Every Kendricks Catch (2011)

[-X-]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1BGCekPuDew[/youtube]

.

 

[Barrison]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1BGCekPuDew[/youtube]
[ Image ]

.

I love you man. No homo. :lol:

 

[Young Ram]

Kendricks just has to stay focused. He should be a good player for us.

 

[libertadrocks]

Does anyone else find it odd that we only successfully ran the naked bootleg to Kendricks in 1 game(GB). That is made for Bradford/Kendricks.

 

[RamFan503]

I love you man. No homo. :lol:

Yeah... sure. :sly:

 

[Faceplant]

Ugh, it is PAINFULLY evident from all of these player vids that we had almost NO downfield offense last year. All dink and dunk, which is fine as long as you can occasionally keep a defense honest...we couldn't.

 

[Anonymous]

Ugh, it is PAINFULLY evident from all of these player vids that we had almost NO downfield offense last year. All dink and dunk, which is fine as long as you can occasionally keep a defense honest...we couldn't.

That's an interesting issue but I think just looking at Kendricks and Salas is misleading.

First, most of the plays you see are from after the bye, when they were scaling things back to accomodate an offense that was having trouble executing the system. One of the reasons they had trouble executing the system was the rookies. That is, like anyone who runs that offense--Giants, Patz, Denver under McD--it works better without rookie WRs. So they just integrated the rookies best they could to get them into the game, and that would not include running a full-on McD offense AS rookies.

Often the downfield plays were not working. They were there. They were not working. Timing was off, execution was off, qb and WR not on the same page, a stressed line was breaking down blocking for longer drops.

Meanwhile if you look at other vids like the qb TDs OR the LLoyd hightlights, they did have a downfield game and when it DID work it looked pretty damm good. That's mostly with Lloyd but Gibson was in on some of it too. And a little DX in there too.

And of course Bradford said at the end of 2009 that he needed to work on his progressions, pre-snap reads, and going for medium range shots when they were there. So he was not entirely ready to run the full version of that offense. Even given that, he threw more downfield in 2011 than in 2010.

BRADFORD 2010.
Medium. 11-20 yards: 18.5% of total attempts.
Deep medium. 21-30 yards: 3.7% of total attempts
Long. 31+ yards: 2.9% of total attempts

BRADFORD 2011
Medium. 11-20 yards: 22.4% of total attempts.
Deep medium. 21-30 yards: 7% of total attempts
Long. 31+ yards: 3.4% of total attempts

Ah but! Look at Clemens. Now what advantage did Clemens have? #1, he is a more veteran qb. #2, they scaled the offense back for him...less to think about. #3, Lloyd was well-established with the Rams at that point so he had a downfield threat. #4, he wasn't injured (till the end) and had Jackson for both his games.

Look at the numbers for Clemens.

CLEMENS 2011
Medium. 11-20 yards: 48% of total attempts.
Deep medium. 21-30 yards: 20.8% of total attempts
Long. 31+ yards: 8.3% of total attempts

48% on 11-20 yard passes is wildly aggressive. I have never see a number like that for that range.

 

[Angry Ram]

Does anyone else find it odd that we only successfully ran the naked bootleg to Kendricks in 1 game(GB). That is made for Bradford/Kendricks.

Yeah, (you know this already) but Gresham was Bradford's best friend @ OU. One would think the TE at the next level should help. Which it did, when utilized. McDaniels probably didn't see that tape.

 

[-X-]

Ugh, it is PAINFULLY evident from all of these player vids that we had almost NO downfield offense last year. All dink and dunk, which is fine as long as you can occasionally keep a defense honest...we couldn't.

That's an interesting issue but I think just looking at Kendricks and Salas is misleading.

First, most of the plays you see are from after the bye, when they were scaling things back to accomodate an offense that was having trouble executing the system. One of the reasons they had trouble executing the system was the rookies. That is, like anyone who runs that offense--Giants, Patz, Denver under McD--it works better without rookie WRs. So they just integrated the rookies best they could to get them into the game, and that would not include running a full-on McD offense AS rookies.

Often the downfield plays were not working. They were there. They were not working. Timing was off, execution was off, qb and WR not on the same page, a stressed line was breaking down blocking for longer drops.

Meanwhile if you look at other vids like the qb TDs OR the LLoyd hightlights, they did have a downfield game and when it DID work it looked pretty damm good. That's mostly with Lloyd but Gibson was in on some of it too. And a little DX in there too.

And of course Bradford said at the end of 2009 that he needed to work on his progressions, pre-snap reads, and going for medium range shots when they were there. So he was not entirely ready to run the full version of that offense. Even given that, he threw more downfield in 2011 than in 2010.

BRADFORD 2010.
Medium. 11-20 yards: 18.5% of total attempts.
Deep medium. 21-30 yards: 3.7% of total attempts
Long. 31+ yards: 2.9% of total attempts

BRADFORD 2011
Medium. 11-20 yards: 22.4% of total attempts.
Deep medium. 21-30 yards: 7% of total attempts
Long. 31+ yards: 3.4% of total attempts

Ah but! Look at Clemens. Now what advantage did Clemens have? #1, he is a more veteran qb. #2, they scaled the offense back for him...less to think about. #3, Lloyd was well-established with the Rams at that point so he had a downfield threat. #4, he wasn't injured (till the end) and had Jackson for both his games.

Look at the numbers for Clemens.

CLEMENS 2011
Medium. 11-20 yards: 48% of total attempts.
Deep medium. 21-30 yards: 20.8% of total attempts
Long. 31+ yards: 8.3% of total attempts

48% on 11-20 yard passes is wildly aggressive. I have never see a number like that for that range.

ZN / Faceplant,

I'm in the process of putting together a video of every single one of Bradford's passes that traveled over 15 yards. Medium/Deep - doesn't matter. Anything 15 yards in the air qualifies as the opposite of a short pass. As I'm doing this, I'm noticing a few things.

1. Bradford's critics need to shut the fuck up (whoever or wherever they are)
2. There were a large amount of drops early on in the season (rookie nerves)
3. Being out of sync with the receiver - and vice-versa - was a killer
4. Receivers were lost early on (Amendola), or cut for poor production (MSW), or ended up on IR (take your pick)
5. Bradford, when facing good defenses, got ROCKED A LOT on those long-developing plays.
6. Whatever the reason is, the offensive line was not equipped to protect the QB last year.

Stat sheets are fine for analysis, but they don't substitute for seeing how things actually develop, or why stats present themselves the way they do. Stay tuned, because this one is going to be a doozy. I thought I was going to see a lot of Bradford misfires so far, but they're not nearly as bad as his detractors would lead you to believe.

*Disclaimer: When I say 'critics' and 'detractors', I'm not talking about anyone on this board.

 

[BigRamFan]

I LOVE what Kendricks brings to the field. Expect that he will have a monster year this season.

 

[Anonymous]

ZN / Faceplant,

I'm in the process of putting together a video of every single one of Bradford's passes that traveled over 15 yards. Medium/Deep - doesn't matter. Anything 15 yards in the air qualifies as the opposite of a short pass. As I'm doing this, I'm noticing a few things.

1. Bradford's critics need to shut the freak up (whoever or wherever they are)
2. There were a large amount of drops early on in the season (rookie nerves)
3. Being out of sync with the receiver - and vice-versa - was a killer
4. Receivers were lost early on (Amendola), or cut for poor production (MSW), or ended up on IR (take your pick)
5. Bradford, when facing good defenses, got ROCKED A LOT on those long-developing plays.
6. Whatever the reason is, the offensive line was not equipped to protect the QB last year.

Stat sheets are fine for analysis, but they don't substitute for seeing how things actually develop, or why stats present themselves the way they do. Stay tuned, because this one is going to be a doozy. I thought I was going to see a lot of Bradford misfires so far, but they're not nearly as bad as his detractors would lead you to believe.

*Disclaimer: When I say 'critics' and 'detractors', I'm not talking about anyone on this board.

What would happen if you did the same thing with Clemens?

 

[-X-]

ZN / Faceplant,

I'm in the process of putting together a video of every single one of Bradford's passes that traveled over 15 yards. Medium/Deep - doesn't matter. Anything 15 yards in the air qualifies as the opposite of a short pass. As I'm doing this, I'm noticing a few things.

1. Bradford's critics need to shut the freak up (whoever or wherever they are)
2. There were a large amount of drops early on in the season (rookie nerves)
3. Being out of sync with the receiver - and vice-versa - was a killer
4. Receivers were lost early on (Amendola), or cut for poor production (MSW), or ended up on IR (take your pick)
5. Bradford, when facing good defenses, got ROCKED A LOT on those long-developing plays.
6. Whatever the reason is, the offensive line was not equipped to protect the QB last year.

Stat sheets are fine for analysis, but they don't substitute for seeing how things actually develop, or why stats present themselves the way they do. Stay tuned, because this one is going to be a doozy. I thought I was going to see a lot of Bradford misfires so far, but they're not nearly as bad as his detractors would lead you to believe.

*Disclaimer: When I say 'critics' and 'detractors', I'm not talking about anyone on this board.

What would happen if you did the same thing with Clemens?

Same thing probably. They had roughly the same QB rating, and towards the end they both only had Lloyd to throw to. Clemens only had a week to get acclimated with the offense, and it was mentioned in these clips that they just gave him a few plays to work with. He also got rocked, but they rolled him out quite a bit too to avoid the impact of that rag-tag offensive line towards the end of the season.

I could probably do Clemens too to illustrate it, but I just got done putting together a half hour video, and it's uploading to my server now. It's 1GB big and too long for YouTube (31 minutes). Maybe I'll do one of him later, and maybe one of Feeley as well. If not tonight, then maybe tomorrow. What you're going to see with Bradford is WHY he was inaccurate on long throws (drops, hurried, good coverage, AND some bad throws). That's all this is about, really. Stat sheets don't show anything but incompletions and their interpretation of what a "target" really is.

 

[DR RAM]

Ugh, it is PAINFULLY evident from all of these player vids that we had almost NO downfield offense last year. All dink and dunk, which is fine as long as you can occasionally keep a defense honest...we couldn't.

That's an interesting issue but I think just looking at Kendricks and Salas is misleading.

First, most of the plays you see are from after the bye, when they were scaling things back to accomodate an offense that was having trouble executing the system. One of the reasons they had trouble executing the system was the rookies. That is, like anyone who runs that offense--Giants, Patz, Denver under McD--it works better without rookie WRs. So they just integrated the rookies best they could to get them into the game, and that would not include running a full-on McD offense AS rookies.

Often the downfield plays were not working. They were there. They were not working. Timing was off, execution was off, qb and WR not on the same page, a stressed line was breaking down blocking for longer drops.

Meanwhile if you look at other vids like the qb TDs OR the LLoyd hightlights, they did have a downfield game and when it DID work it looked pretty damm good. That's mostly with Lloyd but Gibson was in on some of it too. And a little DX in there too.

And of course Bradford said at the end of 2009 that he needed to work on his progressions, pre-snap reads, and going for medium range shots when they were there. So he was not entirely ready to run the full version of that offense. Even given that, he threw more downfield in 2011 than in 2010.

BRADFORD 2010.
Medium. 11-20 yards: 18.5% of total attempts.
Deep medium. 21-30 yards: 3.7% of total attempts
Long. 31+ yards: 2.9% of total attempts

BRADFORD 2011
Medium. 11-20 yards: 22.4% of total attempts.
Deep medium. 21-30 yards: 7% of total attempts
Long. 31+ yards: 3.4% of total attempts

Ah but! Look at Clemens. Now what advantage did Clemens have? #1, he is a more veteran qb. #2, they scaled the offense back for him...less to think about. #3, Lloyd was well-established with the Rams at that point so he had a downfield threat. #4, he wasn't injured (till the end) and had Jackson for both his games.

Look at the numbers for Clemens.

CLEMENS 2011
Medium. 11-20 yards: 48% of total attempts.
Deep medium. 21-30 yards: 20.8% of total attempts
Long. 31+ yards: 8.3% of total attempts

48% on 11-20 yard passes is wildly aggressive. I have never see a number like that for that range.

ZN / Faceplant,

I'm in the process of putting together a video of every single one of Bradford's passes that traveled over 15 yards. Medium/Deep - doesn't matter. Anything 15 yards in the air qualifies as the opposite of a short pass. As I'm doing this, I'm noticing a few things.

1. Bradford's critics need to shut the fuck up (whoever or wherever they are)
2. There were a large amount of drops early on in the season (rookie nerves)
3. Being out of sync with the receiver - and vice-versa - was a killer
4. Receivers were lost early on (Amendola), or cut for poor production (MSW), or ended up on IR (take your pick)
5. Bradford, when facing good defenses, got ROCKED A LOT on those long-developing plays.
6. Whatever the reason is, the offensive line was not equipped to protect the QB last year.

Stat sheets are fine for analysis, but they don't substitute for seeing how things actually develop, or why stats present themselves the way they do. Stay tuned, because this one is going to be a doozy. I thought I was going to see a lot of Bradford misfires so far, but they're not nearly as bad as his detractors would lead you to believe.

*Disclaimer: When I say 'critics' and 'detractors', I'm not talking about anyone on this board.

There are some on this board... Glad you are looking at those, and many were on critical situations, and chain moving downs. I would be anti-Bradford if I hadn't of seen sooo many of these situations. Simply...wasn't his fault.