Idle thoughts – Post Euphoria edition

[Deus Irae]

I have to say I'm kinda shocked by the fact that there hasn't been a SINGLE comment on the topic that got me to write this post in the first place. Am I the ONLY one who think this shift in passing game strategy is fascinating ?

What Russell Wilson was able to do in the superbowl was remarkable. He only completed 12 passes, and yet nearly won a game against a defense that did a far better job than the 24 points they gave up would indicate. I mean, think about it. I would be surprised if Wilson threw more than 5 passes to receivers who be considered open in the traditional sense. The rest were thrown to guys who were covered. Guys that Brady probably would have ignored......And yet you can't say that he didn't have a successful night throwing the ball, both effectively and efficiently.

I thought the Pats defensive plan was brilliant and executed as well as one could expect given who you were playing against and the conditions they were playing under. Yet it was the Seahawk passing attack that led to most of their scoring. THAT's why I think this fairly new phenomenon needs to be discussed......or not.

I don't think it's a shift in strategy, as much as it is the increased use of an already existing weapon because of an increase in he number of tall(ish) deep WRs. In the end, it's essentially the same, but the 'get there' is different. Brady can't stand back and toss Flaccoballoons, because he's throwing to shorter receivers and guys who aren't really middle-deep WRs.

Get Tom another legit "Moss" type, and I thin you'll see the deep ball really re-enter the Patriots arsenal.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

Looper throws work with big physical receivers or with burners who get deep past coverage.
We currently have neither as LaFell's style is not go up and take away the ball in coverage.

Given the receivers currently but maybe not in 2015 season on Denver's team, they're not hurt with Peyton floating up the deep ones because he is uncannily accurate in those throws, much more so than Tom. When Manning could make ALL the throws like the sideline out from across the field, he was dangerous. Now he's eminently defensible although better than more than 2/3rds of the QBs.

So a team could look at its WR corps and with the right big or burner WRs opt for more of a create time to throw QB who can spot who broke coverage and gun 'er in and let the guy make a play type vs the pocket pure thrower who is quixotically more rare than ever. We've had trouble defending those create time to throw guys because the contain rush allows an awful lot of time for someone to break free even if initially blanketed.

 

[patfanken]

I don't think it's a shift in strategy, as much as it is the increased use of an already existing weapon because of an increase in he number of tall(ish) deep WRs. In the end, it's essentially the same, but the 'get there' is different. Brady can't stand back and toss Flaccoballoons, because he's throwing to shorter receivers and guys who aren't really middle-deep WRs.

Get Tom another legit "Moss" type, and I thin you'll see the deep ball really re-enter the Patriots arsenal.

It's not so much the "long" ball. Most of Wilson's chucks were in the 20 yd range in the superbowl. I don't think this is about long bombs 30-40 yds down the field (though some happen)

Clearly the influx of so many tall receivers, along with the rules changes, are the reason for this shift. Another factor is that this influx has become a torrent, as it seems every draft seems to have more and more quality WR prospects. Yet the equally long DB prospects stay exceedingly rare. The 3rd key component in the **** to Flaccogate (why not) is the failure of the league to develop enough competent QB to staff the league. There aren't 5 QB's in the league that could come in here and run Josh's offense well, but there might be over a dozen who could run the Raven's or Seattle's simplified offense competently.

So while I don't disagree with most of what you said, I do believe this can be called a shift in passing strategy caused by the influx of big receivers, the lack of big DB's rules changes that increase the likelihood of a PI, and the need to simplify offenses because you can't find enough QB's to run something as complex as Josh's.

 

[Deus Irae]

It's not so much the "long" ball. Most of Wilson's chucks were in the 20 yd range in the superbowl. I don't think this is about long bombs 30-40 yds down the field (though some happen)

Wilson was throwing to the 6-5 guy who hadn't even been on the team during most of the regular season. Matthews had 4 catches for 109 yards, and a long of 45 yards.

Kearse had 3 catches for 45 yards, with a long of 33, and was targeted deep on numerous occasions.

Take away those two long passes and Wilson is 10 for 19 for 169. It's not just about long bombs, but they are a big part of it. It's why it's so helpful when you can threaten middle-deep.

Clearly the influx of so many tall receivers, along with the rules changes, are the reason for this shift. Another factor is that this influx has become a torrent, as it seems every draft seems to have more and more quality WR prospects. Yet the equally long DB prospects stay exceedingly rare. The 3rd key component in the **** to Flaccogate (why not) is the failure of the league to develop enough competent QB to staff the league. There aren't 5 QB's in the league that could come in here and run Josh's offense well, but there might be over a dozen who could run the Raven's or Seattle's simplified offense competently.

So while I don't disagree with most of what you said, I do believe this can be called a shift in passing strategy caused by the influx of big receivers, the lack of big DB's rules changes that increase the likelihood of a PI, and the need to simplify offenses because you can't find enough QB's to run something as complex as Josh's.

Yeah... as I said, I don't agree with your characterization, but our takes still get us to the same place, and I don't think we're disagreeing on anything of import. I don't think either of us is flat-out wrong. I just think we're looking at the same picture from slightly different angles.

Bottom line: QB+ Tall, legit WR (or at least a middle deep threat) = more deep play and a looser defense


Edit: and, even as we discuss this, Troy Vincent is making comments about something that would significantly change the NFL game in this area:

Defensive pass interference enforcement is a topic to watch in the wake of the Lions' controversial playoff loss to the Cowboys. Vincent suggested an alternate solution to replay that would make PI a 15-yard penalty rather than a spot foul. There's concern that making pass interference reviewable would undermine game officials, who have to make difficult calls in real time.

"We must keep in mind that officials and players are moving at game speed, and those of us who are making decisions on rules have the luxury of slow motion video," Vincent said. "Sometimes game speed and rule changes aren't always compatible."

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap30...penalty-is-a-possibility?campaign=Twitter_atn

I think his argument is a ludicrous one, btw, but it's now out there.

 

[RelocatedPatFan]

This is EXACTLY my point. Finding a truly elite QB is the hardest thing to do in sports. You'd be hard pressed to find more than 5 in the entire league. However if you build a team around the "chuck and duck" strategy (BTW someone should figure out a better name for it), you don't need a QB that skilled in making decisions.

I meant to come back in here and agree with your point that offensive QBs are getting away with this type of play (or using it more than they should). The QBs still have a high level of skill and can make good throws/read coverages, but they'll not be in that elite category. so maybe their below top tier, but these bonus/chunk plays do change the nature of the game. Plus, WRs are getting bigger and faster with DBs not really keeping pace with the physical traits.

Maybe we can call the "chuck and duck" the "Hail Interference". Though something that could accomodate the jump ball and interference would be better.

Brady did get to do the "chuck and duck" in 2007 with Randy Moss and the results were fabulous.

 

[Oswlek]

Reading this thread reminds me of the 2003 Panthers. Just like this past SB, NE really should have been in control of the game early on. And just like that game, Seattle starting turning things around when they started chucking it up and letting the receiver just make a play on the ball. Other than the first TD pass to Smith, most of Delhomme's throws were mini jump balls where NE was in good position and the receiver just made a better play. It's a big reason why I never bought into the hype around Jake and had a good laugh when the signed him to that ridiculous contract.

 

[mosi's man]

I have to say I'm kinda shocked by the fact that there hasn't been a SINGLE comment on the topic that got me to write this post in the first place. Am I the ONLY one who think this shift in passing game strategy is fascinating ?

What Russell Wilson was able to do in the superbowl was remarkable. He only completed 12 passes, and yet nearly won a game against a defense that did a far better job than the 24 points they gave up would indicate. I mean, think about it. I would be surprised if Wilson threw more than 5 passes to receivers who be considered open in the traditional sense. The rest were thrown to guys who were covered. Guys that Brady probably would have ignored......And yet you can't say that he didn't have a successful night throwing the ball, both effectively and efficiently.

I thought the Pats defensive plan was brilliant and executed as well as one could expect given who you were playing against and the conditions they were playing under. Yet it was the Seahawk passing attack that led to most of their scoring. THAT's why I think this fairly new phenomenon needs to be discussed......or not.

The Seahawks made their bones on play-action. Nearly all their passing was predicated on the over-emphasis employed by the Pats at stopping the run. The wideouts were single-covered all game and, despite eight in the box, Lynch was still "held" to one hundred yards. Wilson had excellent touch on the deep ball to the sidelines. Many of those completions were, in fact, excellent throws, not "jump balls", that exploited single coverage out wide. I don't think this was "chuck and hope" like Flacco does deep to Torey Smith. I don't think you are being fair to Wilson on this one.