the wrong passing plays? this means it is more play calling as opposed to coaching philosophy?

So, if I fill your playbook with "weak" passing plays and you happen to choose one of those "weak" passing plays - Then it is your fault for choosing a "weak" passing play - Makes perfect sense.

 

[rmilia1]

ok, no problem. again, there is no right or wrong answer.


just that when i read posts like these, can't help think you should focus more on execution? not what play is called, but why it didn't work?

not all plays will work, but it appears you're saying why isn't enough of them?

Not seeing Kaep in practice and with the limited amount of actual game footage I cant really speak to what his strengths are that make him superior to Alex. Id think that Harbaugh probably knows why he made the switch so I would expect to see a different game plan tailored more to Kaeps strengths. What it seems like we are seeing so far is basically the same game plan with 1-3 plays per game that seem like plays you are calling because of CK being your QB. Thats fine by me since I think the Niners have a Super Bowl team without having to change anything ( including the QB ). Just strikes me as odd to make a QB change, not change the game plan much and lose all of the experience you had with Alex especially once the playoffs roll around.

 

[Bemular]

I have no clue but I am also not the guy that switched QB's either. I assume that when you go away from a guy that has a 104 QB rating, the 7th best QBR in the league, has won 80% of his starts for the last year and a half that you are doing it because you feel like the other guy gives you more dynamic playmaking, so I guess Id expect more dynamic play calling. Otherwise the move is fucking stupid

Fortunately, there have been many more dynamic plays with Kaepernick. Just because every play is not a more dynamic play is meaningless. Down & Distance or other game circumstances may ask only a few times a game for Kap to do something in our offense that Smith cannot do - the rest of the time he his simply executing the same offense and doing so at the same level of efficiency - thus far.

 

[rmilia1]

Fortunately, there have been many more dynamic plays with Kaepernick. Just because every play is not a more dynamic play is meaningless. Down & Distance or other game circumstances may ask only a few times a game for Kap to do something in our offense that Smith cannot do - the rest of the time he his simply executing the same offense and doing so at the same level of efficiency - thus far.

Its funny you mention this B, I actually looked at it earlier on NFL.com. The Niners are averaging 2.9 plays per game of 20+ yards ( not very good BTW, 12th in the NFC) so I figured that that number must be going up under CK and it is but it 3.0 per game compared to Alex being right under 2.9. I also looked at numbers like average yards per play ( higher under Smith), average ypa ( slightly higher under CK) and offensive ppg ( higher under Smith). The reality is that the offense really isnt making more dynamic plays, it feels like it may be because Kaep makes some of them with his feet where Smith made them other ways. Numbers all point to it being pretty much the status quo. EXCEPT for 1 stat which shows that on plays that the Niners lose yards they lose almost 3 times as many per play with Kaep in the game as they did with Smith. Basically the good is about even but when its bad its WAYYY worse with Kaepernick in the game. Granted these are pretty limited sample sizes for him but its still reality.

 

[deep9er]

So, if I fill your playbook with "weak" passing plays and you happen to choose one of those "weak" passing plays - Then it is your fault for choosing a "weak" passing play - Makes perfect sense.

ok, no problem.

didn't mean to carry on, just that i didn't see a difference and still don't? anyway, i'll leave it alone after this post.

what you're saying is Harbaugh put weak passing plays in the playbook and Roman has a knack for picking the weak ones. but since our passing game is weak, then it stands to reason most of the passing plays are weak.

perfect sense would be..............Harbaugh removing most of the passing plays, but apparently he hasn't after 13 games?

 

[deep9er]

Not seeing Kaep in practice and with the limited amount of actual game footage I cant really speak to what his strengths are that make him superior to Alex. Id think that Harbaugh probably knows why he made the switch so I would expect to see a different game plan tailored more to Kaeps strengths. What it seems like we are seeing so far is basically the same game plan with 1-3 plays per game that seem like plays you are calling because of CK being your QB. Thats fine by me since I think the Niners have a Super Bowl team without having to change anything ( including the QB ). Just strikes me as odd to make a QB change, not change the game plan much and lose all of the experience you had with Alex especially once the playoffs roll around.

IMO all you really needed to write was the part in bolden. the thinking is Kaep is able to execute more of the game plan, not Kaep needs a different game plan.

 

[rmilia1]

IMO all you really needed to write was the part in bolden. the thinking is Kaep is able to execute more of the game plan, not Kaep needs a different game plan.

Well so far looks like you're right. I guess I was under the impression ( maybe wrongly so) that Harbaugh saw a truly more dynamic playmaker in Kaep, a guy who could make the difference of a Super bowl contender to a Super Bowl favorite. Havent seen that yet but we'll see how it plays out. Maybe Im old school but I still think experience counts especially in the playoffs and I cant imagine a guy with 1/2 a season under his belt being a better option than a guy with 8 years experience especially if you are running the same plays and not really executing them better to any great degree.

 

[Ray_Dogg]

I agree with this. It may seem like a double standard that this kind of playcalling was good enough for Smith but not Kaepernick but the difference is the latter has shown the willingness and more importantly the ability to make difficult throws.

Problem I have is Smith had 8 TDs passing in his last 4.5 games. Kap has 5 TDs combined in his 4.5 games. Something is up.

 

[taughtmepatience]

Its funny you mention this B, I actually looked at it earlier on NFL.com. The Niners are averaging 2.9 plays per game of 20+ yards ( not very good BTW, 12th in the NFC) so I figured that that number must be going up under CK and it is but it 3.0 per game compared to Alex being right under 2.9. I also looked at numbers like average yards per play ( higher under Smith), average ypa ( slightly higher under CK) and offensive ppg ( higher under Smith). The reality is that the offense really isnt making more dynamic plays, it feels like it may be because Kaep makes some of them with his feet where Smith made them other ways. Numbers all point to it being pretty much the status quo. EXCEPT for 1 stat which shows that on plays that the Niners lose yards they lose almost 3 times as many per play with Kaep in the game as they did with Smith. Basically the good is about even but when its bad its WAYYY worse with Kaepernick in the game. Granted these are pretty limited sample sizes for him but its still reality.

Great analysis. However, this fails to take into account when the play is made. Take yesterday for instance: the 50 yd TD run came at a crucial moment in the game and essentially put the game away. In the Saints game, Kaepernick took the Niners on a soul crushing long drive to start the 4th to put that game away. Last year, we had to watch the defense close out games because Smith couldn't convert crucial 3rd downs in late, meaningful drives (Giant and Dallas games).

 

[Bemular]

ok, no problem.

didn't mean to carry on, just that i didn't see a difference and still don't? anyway, i'll leave it alone after this post.

what you're saying is Harbaugh put weak passing plays in the playbook and Roman has a knack for picking the weak ones. but since our passing game is weak, then it stands to reason most of the passing plays are weak.

perfect sense would be..............Harbaugh removing most of the passing plays, but apparently he hasn't after 13 games?

Why would he? The opinion that his philosophy is weak is not his opinion - it is yours. So now you think Harbaugh should be getting advice on how to guide his NFL offense from you? That's bold.

 

[rmilia1]

Great analysis. However, this fails to take into account when the play is made. Take yesterday for instance: the 50 yd TD run came at a crucial moment in the game and essentially put the game away. In the Saints game, Kaepernick took the Niners on a soul crushing long drive to start the 4th to put that game away. Last year, we had to watch the defense close out games because Smith couldn't convert crucial 3rd downs in late, meaningful drives (Giant and Dallas games).

Fair point but I mean all you really have to do is look at the W's and L's. Both guys did and are doing fine there I have no problem with the switch for you guys as long as CK keeps winning 75% of his starts. LOL.

 

[bdave]

The problem is that making the move to Kaep is ONLY really going to pay any real kind of dividends if the Niners open the offense up and take advantage of his talents. Running the same offense that you ran with Smith isnt going to do anything other than take you as far as what Smith could have taken you anyway ( and that is a best case scenario). If you are making this move then you need to make it, you need to go with it 100% and do what you need to do to have it make sense. Otherwise it just looks like you are losing a ton of experience and playing the same QB.

And not to mention hurting Kaepernick's upside permanently. The last thing we all want is Kaepernick playing the role of a 'game manager'

Let those cannons loose!

And I want Greg Roman fired, we need someone with passion and originality. The play calling has been bad enough!