Why Does Cal Use the Screen Pass?

More like a bunch of film to watch, but yeah, that would be sort of interesting to see. I do already have a somewhat related post already in mind.

Hydro – Hey, here’s free information that also entertains!
TedfordIsGod – Boooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!

What’s up? Having a bad day?

Look, TiG, I don’t cover basketball. We have a basketball post up on our team that’s just a few inches below my post. If you want me to say something about basketball then you’re probably going to have to wait a long time. If you’re upset than a football post went up the day after a big men’s bball victory, then take that up with TwistNHook. We try and put a post up every day even if it doesn’t necessarily relate to the sport that is currently in season. I’m sorry if that’s a problem.

Yes, i agree, I think Jahvid will be catching more passes too.

yes, if we had a better downfield passing game the defensive secondary would be less aggressive in coming up to stop screens.

A friend who knew a lot more about football than I did once simplified it by saying the screen pass is just like a really long handoff. We want to get the ball in the hands of, well, then it was Lindsay Chapman, and get him the ball in space. I don’t think anyone minds if we get the ball to Jahvid more.

Didn’t Riley throw that pass?

I’m not confusing swing passes from screen passes.

The pass to Best when he got hit hard in the Maryland game was not a swing pass.

Screen plays are plays which allow the defensive line to penetrate to only then throw the ball over or around them leaving the defensive line behind the play.

The general run of the mill screens will have the QB dropping back, backpedaling (giving the illusion of broken pass blocking). At the same time, the offensive line will feign pass blocking, and allow the defensive linemen to penetrate. The offensive linemen will then release to prepare blocking up field. The QB will then throw the ball to the receiver (usually either a RB, or WR) who will then advance the ball.

Another variation of the screen are the bubble screens which usually occur out in the flats. The play will consist of a quick pass to a slot WR or a RB flexed out in the slot. Other receivers on the same side of the field as the intended receiver will form the “bubble” of protection around the intended receiver.

Another variation of screens are slip screens which also occur out in the flats. These are quick passes too. The QB will drop back, backpedal, the OL will allow penetration, then release upfield to block. The pass goes to the outside receiver who is moving back towards the center of the field and then will cut upfield and behind the OL blocks upon reception of the ball.

The player movement of bubble screens is away from the center of the field (towards the sideline), and the player movement of slip screens is towards the center of the field (away from the sideline).

In that particular instance vs Maryland, Riley was the QB. Which tilts the arrow of blame towards the design, and the coaching staff.

I’m not following the logic here. Are you saying that if Riley is QB then it automatically places the presumption of fault on the coaches? As in, Riley can do no wrong? Are you implying that if Longshore was the QB then it would automatically place the presumption of fault on Longshore? It’s somewhat unclear as to what you are saying. However, it sounds like you are saying that merely the name of the QB alone can move the presumption of fault from the QB to coaches. If that’s what you mean, I would not agree with that notion.

There are many factors why that screen pass to Best failed. Many reasons from execution, to coaching, to play design, to just bad luck on how the defense responded and defended it. However, I don’t necessarily think that the fact that Riley was the QB automatically “tilts the arrow of blame” in any direction.

glad you found us, and that you and hydro are having this intelligent, high-level discussion about football. it’s one of the things we pride ourselves on regarding this site.

"Why we will run more out of the shotgun in 2009?"

I think we should run a little more out of shotgun to bring down our run/pass ratio. As I think you’ve noticed from my previous posts, Cal has a high tendency to pass when the QB is in shotgun. A more balanced run/pass ratio from shotgun can help keep the defense off balance.

However, whether Cal should run more out of shotgun is a different question from whether they will. As you’ve noted, the most obvious factor in any change of our shotgun run/pass tendencies is probably personnel at QB. Last year, Tedford & Co. seemed at least willing to call and let Riley run the QB draw (Oregon game, for example). Thus, with Riley as our QB in 2009 (assuming he beats out Mansion), I think we will see more QB draws from shotgun. Perhaps not 5 a game, but perhaps once or twice a game if needed against a very aggressive defense.

What intrigues me though is whether Best is a "draw" kind of back?

This is an interesting question. Upon first thought, I can’t remember Best taking any draws from shotgun last year. This is interesting because in 2007, when Forsett was our starting RB, he did take draws from shotgun (see 2007 USC game for most memorable Forsett draw). Furthermore, my memory of 2008 seems to remember that Vereen actually came in quite often as our RB in shotgun situations in lieu of Best. So this of course begs the question, how come past Cal RBs have taken draws from shotgun, but Best isn’t? Is it because Best isn’t a draw back?

I’m not really sure if I have any solid answer for whether Best is a draw back or not. I believe that the draw’s success is due more to the defense being overly aggressive, the OL blocking, and the QB selling pass, than so much what the RB does. If all those three aforementioned factors go in the offense’s favor, even the slowest and non-talented RBs can get 5 yards per attempt.

Perhaps the answer isn’t so much because Best isn’t a draw back (if he even isn’t), but just that the coaches would prefer to utilize him out in the flats where he has more space. When Best isn’t taking a handoff, he is either receiving a screen or swing out in the flat away from the trash in the middle of the field (by “trash” i mean the majority of defenders, and Cal’s own players who can sometimes just get in Best’s way). The reasoning might be this: if Best is going to get a touch and expend energy on that touch, the coaches would rather maximize the yardage from that energy expelled on the touch by putting Best out in the flats where he is more likely to break a big play than putting Best on the interior of the field amidst the trash where he is less likely to break a big play.

But you do have an awfully long name. We need to decide on appropriate short/nicknames for you. BBCBBB doesn’t exactly roll off the tongue. How about “4 backs and a Go Bears?”

Can you even RUN a 4-back play these days? Is it dangerous to have no tight ends?

But I digress.

Hydro – please talk more about why the screen pass failed so miserably! I totally get the reason for a screen pass, but it was just awful. I think the lack of (good) vertical passing is the answer – making it really easy for safeties to come down in run support, but I don’t have statistical backing for that notion.

Also, to throw out a huge generality – it always pained me to see Best running up the middle. He’s not as good at breaking the first tackle inside as Marshawn (who is, really) and he’s not a gigantic guy who can just pound the pile and get 3 yards no matter what.

We ran plenty of “the Gilby” in ‘08 (Gilby refers to Keith Gilbertson: line up in I, obvious running down, run up the middle for -2 to +1 yards), and I always wished they’d just use Vereen for it, because I didn’t want Best wasting his energy and risking injury for that crap. The stats were VERY low for him getting more than 3 yards up the middle.

I don’t care to see him develop the skill of running up the middle except as an occasional diversion to improve the success of him running outside and in space where speed kills. Considering our lack of WR talent last year, I was an advocate of having Vereen AND Best in the backfield, and the Defense has to decide “inside or outside?”, and if the safeties REALLY come up in the box, the QB can audible to a pass – play-action if you want, that can go to either back, inside/outside. And every time you maximize the player’s ability.

OK, I’m sure there are holes in that strategy – tell me what they are.

And regarding Basketball – I’m as psyched as the next Cal fan at our success (beating Stanfurd at ANYTHING soothes the soul), but I MUCH MUCH MUCH prefer the sport of football. So I’m SUPER-happy to have Hydro keep the football thinking alive during the terribly long football off-season. Go Hydro!

Though I avidly read the stories of our success and failure in BB this year, I can’t watch it – in football, close games are incredibly exciting in the final minute. In BB, the games often devolve into a fouling-strategy that is perverse and just feels unsportsmanlike to me.

There are only a couple of situations in football where intentional fouling gives you an advantage, and it can often be avoided by the other team – in BB, it seems to be Plan A quite often, and I just don’t like it.

Imagine if there were a ‘special’ foul in Football, where the team that got fouled immediately got to kick a 30-yard field goal for 2 points (or 1 point?), after which possession was given to the fouling team on their 20. The stoppage! The downtime!

It’s patently stupid, and obviously fixable – you just give possession to the fouled team!

Oops, sorry BBall fans, I totally respect your love of the game – which has many advantages over football, but the fouling at the end of close games makes it unwatchable for me. Maybe I should try it more with a DVR – I used that for the Olympic basketball games, and when it’s foultime you just run at 4x speed and you don’t miss anything. But then you feel silly…

A great subject for another post is how much control does the O.C. really have under Tedford? On game day I would think the O.C. calls the plays, and Tedford, with the headset on, only over rules when he has a real strong opinion.

Well, I think it’s been theorized that Tedford and the OC put together the offensive gameplan together with Tedford getting the final say on everything. I don’t think the fact that Tedford gets the final say should be interpreted as Tedford just ignores the OC (not that you said that, but I feel like that’s what some fans think). As for the actual gameday, I’m sure Tedford suggests plays, vetos plays, and of course determines whether to go for it on 4th down, etc. But I think, in 2008 at least, that Tedford probably didn’t actually do much playcalling himself – perhaps only calling as little as 2-4 specific plays a game.

One thing I’d love to see is one of the several tactics Utah did to Alabama in the Sugar Bowl – they didn’t wait for the defense to get set. They came to the line, and ran their play. Too often, while the defense is still running players on and off the field, the quarterback waits so the line can get its blocking scheme, and/or to have a chance to call an audible.

I like running plays before the defense is set too. However, sometimes if the defense isn’t set, the offense won’t be set either! That’s because if the defense isn’t in place, the offense isn’t always clear on whom to block and that can lead to confusion for the offense.

Cal doesn’t really push its offensive tempo because Tedford does like time of possession, and also many plays (at least from the 2006, and 2007 seasons) were plays which required pre-snap reads and had options (in the decision-making sense, not the lateral sense).

I would like to see Cal put the QB back under center more often.