PA passing vrs non PA passing

[Upnorth]

http://footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2012/2011-play-action-defense

Footbaloutsiders has charted the effectiveness of teams defence against play action passes
and non play action. Positive numbers are bad, negative good (for defense) in their system.
I did not realize there was that large of a descrepancy on PA vrs nonPA for our D.

Does this mean our dqb (Hawk) is not as good at calling the d as Bishop was saying?

[ThunderDan]

http://footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2012/2011-play-action-defense

Footbaloutsiders has charted the effectiveness of teams defence against play action passes
and non play action. Positive numbers are bad, negative good (for defense) in their system.
I did not realize there was that large of a descrepancy on PA vrs nonPA for our D.

Does this mean our dqb (Hawk) is not as good at calling the d as Bishop was saying?

Not sure what that has to do with Hawk and playcalling or lining up in the right defense. This seems to point to the ability to "read" plays and the ability to change from run-to-pass responsibilities. It may point out that we just don't have "skill" sets in our DBs and LBs to make the needed plays.

[pbmax]

Play action happens after the formations and defenses are set. Its not a play call thing, as any competent team should be able to play pass out of a possible run formation. And Hawk is not making calls based on down and distance, Capers takes care of that.

Its more likely that the LBs are biting on runs and failing to get into their drops or coverage zones. Despite the assertion earlier in the piece, its not likely entirely the fault of the DB on the play if the linebacker underneath is nowhere to be found, allowing an easy long completion.

[MadScientist]

Play action happens after the formations and defenses are set. Its not a play call thing, as any competent team should be able to play pass out of a possible run formation. And Hawk is not making calls based on down and distance, Capers takes care of that.

Its more likely that the LBs are biting on runs and failing to get into their drops or coverage zones. Despite the assertion earlier in the piece, its not likely entirely the fault of the DB on the play if the linebacker underneath is nowhere to be found, allowing an easy long completion.

So the question is why are the LB's biting on PA. The two possibilities that I can think of are that they are reading the formation wrong and are selling out for the run (preparation and discipline problems), or that they are trying to compensate for a DL that isn't good against the run, especially when they are in nickle and dime.

[sharpe1027]

Aren't we about average according to those numbers?

[Joemailman]

It would be interesting to know the down-and-distance on the PA plays. The reason I say that is because a LB is more likely to bit on play action on 3rd and 1 than he is on 3rd and 6. If the Packers rather poor run defense led to a lot of short yardage situations, that could lead to PA against them being more effective.

[Smeefers]

Aren't we about average according to those numbers?

No, according to those numbers we are in the bottom third of the league. Middle bottome third.

I don't think this information points to any player or position in particular. The entire defense played horrible last year. These numbers are just a result of that.

[sharpe1027]

I read the chart as putting them near 22nd or so in the league. I know that isn't exactly in the middle, but it isn't much of a red flag either.

If you look at the data I think that there is a more plausible reason for the ranking than blaming Hawk. Teams barely ever used PA against GB. Since PA relies upon misdirection you would expect it to get less effective the more it is ran. Basically, if teams are running PA all the time against the defense, the players are bound to be more ready for it.