[Stymie]

Required talent #1 for a QB is "Find and hit the open receiver!"  Hogan ain't doing that this year.  Hence the perceived sluggishness of the offense.  Moving the chains more frequently and in bigger chunks would make us look fast even though we'll never be as fast as Alabama or Oregon.

[Stymie]

Required talent #1 for a QB is "Find and hit the open receiver!"  Hogan ain't doing that this year.  Hence the perceived sluggishness of the offense.  Moving the chains more frequently and in bigger chunks would make us look fast even though we'll never be as fast as Alabama or Oregon.

[washingtonismoney]

Required talent #1 for a QB is "Find and hit the open receiver!"  Hogan ain't doing that this year. 

Then why is he completing 71% of his passes for 8.83 yards per attempt? Has to be a bit more complicated than that.

[washingtonismoney]

Required talent #1 for a QB is "Find and hit the open receiver!"  Hogan ain't doing that this year. 

Then why is he completing 71% of his passes for 8.83 yards per attempt? Has to be a bit more complicated than that.

[stupac2]

Then why is he completing 71% of his passes for 8.83 yards per attempt? Has to be a bit more complicated than that.

I think the problem with our offense is that we've offended the elder gods. Submit sacrifices to Cthulhu this week.

Seriously though, I'm baffled by this. Nothing makes sense. It seems like there should be some kind of easy answer but there isn't. What the hell is wrong with our offense?

[stupac2]

Then why is he completing 71% of his passes for 8.83 yards per attempt? Has to be a bit more complicated than that.

I think the problem with our offense is that we've offended the elder gods. Submit sacrifices to Cthulhu this week.

Seriously though, I'm baffled by this. Nothing makes sense. It seems like there should be some kind of easy answer but there isn't. What the hell is wrong with our offense?

[OutsiderFan]

Watching the Niners today was almost like re-watching Stanford play UW. 

Total statistical domination.
Give up points on special teams and/or offense
QB missing too many throws.
FGs not TDs
Have lead late and need one first down deep in own territory, run ball up middle trying to run clock, into 8 man front, punt and still leave plenty of time for opponent to score tying or winning points.
Niners came even closer to losing and dominated even more statistically than Stanford, but Stanford still needed last drive defensive stop to secure win.

The difference for Niners was Kaepernick making a crazy throw on pure raw athleticism.  Difference for Stanford was Ty Momtgomery's crazy athleticism to push a defender 10 yards into the EZ.

[OutsiderFan]

Watching the Niners today was almost like re-watching Stanford play UW. 

Total statistical domination.
Give up points on special teams and/or offense
QB missing too many throws.
FGs not TDs
Have lead late and need one first down deep in own territory, run ball up middle trying to run clock, into 8 man front, punt and still leave plenty of time for opponent to score tying or winning points.
Niners came even closer to losing and dominated even more statistically than Stanford, but Stanford still needed last drive defensive stop to secure win.

The difference for Niners was Kaepernick making a crazy throw on pure raw athleticism.  Difference for Stanford was Ty Momtgomery's crazy athleticism to push a defender 10 yards into the EZ.

[washingtonismoney]

Seriously though, I'm baffled by this. Nothing makes sense. It seems like there should be some kind of easy answer but there isn't. What the hell is wrong with our offense?

My thoughts are:
1. total stats obscure red zone troubles. Average redzone performance turns this team into a very good offensive performer.
2. passing stats obscure Hogan's scrambles, which are effectively hidden incompletions since he hasn't been terribly effective running. (Whether or not the big number of scrambles is due to a deficiency with Hogan, the offensive line, or something else is the problem is another matter.)
3. fewer big passing plays offensively means it's hard to bypass redzone (see above, sort of; but really the ideal thing is to score quickly and avoid the need for precise execution over a long period of time. Bend-but-don't-break defense is boring to watch and often castigated by fans, but really effective when done well.) I think part of this is due to defenses not being quite as quick to jump on play-action threats.
4. running backs less effective -- despite being faster, not getting as many big plays, oddly.
5. Some of it is random bad luck.

[washingtonismoney]

Seriously though, I'm baffled by this. Nothing makes sense. It seems like there should be some kind of easy answer but there isn't. What the hell is wrong with our offense?

My thoughts are:
1. total stats obscure red zone troubles. Average redzone performance turns this team into a very good offensive performer.
2. passing stats obscure Hogan's scrambles, which are effectively hidden incompletions since he hasn't been terribly effective running. (Whether or not the big number of scrambles is due to a deficiency with Hogan, the offensive line, or something else is the problem is another matter.)
3. fewer big passing plays offensively means it's hard to bypass redzone (see above, sort of; but really the ideal thing is to score quickly and avoid the need for precise execution over a long period of time. Bend-but-don't-break defense is boring to watch and often castigated by fans, but really effective when done well.) I think part of this is due to defenses not being quite as quick to jump on play-action threats.
4. running backs less effective -- despite being faster, not getting as many big plays, oddly.
5. Some of it is random bad luck.

[Viking_Guy]

One possibility - the compression as one operates closer to the end zone increases the accuracy with which passes need to be delivered in both time and space.  Operating in the middle of the field, the defense is more spread out vertically, the holes in the zones are bigger, and the receivers have time to adjust to the flight of the ball.  But in the red zone, those spaces are much tighter.  And Hogan doesn't hit them consistently, and has a tendency to hit them late.

Actually, that would be an interesting statistical comparison - Hogan's completion rate and interception rate outside and inside the red zone, or maybe the 30.

That same compression makes slower-developing runs more difficult to execute, as the safeties crash forward; one reason I like the fullback dive out of the offset I with lots of linemen we tend to run on short yardage is the quickness with which the ball gets to the line.  One reason why I liked the bootleg by Hogan yesterday was not the run - because it wasn't just a run.  It was a run-pass option, with the tight end dragging with Hogan and placing the defender into a 2 v 1 quandary.  Hogan did make a nice fake to set up his dive.  But passing out of that bunch OL-heavy formation more often could really give teams something to think about on film.

VG

[Viking_Guy]

One possibility - the compression as one operates closer to the end zone increases the accuracy with which passes need to be delivered in both time and space.  Operating in the middle of the field, the defense is more spread out vertically, the holes in the zones are bigger, and the receivers have time to adjust to the flight of the ball.  But in the red zone, those spaces are much tighter.  And Hogan doesn't hit them consistently, and has a tendency to hit them late.

Actually, that would be an interesting statistical comparison - Hogan's completion rate and interception rate outside and inside the red zone, or maybe the 30.

That same compression makes slower-developing runs more difficult to execute, as the safeties crash forward; one reason I like the fullback dive out of the offset I with lots of linemen we tend to run on short yardage is the quickness with which the ball gets to the line.  One reason why I liked the bootleg by Hogan yesterday was not the run - because it wasn't just a run.  It was a run-pass option, with the tight end dragging with Hogan and placing the defender into a 2 v 1 quandary.  Hogan did make a nice fake to set up his dive.  But passing out of that bunch OL-heavy formation more often could really give teams something to think about on film.

VG

[washingtonismoney]

Hogan presenting a run-pass conflict to the defense also worked really well -- though it was improvisational -- with the first TD to Montgomery.

[washingtonismoney]

Hogan presenting a run-pass conflict to the defense also worked really well -- though it was improvisational -- with the first TD to Montgomery.

[stupac2]

Watching the Niners today was almost like re-watching Stanford play UW. 

Total statistical exercise of mastery.
Give up points on special teams and/or offense
QB missing too many throws.
FGs not TDs
Have lead late and need one first down deep in own territory, run ball up middle trying to run clock, into 8 man front, punt and still leave plenty of time for opponent to score tying or winning points.
Niners came even closer to losing and dominated even more statistically than Stanford, but Stanford still needed last drive defensive stop to secure win.

The difference for Niners was Kaepernick making a crazy throw on pure raw athleticism.  Difference for Stanford was Ty Momtgomery's crazy athleticism to push a defender 10 yards into the EZ.

Funny, I had the same thoughts watching that game. Except that I didn't care so much about the outcome.

[stupac2]

Watching the Niners today was almost like re-watching Stanford play UW. 

Total statistical exercise of mastery.
Give up points on special teams and/or offense
QB missing too many throws.
FGs not TDs
Have lead late and need one first down deep in own territory, run ball up middle trying to run clock, into 8 man front, punt and still leave plenty of time for opponent to score tying or winning points.
Niners came even closer to losing and dominated even more statistically than Stanford, but Stanford still needed last drive defensive stop to secure win.

The difference for Niners was Kaepernick making a crazy throw on pure raw athleticism.  Difference for Stanford was Ty Momtgomery's crazy athleticism to push a defender 10 yards into the EZ.

Funny, I had the same thoughts watching that game. Except that I didn't care so much about the outcome.

[81alum]

How about 3rd down conversion percentage?
2010 58%
2011 53%
2012 38%
2013 50%
2014 42%

That is pretty bad compared with past years with the exception of 2012.  A hefty drop off from last year.  And yet we have tight ends this year--I would have expected us to do at least as well as 2013 due to that fact alone.  We need to develop the 5-10 yard pass to the TE over the middle just for ball control.

Red Zone Conversion TD percentage:
2010 69%
2011 77%
2012 61%
2013 58%
2014 42%

We knew this was bad, but this puts it in perspective.  It is VERY bad. 

Field Goal percentage
2010 90%
2011 71%
2012 63%
2013 77%
2014 50%

Williamson is 4/8.  Last year he was 18/22 (Ukropina was 2/4) so he has already missed as many this year as all of last year combined. 

Punting
2010 42
2011 41
2012 43
2013 43
2014 39

What the heck?  Is the kicking game in general just losing effectiveness?

[81alum]

How about 3rd down conversion percentage?
2010 58%
2011 53%
2012 38%
2013 50%
2014 42%

That is pretty bad compared with past years with the exception of 2012.  A hefty drop off from last year.  And yet we have tight ends this year--I would have expected us to do at least as well as 2013 due to that fact alone.  We need to develop the 5-10 yard pass to the TE over the middle just for ball control.

Red Zone Conversion TD percentage:
2010 69%
2011 77%
2012 61%
2013 58%
2014 42%

We knew this was bad, but this puts it in perspective.  It is VERY bad. 

Field Goal percentage
2010 90%
2011 71%
2012 63%
2013 77%
2014 50%

Williamson is 4/8.  Last year he was 18/22 (Ukropina was 2/4) so he has already missed as many this year as all of last year combined. 

Punting
2010 42
2011 41
2012 43
2013 43
2014 39

What the heck?  Is the kicking game in general just losing effectiveness?

[fullmetal]

[quote author=Stymie link=topic=10733.msg99644#msg99644 date=1411957185]
Required talent #1 for a QB is "Find and hit the open receiver!"  Hogan ain't doing that this year. 

Then why is he completing 71% of his passes for 8.83 yards per attempt? Has to be a bit more complicated than that.
[/quote]

I don't think Hogan is so much completing passes as receivers are managing to miraculously contort in mid-air and snare passes thrown behind them :p

[fullmetal]

[quote author=Stymie link=topic=10733.msg99644#msg99644 date=1411957185]
Required talent #1 for a QB is "Find and hit the open receiver!"  Hogan ain't doing that this year. 

Then why is he completing 71% of his passes for 8.83 yards per attempt? Has to be a bit more complicated than that.
[/quote]

I don't think Hogan is so much completing passes as receivers are managing to miraculously contort in mid-air and snare passes thrown behind them :p

[TreeWeird]

[quote author=martyup link=topic=10733.msg99612#msg99612 date=1411942024]5.  I'm confused by something that happened during Udub's last possession.  When they got called for the intentional grounding, the ref announced that the clock should be set at 15 seconds.  It changed to that for a few seconds and then was changed back to 32 seconds.  What happened there?

The ref was wrong. That play ended with the clock at 42 seconds, and an offensive penalty that stops the clock causes a 10-second runoff. I have no idea why he initially said 15. On my broadcast it briefly switched to 15 then went back to 32, my guess is that the ref corrected himself but it wasn't caught by the mics because they switched the audio feed back to the booth (or however that works). Either way, 32 seconds was correct.
[/quote]

I'm just speculating, but wouldn't the play clock have read 25 with the stoppage of play?  Perhaps ref glanced at the play clock and thought it was the game clock for a moment.

[TreeWeird]

[quote author=martyup link=topic=10733.msg99612#msg99612 date=1411942024]5.  I'm confused by something that happened during Udub's last possession.  When they got called for the intentional grounding, the ref announced that the clock should be set at 15 seconds.  It changed to that for a few seconds and then was changed back to 32 seconds.  What happened there?

The ref was wrong. That play ended with the clock at 42 seconds, and an offensive penalty that stops the clock causes a 10-second runoff. I have no idea why he initially said 15. On my broadcast it briefly switched to 15 then went back to 32, my guess is that the ref corrected himself but it wasn't caught by the mics because they switched the audio feed back to the booth (or however that works). Either way, 32 seconds was correct.
[/quote]

I'm just speculating, but wouldn't the play clock have read 25 with the stoppage of play?  Perhaps ref glanced at the play clock and thought it was the game clock for a moment.

[stupac2]

I'm just speculating, but wouldn't the play clock have read 25 with the stoppage of play?  Perhaps ref glanced at the play clock and thought it was the game clock for a moment.

Yeah, that's entirely possible, though it would be amazingly dumb. The play clocks I saw on the broadcast were at field-level, pretty far away from the game clocks.

[stupac2]

I'm just speculating, but wouldn't the play clock have read 25 with the stoppage of play?  Perhaps ref glanced at the play clock and thought it was the game clock for a moment.

Yeah, that's entirely possible, though it would be amazingly dumb. The play clocks I saw on the broadcast were at field-level, pretty far away from the game clocks.