Play Calling

[Critty]

For this of you who did not get a chance to read the beyond the pylon article about the deep pass.
I think the biggest takeaway is Survivorship Bias.

You call 12 pass plays with the intention to push the ball down the field in a game. You only execute two attempts. And complete 1/2 for 50% success statistically. The other 10 attempts went down as 4 short passes to checkdown, 2 short throw away at checkdown feet, 2 QB run by scramble, and 2 sack. So in reality you are 1/12 for 8.3% but those 10 plays are not showing up in deep throws category, only 2 survived.

So the raw number of 1/2 on deep throws in that game is misleading as it indicates a 50% effectiveness of the deep pass. And at first glance, you could conclude they should throw deep more in the game. The better stat should have been 1/12 to show it's effectiveness that day. But that is not the stat that gets recorded and reported.

I'm confident Staley and staff track their own plays and know the reality of what happens each play and with each player's assignment. I would bet in a scenario like the above they know they went 1/12 on intentional deep tries that game and that they have to execute better on those plays.

[Guest]

Lol. You truly live in an imaginary world.
You called Allen route a short out.
Only in your imaginary playbook is that a short out
:goofylol:

Just simplify your BS and say you want to see Gos, 9s and 7s routes called more and executed. Do you even know what Go, 9 and 7 routes are? Or do you just call it (bombs) It isn't just the call, it has to be executed. And if you look at the Chargers plays they have Gos, 9s and 7s. If you look at Chili tape you can see a couple plays include the bomb routes you've been desperate to see executed, and you disregarded it because you had to as it doesn't fit into your story.
The clueless one is you. And you have done it in spectacular fashion. Mic drop!

FFS, your posts are so incredibly bad. You have not even arrived at the discussion. Once again, I will try to give you a road map or draw a really simple picture for you so you might be able to actually get to the discussion.

I have been addressing the lack of very deep and deep passes over many months using a consistent discussion and terminology. The worthless imbecility contained in your way late to the party posts adds nothing. You do not get to change terms that I have clearly expressed over many months into some lame ass effort to make them mean something else. The first post in this thread made reference my posts, my discussion, not your worthless idiotic horse manure attempt to rewrite the history of my discussion. Until you get that, every post you offer on the route distance subject is idiotic on its face and does not even relate to my discussion.

I have said bombs and very long passes probably a hundred or more times in my posts. They encompass all very long primarily vertical patterns. There is no need to state them one by one because I have intended to encompass them all.

The analysis is beyond simple. 92% of our passes heading into last weekend's game were 20 yards or less. Herbert is not holding the ball waiting for long pass patterns to develop in an effort to access the very deep part of the field. Our air yards per pass is in the bottom 5. When a WR runs a clear out route, Herbert is not, with rare exception, looking to hit the very deep pass. Almost every time, he is looking at one of the underneath routes. So, your pathetic, beyond lame attempt to point to a WR running a clear out route where Herbert is not looking demonstrates a huge failure to comprehend what is actually happening.

Pundits across the nation have seen this obvious reality that you fail to acknowledge. The Simms video represents a very recent offering along these lines. It is spot on in identifying the obvious problem, the very problem with the offense I have been discussing all season long.

If we were trying to throw the ball very deep, we would be seeing very deep passes, which we are, with rare exception, not seeing--not as the primary read, not by the passes thrown, not by anything. Our offense has pretty much been the polar opposite of that, which virtually every stat and the eyeball test tells us. And the plays posted by NoMoreChillies are not evidence of anything to the contrary. If you believe they are, then you do not know what in the hell you are talking about.

[Guest]

Fact: There are (bomb) routes in Chili clips.

And to address your clueless and foolish Herbert eyes take.
If you were the safety JH10 would have you out of position all the time. Game plan would be Chainy likes to get nosy and will easily bite on look offs.

It's mind boggling that you don't understand QBs look off the defense on purpose to hold or move the safety with the intention to hit the other reciever in the hole.

In case you need education about look off. It means instead of staring down the primary receiver the QB will look off the safety by looking away from his primary target to lure the safety away from his intended target. It's a technique that is intentionally used and often used when trying to hit big plays.

What you asking for is telegraphed deep passes where it's a go route and you see Herbert staring down Guyton. And you are questioning the OC and play call. Wow. LOL!

The fact I have to point out your massive error in attempting to use where Herbert looked 1st as any sort of proof that supports your take is the final nail in your coffin on this debate.
:tired:

Your impressively awfully take of the videos is duly noted.

If you think any of these play are primarily designed to be a very deep pass, I pity you.

[Guest]

Popper had a good breakdown on the play calling for the Bengals game. Here it is:

In a 41-22 win over the Bengals on Sunday, the Chargers unlocked Justin Herbert’s rocket-launcher arm for the first time since Week 5 against the Browns.

Herbert set a career high with five completions on throws of 20 or more air yards, according to TruMedia. He tied a career and season high with eight attempts of 20 or more air yards. He also set a season high with 10.74 air yards per pass attempt.

The Chargers drove the ball down the field, and that was the primary reason they were able to both build a 24-0 lead and finish the game with 17 straight points.

What changed?

A lot had to do with how the Bengals play defensively. Cincinnati is one of the most nickel-heavy teams in the league. It has played the eighth-highest rate of five-defensive back packages of any team in football. Its nickel corner Mike Hilton is a stout and physical run defender, and that allows it to stay in these packages more often, even when opposing offenses bring out heavier personnel. The Bengals have been solid stopping the run. They are ranked 11th in rush defense DVOA, Football Outsiders’ efficiency metric.

There is a flip side of this, though. Because the Bengals have smaller players on the field, they are forced to use more players in the run front. They will often have seven or eight players in the box to defend the run. The seventh player is typically Hilton, and the eighth player is typically a safety, either strong safety Vonn Bell or free safety Jessie Bates. This strategy, of course, leaves fewer players in coverage and leads to a lot of single-high safety looks. The Chargers saw that as a weakness to exploit, and they attacked that weakness with deep shots to their bigger receivers out of play action. Herbert went 12-of-16 passing for 221 yards and two touchdowns with an average depth of target of 13.8 yards on play action in the game, according to Pro Football Focus.

Herbert’s 41-yard completion to Mike Williams on the Chargers’ opening possession of the game was a perfect example of this.

The Chargers went into their tempo offense after a 1-yard loss on first down. Herbert had thrown to Williams on a hot read when the Bengals brought a corner blitz, and Williams was dropped behind the line. As the Chargers set up for their second-and-11, you can see the Bengals had eight players in the box — four defensive linemen, two linebackers, Hilton (circled in yellow) and Bell (circled in red).



The offensive concept was a play-action shot to Williams, who was lined up on the outside left of the formation. He ran a corner route. Wide receiver Joshua Palmer, in the slot to the left, and tight end Stephen Anderson, on the right shoulder of right tackle Storm Norton, stayed in to protect. And Keenan Allen, lined up to the outside right, ran an over route.



As Herbert took the snap and faked the handoff to Austin Ekeler, it is clear the Bengals are in a single-high look, with Bates manning center field.



Herbert hit the bottom of his drop, and Williams was matched up with Bengals corner Chidobe Awuzie. Bates was still on top of Willaims.



But as the play progresses, Allen came into Bates’ field of vision on his over route. Offensive coordinator Joe Lombardi said the Chargers had seen on tape that the Bengals, based on their defensive rules, would drive Bates down on over routes and leave the corner to cover the deep third.

That is exactly how the play unfolded. As you can see here, Bates attacked Allen to cut off that over route.



As Bates closed, Williams gained leverage on Awuzie to the outside on his corner route. Herbert saw it and delivered.





Williams shielded Awuzie. Herbert threw a perfect ball over the corner’s head. The Chargers scored a touchdown four plays later.

The Bengals adjusted as the game went on and started playing more two-high shells to take away the Chargers’ deep-field passing game. But the Chargers were still able to find success, largely because of Herbert’s otherworldly arm strength.

Later in the first half, Herbert connected with Jalen Guyton on a 44-yard touchdown on a first-down shot play. The Chargers, again, took advantage of the Bengals’ nickel package and Hilton’s tendency to play close to the line of scrimmage with play action.

Lombardi said the Chargers were actually hoping for another single-high safety look on this play, and they designed the play to attack that coverage shell. The Bengals showed two-high safeties pre-snap and stayed in that shell after Herbert took the shotgun snap.





The play design had Allen, lined up on the outside right, running a double move down the right sideline. Williams, lined up outside to the left, ran a dig. And Guyton, in the slot, ran a deep corner.



If the Bengals had played single high, the concept — at least on the whiteboard — would have forced the deep safety to drift toward Allen on the double move, and Guyton would have just needed to beat to nickel corner, Hilton, one-on-one for a touchdown.

The play unfolded differently from how Lombardi intended, but the result was the same.

As Herbert faked the shotgun handoff to Justin Jackson, Hilton had his eyes in the backfield, prepared to defend the run.



That gave Guyton a free release as Herbert sprinted out to the right to give himself time to throw and allow for Guyton’s route to develop.



Herbert got to the edge. Hilton was covering Jackson in the flat. Bell, circled in yellow, was over the top of Allen’s double move. That left Bates in one-on-one coverage on Guyton, and Eli Apple in one-on-one coverage on Williams.



As Herbert settled into his drop, Guyton cut to the open space on the outside, creating separation from Bates.



Herbert released, and Guyton was open.



This was a very, very long throw, though, across the field, and Herbert underthrew Guyton slightly. The throw still traveled 61.5 yards in the air, according to Next Gen Stats. Herbert has the arm strength to put that ball into the corner.

Still, Guyton won the jump ball with Bates for the touchdown. Bates was called for pass interference on the play.



“Brandon (Staley) always talks about (how) receivers catch those balls a lot more than DBs,” Lombardi said. “And so when you get a ball that far down the field, defensive backs are more likely to be in a panic mode than receivers. Receivers just do that a lot more. So when you get a chance to throw the ball deep one-on-one, more good things are going to happen than bad things. So whether it’s pass interference, a catch, it usually works out well.”

When the Chargers offense is clicking, this is what it looks like. There are so many factors that go into accessing the deep part of the field. What coverage system is the defense playing? What are they taking away and what are they giving up? How do the Chargers create a protection scheme that gives Herbert enough time to throw?

The Chargers also had excellent field position in this game thanks to good special-teams play and turnovers. Lombardi acknowledged that played a part in the more aggressive calls.

As Lombardi said, shot plays can be “feast or famine.” And when they do not work out, those calls can dig the offense a hole.

But this is the offense’s strength. There is no doubt about that. And leaning into this strength over the final stretch of the season could very well lead the Chargers to the postseason and beyond.

The most important part of the discussion is how Staley is generally positive about the very deep passing plays and Lombardi is much more negative about them. And Lombardi's resistance to the very deep passing game has been expressed in other discussions as well such as when he essentially stated that he preferred multiple short plays to a single long play covering the same distance. Lombardi's resistance to the long passing game has been flagrantly obvious. It was in Detroit as well. New city, same result.

The other part that is how the deep passing game can be structured to overcome cover shells. No kidding.

As I have stated previously, I do not believe defenses suddenly woke up in 2021 and discovered that Herbert was a great deep passer. They knew it all of last year and defended it accordingly and we still threw deep, taking our shots down the field.

I do not see defenses playing any differently against us this year than they did last year. The difference is Lombardi's play calling, not the defenses and certainly not the pass protection, which is actually better this year than last year.

[Guest]

For this of you who did not get a chance to read the beyond the pylon article about the deep pass.
I think the biggest takeaway is Survivorship Bias.

You call 12 pass plays with the intention to push the ball down the field in a game. You only execute two attempts. And complete 1/2 for 50% success statistically. The other 10 attempts went down as 4 short passes to checkdown, 2 short throw away at checkdown feet, 2 QB run by scramble, and 2 sack. So in reality you are 1/12 for 8.3% but those 10 plays are not showing up in deep throws category, only 2 survived.

So the raw number of 1/2 on deep throws in that game is misleading as it indicates a 50% effectiveness of the deep pass. And at first glance, you could conclude they should throw deep more in the game. The better stat should have been 1/12 to show it's effectiveness that day. But that is not the stat that gets recorded and reported.

I'm confident Staley and staff track their own plays and know the reality of what happens each play and with each player's assignment. I would bet in a scenario like the above they know they went 1/12 on intentional deep tries that game and that they have to execute better on those plays.

Why are you making up such idiotic results? The analysis is weak.

Every very designed very deep pass should have a safety valve that should be just as effective as Lombardi's stupid short passing game, and maybe more so if the deep pattern has effectively cleared out the short passing area.

Just a simple question here--have you ever seen Philip Rivers play football? Checkdowns in space to Ekeler, Sproles and Tomlinson were a very good thing, much better than stupid WR screens and quick two-yard out patterns to WRs or TEs in the Lombardi offense.

I am sure Lynn tracked his results too and it did not stop us from being way too early down run heavy last year. Coaches have biases. Lynn's was clear by prior coaching history, spoken word and offensive game plan. So is Lombardi's. It is a different bias, but it is just as obvious based upon all of the same kinds of evidence.

It is the stupidest baked in assumption ever that teams only figured out in 2021 that we have the ability to throw deep and that teams are somehow defending us differently this year.

We know the variable that has changed (Lombardi as the play caller) and the ones that have remained the same (the defenses played against us) or have become even more favorable to the very deep passing game (better OL protection this year).

No more weak arguments please.

[Fleet 1]

I dont want to see personal attacks like im seeing in this thread. I have deleted a couple posts already. Stop with the personal insults. Just use better communication when you disagree.

Late.

[Guest]

I didn't disagree that speed is useful for throwing deep. On the contrary, I believe the saying "speed kills". I was merely pointing out that players with average speed can get deep. Just a week ago we saw Mdub catch a 41 yard pass and he was behind everyone - it wasn't speed that got him open, it was slick moves that left a DB trailing him.

I watch Tyreek Hill making great plays with his speed and I wish we had 3 or 4 like him, but the only fast WR we have is Guyton and he's prone to dropping passes. Nonetheless, I'd send him deep often. If he gets behind everyone, throw it to him. If he's covered one of the other receivers should be open.

The purported drop issue with Guyton is hugely overstated. Even after a couple of drops and a low sample size magnifying those drops, the difference between Guyton and Mike Williams is less than 3 drops out of 100 passes. Receivers can have a short stretch with drops followed by stretches without drops. I suspect that over time and with a larger sample size for Guyton, even that small difference would diminish.

[Critty]

Your impressively awfully take of the videos is duly noted.

If you think any of these play are primarily designed to be a very deep pass, I pity you.

Dude. Your ability to shoot you own argument in the foot is fun to watch. And then to call my take of the videos impressively awful literally takes the cake on ignorant BS.

The tape compared to your posts is plenty evidence in and of itself.

Fact: You literally on Chili play #1 called Allen route a short out which is verifiably false. And then you tried to justify your take by interpretation of where Herbert was looking 1st. A massive and obvious fail by you. It's there for all to see.
Just like your lame interpretation of the Palmer pass which you said was nearly uncontested and then the video showed that was verifiably false as well.

Also the worthless deep pass air yard stat that you use have massive survivorship bias.
.
Again, you calling Allen route a short out is like calling the DUI a minor traffic infraction. Neither are true and never will be. And your arrogance to say nobody gets to define a short, medium or deep pass but you is laughable at best and sad at worst.
There are standards that apply and you don't get to change them to fit your lame premises. Not in court and not in football.

My takes on those videos are verifiably correct. Each is a deep pass concept and some plays include the (bomb) routes you wanted to see. All those plays had execution issues. These is not opinion. It's fact!

What is duly noted is that you want to see telegraphed go routes to Guyton, you have been very clear about that.

I don't have any pity for you as everyone knows you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink.
If you cant see the water right in front of you, I can't do anymore to enlighten you. You have made up your mind you're exactly right that there is no water in front of you in spite of getting damn near water boarded with facts and video evidence.

:facepalm1:

[Guest]

Speed only really helps when it is applied correctly. Guyton may be close behind Hill in speed, but Hill looks like the fastest player in the NFL because even when he is running routes and making hard cuts, he is still super fast. Guyton has to develop his route running and hands to make catches at all levels. Hill makes a lot of plays underneath and then uses his plays to stretch them into extra bases. Guyton needs to do the same if he is going to be the long-term #3.

Almost every DB in the league can stop a fast receiver if he is a one-trick pony. Guyton needs to develop some complementary routes underneath and that will make him a lot more dangerous. Then the DB has to respect the short routes, and he has a chance to get long, or hurt a D with a short catch and run.

Guyton gets open on medium crossing routes as the video in this thread has shown us, but he is not the first or second read most of the time. With is speed, he can run across the field to create separation just as Hill does for KC, but we have not tried to take advantage of this type of play.

Guyton has been effective on deep passes. He has certainly earned some trust with respect to those plays.

I agree that he can improve on other aspects of his game, but I would favor us taking advantage of what he does well.

[Guest]

A couple of things of note

1). The Chargers certainly have a horrible run D, maybe an average pass D (on average), and terrible ST (getting better, but still not great). Maximizing offensive efficiency is not the best strategy in ISOLATION of our D and ST.

The play calling on offense needs to prop up the D and ST, not just get us in a track meet. A track meet is a good strategy only if you think your D can get a stop here and there, and while we do sometimes, we aren't at that point yet (not expecting it every week).

Efficiency analysis works for many areas of life, but NFL football, where there is a 60-minute time limit and limited opportunities make that sort of analysis limited in their applicability. IT works in generalities, but not in particular.

Besides a lot of the really big hurdles to a play being successful have already been cleared out when you do analysis like this, like plays being designed to go long, but broke down via pass protection usually get weeded out.

2). The data is collected from recent years. For the last 40 years or so, NFL teams passing games are designed around short throws that maximize competition %, and trying to get positive yards on every play. Defenses have reacted accordingly. That makes them more vulnerable to the longer throws. However, if you change the strategy on O, the D will react, and the longer throws are much lower percentage, meaning a lot more 3 and outs. There are dynamics in the game of football that efficiency analysis misses.

3). More than half (probably 2/3) of NFL teams have little or no pass rush. The stats collected are skewed toward the type of situations that are more likely for long passes to work, especially late in games, when both the DB and pass rushers are tired. But if you want to apply the conclusion generally, throwing long passes across the fill 60 minute period, then as an offense, you better have an answer for the pass rush if you are going to give those rushers time to get to the QB instead of throwing it quickly.

Lombardi doesn't throw long on a lot of plays because he is trying to protect the poor pass protection from Schofield and Norton. The D always has the chance to matchup their better rushers vs our right side OL. Because we play left and right OL, there is nothing we can do about it.

So, unless we want to see Herbert getting killed, that is the way it is going to be. There are times we aren't going to expose Herbert because we couldn't protect him. People were shocked we didn't throw downfeild vs the Ravens????? REally,

Quick passing is our best pass protection for our QB at times. Herbert is a better downfield thrower than short passer, but if he gets killed it won't matter. Too many bad things happen.

Fans are hoping we can overcome a very uneven roster. through playcalling and voodoo (or something)

I think the coaching staff has done a great job of overcoming Norton and Schofield, and even the rest of an offense that is not that great. We are trying to maximize Herbert to Allen and Williams and defenses are doing their best to stop that. Until we have the horses to make them pay, it is going to come down to that. Our D needs a lot of help as does our ST, and we are winning a lot of games for a team that is at best breaking even in 2 phases of the game. Coaching can only do so much, and we are 7-5 in large part because of the coaching, not in spite of it.

We were not throwing deep before Aboushi went down.

It is a Lombardi thing more than it is anything else.

[Critty]

Why are you making up such idiotic results? The analysis is weak.

Every very designed very deep pass should have a safety valve that should be just as effective as Lombardi's stupid short passing game, and maybe more so if the deep pattern has effectively cleared out the short passing area.

Just a simple question here--have you ever seen Philip Rivers play football? Checkdowns in space to Ekeler, Sproles and Tomlinson were a very good thing, much better than stupid WR screens and quick two-yard out patterns to WRs or TEs in the Lombardi offense.

I am sure Lynn tracked his results too and it did not stop us from being way too early down run heavy last year. Coaches have biases. Lynn's was clear by prior coaching history, spoken word and offensive game plan. So is Lombardi's. It is a different bias, but it is just as obvious based upon all of the same kinds of evidence.

It is the stupidest baked in assumption ever that teams only figured out in 2021 that we have the ability to throw deep and that teams are somehow defending us differently this year.

We know the variable that has changed (Lombardi as the play caller) and the ones that have remained the same (the defenses played against us) or have become even more favorable to the very deep passing game (better OL protection this year).

No more weak arguments please.

Dude. What are you taking about?
Survivorship bias is baked into the deep pass stats.
It's math and analysis.
So, now to be right, your calling math weak. Wow!

Did you learn anything from the beyond the pylon article?
Did you even read it?
Why dismiss math?

[Guest]

I never suggested staring down the primary read...all plays should naturally be disguised as much as possible, from the formation forward...so ideally, Herbie looks off a short route receiver and shortly afterwards looks deep to see how much separation there is...but I think the point is well taken that a balanced attack, including some deep shots mixed in with the short pass game, makes sense, depending on what the opposing D gives us...

It is the hallmark of Critty argumentation to make up concepts that you have not and are not suggesting as part of a weak attempt to save a failed argument. His attempt to redefine what I am discussing by altering route distances to which I referred is one example. His response to you is another.

Here, in this thread, the video is as plain as day in not supporting his position, so he has made up this "Herbert was really looking off Guyton's defender" nonsense because it is pretty clear in the video that Herbert is not somehow looking out of his earhole in Guyton's direction as Herbert's head and shoulders were facing nearly 90 degrees away from where Guyton was without ever looking anywhere near Guyton's direction.

That is where all of this "looking off the defender" nonsense comes from in this thread and it is pathetic.

Everyone knows that QBs should not stare down the intended receivers. Nobody has disputed that. And Critty's inability to tell the difference between looking at a primary read and looking off a defender does not change that no matter how many times he weakly raises this non-issue that nobody is suggesting.