how often do you expect WR to get open

[SUFan44]

Stanford's Andrew Luck has 4 INT's. So does Ryan Nassib. And Nassib has thrown the ball 18 more times than Luck has, too.

Just sayin'.

(For the record, I think Nassib is a less-than-average college QB with all things taken into consideration. Just wanted to give the pro-Nassib crowd some ammunition, because they need everything they can get.)

 

[kingottoiii]

Watched the game last night, I had a few thoughts related to this:

1. I don't think there was as much press coverage as people think, unless I don't understand it. I think of it as the DB lined up in the WR's face and not letting him off the LOS. In the Louisville game, I saw a lot of passing plays where their DBs were 7 to 10 yards off the LOS. And when Chew was wide open deep, it was what I would consider press coverage. Guy got in his face, tried not to let him release, yet he beat him and was open. That wasn't even a bomb type distance throw, should have been completed.

2. IB is right, Nassib is too worried about not throwing an INT. He had a lot of time in the 2nd half on many of those plays. Louisville's first TD was a QB trusting that a WR would make a play. Granted there was a bit of a push, but that was a freshman throwing to a freshman.

I wonder if watching a true freshman QB making some plays (albeit a talented, highly recruited one) has him at least thinking about his backup QBs. His may lack in pure talent, but you would think they make it up on practice reps by now.

Guys have gotten open deep but Nassib hasn't been able to hit them. There is no denying this and no excuse for it. But those aren't your bread and butter plays.

I am more concerned with our patterns. We don't send a lot of guys go out and the one's that do often have routes that take awhile to develop. That puts pressure on the OL to hold their blocks. And on top of that the WRs often have double coverage since we have only 2-3 guys going out. That is why Nassib throws it to the underneath guy or dumps it to a back so often. He really has no choice.

I really don't know why we don't work the sideline. That IMO is where Nassib is his best. He has made some really really good throws. Also if our WRs are having and issue getting open, then why not put them in motion? Or go more 3 WR sets so the slot guy has a mismatch? It seems like our WRs have a deep pattern, a quick slant, and a flat route. You rarely see them do anything else.

Also IMO when you have poor WRs and a poor OL that last thing you should do is go max protect. Having 2-3 guys, who struggle to get open, go out just makes it easier for the DBs to cover. Having 5 guys who struggle is much harder to cover.

 

[Dick_in_MI]

Gotcha. I read it like you were implying we don't have receivers that can get open - "I expect that on a team with good receivers that somebody would be open" and "If you have receivers capable of getting separation." Your if statements threw me off.

Millhouse's original question was how often we expected receivers to get open. The answer is predicated upon guys getting separation plus the OL holding off the rush long enough for the patterns to open up.

The second half of the the process is the QB getting time to make his reads and then delivering a catchable ball. That wasn't asked in the initial question, but it's part of the equation.

 

[kingottoiii]

Nassib seemed to be very accurate the week before. Bottom line, Nassib has been good when he has time and struggled when he hasn't.

Actually he had a really good 1st Q against UL and was under pressure the whole time. After that it was all down hill.

 

[Upstate]

A lot of the problems on Saturday were directly related to how poorly the OL played in comparison to the WVU game.

 

[OrangeXtreme]

Then don't get in 3rd and long so much. And how do we know WRs weren't open? All we saw was a QB standing there, patting the ball. Doesn't mean there wasn't a throw he could make.

It's hard to tell from watching the TV, but on the radio broadcast Matt Park said there were a few plays where Nassib simply had nobody to throw to.

 

[rrlbees]

So here's my question... of the three units: OL, WR and QB, which one has the greatest ability to lift the play of the other 2?

In other words, is it more likely for a great OL to make average QBs and WRs better? Great QB to make average OL/WR better? Or great WR to make average OL/QB better?

My non-Xs-and-Os opinion would be QB, but curious to hear what others say.

IMO, the OL. Take it to the extreme. If there is not any pressure and the QB has all day to sit there and the WR has all day to get open (there isn't a DB that can cover a WR forever) then the chances for a completion goes up.

 

[Chip]

It's hard to tell from watching the TV, but on the radio broadcast Matt Park said there were a few plays where Nassib simply had nobody to throw to.

Ehh, if Gedney said it I'd believe it more. Play by play guys tend to see a QB with time not throwing the ball so they say there's no one to throw to.

I think he's terrified to throw a pick. I can understand why, but most of this was in the 2nd half. We're not going to come back by taking the safe approach versus risk/reward.

Oh well, not our day, happens on the road sometimes in college football. I'm sure the Texas Tech fans were a little confused this past weekend as well. As CIL said, one team came ready to play, one didn't seem to have that same fire.

Can't have a repeat in the Pasqualoni's revenge game.

 

[rrlbees]

Now we have someone blaming the OLine.

Who blamed the OL only?

 

[Chip]

IMO, the OL. Take it to the extreme. If there is not any pressure and the QB has all day to sit there and the WR has all day to get open (there isn't a DB that can cover a WR forever) then the chances for a completion goes up.

And if the OL is opening holes for the running game, then play action is a big help for an average QB or average WRs.

My answer to Scooch's question would be QB with an asterisk. That being that it has to be a QB who can throw or just as easily move the chains with his feet.

 

[SaltineWarrior]

When the OL holds the pass rush long enough for the patterns to open up, I expect that on a team with good receivers that somebody would be open on at least half to 2/3 of the pass plays.

That doesn't mean "open long" necessarily but open. If you have receivers capable of getting separation, and if the OL gives the QB enough time for the patterns to open and for the QB to scan his progression, then at least one guy should get open a fair amount of time and I expect the QB to have the skill to hit an open receiver.

We haven't done a very good job in a lot of that.

I agree, its starts up front. Receivers need time to get separation. If the pocket closes quickly, its impossible to complete these passes. Nassib has made some mistakes too, no doubt. But once the line gives him more time, watch how much better both he and his receivers will appear to be.

 

[Scooch]

And if the OL is opening holes for the running game, then play action is a big help for an average QB or average WRs.

My answer to Scooch's question would be QB with an asterisk. That being that it has to be a QB who can throw or just as easily move the chains with his feet.

So one vote for OL, and one for QB. I think either can be right. No one stepping up and saying WR though. Lots of attention being paid to how we stuggle against this new-fangled "press coverage", but seems like people are of the opinion that if the OL gives time, or the QB is accurate (or can scramble) then the WRs can be productive.

 

[Chip]

So one vote for OL, and one for QB. I think either can be right. No one stepping up and saying WR though. Lots of attention being paid to how we stuggle against this new-fangled "press coverage", but seems like people are of the opinion that if the OL gives time, or the QB is accurate (or can scramble) then the WRs can be productive.

To me I can see where a weak WR group can bring down an entire offense (2005), but it's hard to see a great WR group propping up a team with poor play at QB and OL. Inaccurate QB with no time to throw seems like it would be a waste of WR talent.

 

[orangenirvana]

Who blamed the OL only?

No one. Didn't mean to imply that.

 

[orangehomer]

how often do you guys expect our WR to get open against "press coverage" (catch phrase of the last couple weeks)

i can't believe how much i'm reading about it after that game.

i think there are unrealistic expectations for how often WRs should be running free, especially when they're not spreading it out so much and looking more for home runs.

rahme's article is good today and i'm relieved that marrone recognizes this

“We got some guys open,” Marrone said. “When I saw open I mean touchdown open, and we had a couple overthrows.”

i think it comes back to the same thing with nassib every time. he is effective if the team is running the ball well. against lville we got behind + couldn't run = nassib stunk. against WVU we could run + got ahead = nassib good. i think every touchdown pass he threw last week was in play action. when he plays best is when teams have to load up against the run and end up biting on play action.

 

[BlueCurtain]

wrong. he got hit a lot but not on all of those throws where there were guys open. there was one to chew where he and chew had no one near them

In the WVU game, he was able to fire ropes or quick slants to guys who were pretty wide open just waiting for the ball. Nassib has not shown any touch on deep routes where he has to put some air on the ball to let his receiver run under it. That is a major problem. The flea flicker against KSU last year, I think he just threw it as far as he could.

 

[Cuseman78]

In the WVU game, he was able to fire ropes or quick slants to guys who were pretty wide open just waiting for the ball. Nassib has not shown any touch on deep routes where he has to put some air on the ball to let his receiver run under it. That is a major problem. The flea flicker against KSU last year, I think he just threw it as far as he could.

As others have said, his biggest problem on long balls is he is afraid to throw a pick so he has a tendency to just throw it up and let his WRs run under it. He doesn't have much feel on the long ball.

 

[44cuse]

how often do you guys expect our WR to get open against "press coverage" (catch phrase of the last couple weeks)

i can't believe how much i'm reading about it after that game.

i think there are unrealistic expectations for how often WRs should be running free, especially when they're not spreading it out so much and looking more for home runs.

rahme's article is good today and i'm relieved that marrone recognizes this

“We got some guys open,” Marrone said. “When I saw open I mean touchdown open, and we had a couple overthrows.”

I have not read the whole thread yet, but...IMO...it's less about "getting open" and more about getting knocked off your route. All offenses depend on multiple factors but one of the key factors is timing. Timing involves the WR being in the spot he is expected to be at the time he is expected to be (in relation to the blocking scheme which impacts the QB's internal clock). That's where I believe the rhythm piece we hear about with the offenses you (and myself as well to an extent) like comes into play.

If you are being jammed in press coverage, and you can't get off your jam (as the WR) or are disrupted in the process of getting to where the QB expects you to be, you are going to have problems. In our offense, that becomes a bigger issue because our OL is terrible.

44cuse