PDA

View Full Version : Short passing game.



CrazyHorse
10-02-2015, 11:13 PM
Why are the Patriots so good at it and we aren't. Are they just better at breaking tackles?

Al Wilson 4 Mayor
10-03-2015, 01:31 AM
Because at this point of their careers Brady has a lot more arm talent...and Gronk draws a lot of attention, imo.

HORSEPOWER 56
10-03-2015, 02:01 AM
It doesn't hurt that they've run the same offense for essentially 15 years. McDaniels learned under Weiss and has kept the same system. Brady has never had to learn a new offense.

EastCoastBronco
10-03-2015, 07:47 AM
It doesn't hurt that they've run the same offense for essentially 15 years. McDaniels learned under Weiss and has kept the same system. Brady has never had to learn a new offense.

If it ain't broke...

BroncoWave
10-03-2015, 07:58 AM
Because they cheat and know what's coming on defense.

Northman
10-03-2015, 09:26 AM
Because at this point of their careers Brady has a lot more arm talent...and Gronk draws a lot of attention, imo.

Not only that but they can stretch the field when they really need to.

Al Wilson 4 Mayor
10-03-2015, 11:36 AM
Not only that but they can stretch the field when they really need to.

Right, that goes back to arm talent. I don't know if Manning can even throw the ball 50 yards anymore. Most deep balls don't go that far anyway, but the deep throws I've seen this year haven't been that accurate and it looks like he's giving it everything he's got just to get it 40 yards down the field.

Northman
10-03-2015, 11:46 AM
Right, that goes back to arm talent. I don't know if Manning can even throw the ball 50 yards anymore. Most deep balls don't go that far anyway, but the deep throws I've seen this year haven't been that accurate and it looks like he's giving it everything he's got just to get it 40 yards down the field.

I think he can but i think because of his age and the recent article talking about loss in his fingertips i think it adds to his inconsistency at this stage of his career. I think back to the first game against the Ravens and how he just missed Sanders on long passes. There is that old adage about a game of "inches" and that would be an example of that. If he's able to make those throws it changes the complexion of that game i believe. Against the Chiefs our receivers were able to make plays for the catches but it would be nice if he was able to hit those guys in stride but it is what it is at this point.

Al Wilson 4 Mayor
10-03-2015, 11:54 AM
Or the jump ball DT grabbed and ran in against the Lions. He had a couple steps on the db. Payton only got it out there about 40 yards.

Simple Jaded
10-03-2015, 06:09 PM
Or the jump ball DT grabbed and ran in against the Lions. He had a couple steps on the db. Payton only got it out there about 40 yards.

I think that's Manning trying to correct the over-throws from previous games.

Al Wilson 4 Mayor
10-03-2015, 06:42 PM
I think that's Manning trying to correct the over-throws from previous games.
Let's hope so, because DT made a crappy throw look like a great play call.

Simple Jaded
10-03-2015, 06:54 PM
Let's hope so, because DT made a crappy throw look like a great play call.

Definitely a crappy throw for the Manning we're used to, unfortunately that may be as good as it gets.

Al Wilson 4 Mayor
10-03-2015, 06:55 PM
Definitely a crappy throw for the Manning we're used to, unfortunately that may be as good as it gets.

That's what worries me, he might not be able to throw it any farther than that.

Joel
10-03-2015, 07:06 PM
1) They've been doing the same thing since before Brady was drafted,
2) Their coach matches our QB in the level of exhaustive and exhausting precision demanded in film study and every snap of every practice and
3) They habitually cheat myriad ways with total impunity.

When Manning has >1-2 seconds often enough to EXPECT it, and so scan the coverage and find receivers, he'll look a lot more like the Manning of old. Ignoring his overthrows to say Father Time has sapped his strength is one thing, but implying his arm's now so weak he can't even accurately throw 10-15 yds is absurd; I can do that, despite 1) being 2 years olders and 3) never playing a down of organized football.

Just to be clear, I'm not saying it's an invalid question; two first ballot HoF QBs getting radically different results from the same style (and despite Manning having far better #1 and #2 WRs) makes the question very pertinent. There ARE several reasonable explanations though (and I don't mean "Manning's finally lost it; time to start Oz.")

Al Wilson 4 Mayor
10-03-2015, 07:32 PM
Who are you talking to Joel? No one said he can't throw it 15 yards. I said he might not he able to throw it 50 because I haven't seen one of his balls travel over 40 yards yet this year.

TXBRONC
10-03-2015, 07:51 PM
Definitely a crappy throw for the Manning we're used to, unfortunately that may be as good as it gets.

Bite your tongue.

Joel
10-03-2015, 08:01 PM
Who are you talking to Joel? No one said he can't throw it 15 yards. I said he might not he able to throw it 50 because I haven't seen one of his balls travel over 40 yards yet this year.
If, for the sake of argument, we accepted that's true: How could it explain our far worse SHORT passing game? Because no one fears his deep ball enough to leave both safeties deep, and instead blankets the short routes? Seattle did the same thing back when he shattered all the passing records, and it worked depressingly well both times we played them. That change had nothing to do with his arm (which was fine then) and everything to do with his protection and run support (which was wretched then and has continually gotten worse since.)

He's not missing short passes because his arm's too weak to throw <20 yds, but because he has to rush every throw as long as he expects the rush to be on him in <2 seconds. The problem's not Father Time, but MFing time in the pocket. Maybe the best argument for reverting to the pass-heavy offense we used pre-Kubiak is that he and everyone else would be far more familiar with his hot reads. Of course, so is the whole NFL after watching his highlight reels for a decade-and-a-half, and watching tape of the Denver version for three.

For that matter, MANNING has nothing to do with the OPs follow up question (i.e. "are [the *ots] just better at breaking tackles?") On that score, I don't think Edelman nor Amendola breaks tackles any better than Sanders (nor as well as DT,) but do think it's true we don't have a TE to manhandle tacklers as effortlessly and often as Gronk, anymore than we have one who blocks as well. Maybe Green can fill that role; it's hard to deny the value, particularly when teams drop everyone down close to the line to smother short passes and/or blitz Manning.

BroncoWave
10-03-2015, 08:17 PM
If, for the sake of argument, we accepted that's true: How could it explain our far worse SHORT passing game? Because no one fears his deep ball enough to leave both safeties deep, and instead blankets the short routes? Seattle did the same thing back when he shattered all the passing records, and it worked depressingly well both times we played them. That change had nothing to do with his arm (which was fine then) and everything to do with his protection and run support (which was wretched then and has continually gotten worse since.)

He's not missing short passes because his arm's too weak to throw <20 yds, but because he has to rush every throw as long as he expects the rush to be on him in <2 seconds. The problem's not Father Time, but MFing time in the pocket. Maybe the best argument for reverting to the pass-heavy offense we used pre-Kubiak is that he and everyone else would be far more familiar with his hot reads. Of course, so is the whole NFL after watching his highlight reels for a decade-and-a-half, and watching tape of the Denver version for three.

For that matter, MANNING has nothing to do with the OPs follow up question (i.e. "are [the *ots] just better at breaking tackles?") On that score, I don't think Edelman nor Amendola breaks tackles any better than Sanders (nor as well as DT,) but do think it's true we don't have a TE to manhandle tacklers as effortlessly and often as Gronk, anymore than we have one who blocks as well. Maybe Green can fill that role; it's hard to deny the value, particularly when teams drop everyone down close to the line to smother short passes and/or blitz Manning.

He absolutely could be missing short passes because of a weak arm. All of his passes are probably muscle memory at this point in his career. If he's putting the same juice behind short passes that he always has but now has a weaker arm than before, then it's reasonable to assume that those passes wouldn't be as accurate. Even short passes have to be thrown hard to get them in the tight windows of the NFL.

Joel
10-03-2015, 08:55 PM
He absolutely could be missing short passes because of a weak arm. All of his passes are probably muscle memory at this point in his career. If he's putting the same juice behind short passes that he always has but now has a weaker arm than before, then it's reasonable to assume that those passes wouldn't be as accurate. Even short passes have to be thrown hard to get them in the tight windows of the NFL.

I might buy that if the ball's were simply arriving late rather than going everywhere EXCEPT directed. Driving to Albuquerque takes longer at 30 mph than 70: It still doesn't end up in Peoria. Lost strength could cause more Ints because the ball needs more flight time and those narrow windows close as fast as ever, and would certainly mess up timing routes. But the ones too high, too low or just flat off target aren't because his arm's not strong enough to control a 15 yd throw (loss of feeling in his fingertips would be a far more likely culprit—except it was the same in 2013.)

Accuracy's far more dependent on touch than strength, so usually one of the last things to go, when strength falls to the point QBs must put all they have left into even medium range throws, hoping accuracy takes care of itself. There's far more to a pass than arm strength; in a very real sense, Manning's spent his entire career proving that. Given time, Manning's still a top QB; I just wish we could test that.

Al Wilson 4 Mayor
10-03-2015, 09:11 PM
Joel, that is not what Seattle did. Seattle kept everything in front of them and attacked the short routes. That's why our receivers were getting rocked by safeties and LB's as soon as they caught the ball. The Manning we see today is not the same guy we saw in the SB.

Joel
10-03-2015, 09:29 PM
How does
no one fears his deep ball enough to leave both safeties deep, and instead blankets the short routes? differ from
Seattle kept everything in front of them and attacked the short routes. That's why our receivers were getting rocked by safeties and LB's as soon as they caught the ball.


The Manning we see today is not the same guy we saw in the SB.
Maybe not, but it's sure hard to know based on anything that happens on the field. The main difference is it's not a default pass-only offense he practically designed, so he can't throw the ball the instant he gets it and be right on target (except, of course, when he does. ;)) But since our season rushing average is a whopping 2.6 yds/att, we quickly find ourselves back in the same old dink, dunk and THUNK short passing game that separated DTs shoulder and left Welker wondering what city he was in—and doing it with a new playbook despite Manning sharing practice time for the first time ever.

The difference between our offensive failures and NEs successes with that system won't mean much until/unless that disparity continues when we play a D like Jacksonvilles and they face Justin Houston and Tamba Hali on the road with three days rest. I mean, people are already writing articles about NEs schedule being so soft they could go undefeated, while we have a new coach, new offense and all of ONE linemen from last year: Is that REALLY a fair basis of comparison, even if we ignore NEs latest ongoing cheating scandal?

Joel
10-03-2015, 09:36 PM
I said 4 years ago it would go this way: We'd stick Manning with the same old crappy protection and non-existent run "support" we already had, then call him a bum when he didn't singlehandedly win us a bunch of SBs. The faithful sure aren't going to blame the front office, because we all know where that leads; much easier to blame the hired gun, especially after a decade hating him for twice lighting us up so badly in the playoffs we traded Portis for Champ AND spent a seasons first THREE picks on CBs. Sad thing is, the front office is finally doing almost EXACTLY what I wanted, but (probably) a year too late.

Yet none of that has anything to do with whether our receivers can break tackles/why they can't.

Al Wilson 4 Mayor
10-03-2015, 09:42 PM
Right Joel, because that's exactly what I'm doing.

SR
10-03-2015, 09:46 PM
I said 4 years ago it would go this way: We'd stick Manning with the same old crappy protection and non-existent run "support" we already had, then call him a bum when he didn't singlehandedly win us a bunch of SBs. The faithful sure aren't going to blame the front office, because we all know where that leads; much easier to blame the hired gun, especially after a decade hating him for twice lighting us up so badly in the playoffs we traded Portis for Champ AND spent a seasons first THREE picks on CBs. Sad thing is, the front office is finally doing almost EXACTLY what I wanted, but (probably) a year too late. Yet none of that has anything to do with whether our receivers can break tackles/why they can't.

You said all that four years ago?

Joel
10-03-2015, 10:12 PM
You said all that four years ago?
Everything but the part about todays FO doing almost exactly what I want (though probably too late,) because I was never conceited enough to think it would (really.) And I didn't say none of it had to do with a 2015 threads first question. Funny thing is, I also said it would all happen LAST year, because back then I didn't think Manning had >3 years left (tops,) so everyone said I was just a homer for our last QB when it was so obvious Manning would finish his contract here. Everyone who still feels that way, please raise your hands.

CrazyHorse
10-03-2015, 10:15 PM
I read that Brady's is getting rid of the ball faster than any body but his yards per attempt through the air is among the lowest. We tried the same thing in the Super Bowl and got destroy(We were missing several starters) but the Patriots were able to beat the Seahawks with the same formula. It just doesn't make a whole lot of sense, unless they're that much better at figuring out the defense's play call.

Al Wilson 4 Mayor
10-03-2015, 10:29 PM
I was one who defended Manning's poor play at the end of last year, attributing it all to the injury.
What I see in Manning's throws is what most analysts are pointing out also. These analysts who are suggesting his arm talent has dropped also have great repsect for him.
I still think Manning is effective, but not one of the 2 or 3 most effective in the game not anymore. He doesn't need to be the best QB in the league for this team to win.
Pointing out Manning's decline doesn't mean I'm blindly loyal to Elway (it means I trust my eyes) Suggesting that is assanine at best.

MOtorboat
10-03-2015, 11:23 PM
I said 4 years ago it would go this way: We'd stick Manning with the same old crappy protection and non-existent run "support" we already had, then call him a bum when he didn't singlehandedly win us a bunch of SBs. The faithful sure aren't going to blame the front office, because we all know where that leads; much easier to blame the hired gun, especially after a decade hating him for twice lighting us up so badly in the playoffs we traded Portis for Champ AND spent a seasons first THREE picks on CBs. Sad thing is, the front office is finally doing almost EXACTLY what I wanted, but (probably) a year too late.

Yet none of that has anything to do with whether our receivers can break tackles/why they can't.

Or, what you wanted wasn't as smart as you think it is.

Simple Jaded
10-03-2015, 11:59 PM
That Poortis/Bailey was a great trade for Denver.

Joel
10-04-2015, 05:22 AM
I read that Brady's is getting rid of the ball faster than any body but his yards per attempt through the air is among the lowest. We tried the same thing in the Super Bowl and got destroy(We were missing several starters) but the Patriots were able to beat the Seahawks with the same formula. It just doesn't make a whole lot of sense, unless they're that much better at figuring out the defense's play call.
Bradys SB line was far better than ours though. I don't know the stats on hurries and pressures (they only sacked him once) but he wasn't running for his life against a straight four man rush like Manning was.


I was one who defended Manning's poor play at the end of last year, attributing it all to the injury.
What I see in Manning's throws is what most analysts are pointing out also. These analysts who are suggesting his arm talent has dropped also have great repsect for him.
I still think Manning is effective, but not one of the 2 or 3 most effective in the game not anymore. He doesn't need to be the best QB in the league for this team to win.
Pointing out Manning's decline doesn't mean I'm blindly loyal to Elway (it means I trust my eyes) Suggesting that is assanine at best.

His RANGE may well have declined; it's even probable. But that won't 1) affect SHORT passes much, 2) affect our ability to break tackles much or 3) be possible to know as long as he has NO time to set his feet.


Or, what you wanted wasn't as smart as you think it is.

Maybe, but let's hope not, because Elway's DOING it, smart or not. What we WERE doing sure didn't work, smart or not: Best passing EVER and an uber-talented D, yet one-and-done 2/3 years (despite playing at home) and one of the worst SB beatings EVER the other year.


That Poortis/Bailey was a great trade for Denver.
Yeah, but the point was the motive, not how well it worked out for us. Back then we had a line good enough we could grab anyone off the street and make them 1000 yd rushers, but Manning torched our secondary in the playoffs to the tune of 41-10, so the trade made sense. The next year, Manning "only" torched our secondary 49-24 in the playoffs, because even Champ in his prime couldn't cover an entire WR corps, so we spent our first THREE '05 picks on CBs.

Simple Jaded
10-04-2015, 04:09 PM
So we should thank Manning for torching them in the playoffs?

Joel
10-04-2015, 06:41 PM
So we should thank Manning for torching them in the playoffs?
Maybe; seemed like nothing less than doing it TWICE could convince the Mastermind our whole secondary was irredeemable garbage. I love Shanny to death, but what he knows about running a D could fit on a napkin. With room to spare. The point wasn't that 29-year-old Manning made our secondary better by exposing it so badly he FORCED improvement, but that people who endured those games will remember them very quickly if he retires without another SB—whether or not the latter's his fault.

All THAT and the rest said, todays game made it much harder to argue he's the same ol' Peyton. While not flawless, the protection and run support were both sufficient, and the D still elite until we totally exhausted it (our D was on the field >22 minutes in the first half ALONE.) We should've won that game going away, and nearly did twice: Until Manning tried to throw it away both times. Maybe he has lingering trust issues with his much improved pass protection, but if it's no better next week, maybe I was right when we signed him: 2-3 good years until he retires or makes us all wish he had.