Bubble screens and perception vs reality

There's lot's of good stuff to gnaw on here.

Looking at the numbers below you will see that 45 breaks down to 2.65 a game, a far cry from the 5 or even 10 times a game that fans claim that Arians or Roethlisberger calls it during a game. According to my charting there were 4 games that it wasn't used at all in, so even removing those games from the average it was used 3.46 times a game. 25 times the play produced 4 or more yards and 33 of the 45 times it produced positive yardage. 20 times it produced a first down and the yards per attempt average was a respectable 6.09. There was the 1 interception against the Baltimore Ravens on a nice play by Terrell Suggs and 4 fell incomplete. 1 of the 45 went for a touchdown by Mike Wallace against the Cincinnati Bengals.
When you look at the 2011 bubble screens by target you see that Hines Ward was targeted 11 times for a 4.55 yards per target. How many of these were game planned in to get him some "easy catches" during his march to 1,000 we will never know, but you have to think quite a few were. Those catches accounted for nearly 25% of the balls he caught this past season. Wallace was targeted on 17 of the bubble screens for a very healthy 8.35 yards per attempt. Maybe they didn't throw it to him enough based on those stats. Outside of the 2 incompletions and the interception, Wallace was only held to less than 5 yards on the bubble screen twice and none of the completions went for negative yards.[/quote]









http://www.steelersdepot.com/2012/01/breaking-down-the-steelers-2011-wide-receiver-bubble-screens/

i wouldn't mind the bubble screen if they only throw it to the speed guys like Brown or Wallace these guys could make some yards after the catch.

what about screens to the backs?

effyou515 wrote:

i wouldn't mind the bubble screen if they only throw it to the speed guys like Brown or Wallace these guys could make some yards after the catch.

The majority of them did go to Brown or Wallace

Quote :

what about screens to the backs?

What about them? Find an article about them as this article is about the dreaded wr screen.

supytalpeht wrote:

effyou515 wrote:

i wouldn't mind the bubble screen if they only throw it to the speed guys like Brown or Wallace these guys could make some yards after the catch.

The majority of them did go to Brown or Wallace

Quote :

what about screens to the backs?

What about them? Find an article about them as this article is about the dreaded wr screen.

It still scares the shit out of me. Wallace and Brown are elusive and that's why it works thrown to them. Where did you get your stats? Because it sure seemed to me like we have more negative BSs than positive this year. Maybe I just dislike the play so much it seemed like most for for a loss. I mean a fast corner anticipating the play will take it to the house.

supytalpeht wrote:

effyou515 wrote:

i wouldn't mind the bubble screen if they only throw it to the speed guys like Brown or Wallace these guys could make some yards after the catch.

The majority of them did go to Brown or Wallace

Quote :

what about screens to the backs?

What about them? Find an article about them as this article is about the dreaded wr screen.

Did you get enough sleep last night Supy?

Do people even bother to read articles?

A bubble screen isn't just for a WR, it's for backs as well.

"A "bubble screen" (also called a "slip screen" or "quick screen") is an offensive play used in American football at the high school, college and professional levels. A common feature of the west coast-style or "spread" offense, a bubble screen is a short pass designed to quickly get the football into the hands of a wide receiver or running back who "bubbles" back behind the line of scrimmage."

A screen to the Running Back would actually make sense, but an entire play shouldn't be based around getting the ball to him. A running back screen should be used as a last ditch effort to get the ball away, not as a play in itself. I would say that the same goes for WR's, but I don't think they should be running screen plays behind a patchwork offensive line at any time to be completely honest.

supytalpeht wrote:

effyou515 wrote:

i wouldn't mind the bubble screen if they only throw it to the speed guys like Brown or Wallace these guys could make some yards after the catch.

The majority of them did go to Brown or Wallace

Quote :

what about screens to the backs?

What about them? Find an article about them as this article is about the dreaded wr screen.

Your right, the majority did go to Brown and Wallace, and the majority of them didn't work. Arians at his best

That'll trick 'em!

bayz101 wrote:

supytalpeht wrote:

effyou515 wrote:

i wouldn't mind the bubble screen if they only throw it to the speed guys like Brown or Wallace these guys could make some yards after the catch.

The majority of them did go to Brown or Wallace

Quote :

what about screens to the backs?

What about them? Find an article about them as this article is about the dreaded wr screen.

Your right, the majority did go to Brown and Wallace, and the majority of them didn't work. Arians at his best

That'll trick 'em!

I guess you consider averaging over 6 yards per attempt not working.

supytalpeht wrote:

bayz101 wrote:

supytalpeht wrote:

effyou515 wrote:

i wouldn't mind the bubble screen if they only throw it to the speed guys like Brown or Wallace these guys could make some yards after the catch.

The majority of them did go to Brown or Wallace

Quote :

what about screens to the backs?

What about them? Find an article about them as this article is about the dreaded wr screen.

Your right, the majority did go to Brown and Wallace, and the majority of them didn't work. Arians at his best

That'll trick 'em!

I guess you consider over 6 yards per attempt not working.

I don't particularly pay attention to stats much at all, to be quite honest. I know i've watched every game this year and 90% of the time a screen is run it's either stopped short of the line of scrimmage, or it goes for a short gain of 3-5 yards. However, every now and then Wallace or Brown will break out (Likely against lesser defenses) and get a gain of 10-20 yards. That's where your inflated 6.0 yards per attempt comes from, as i'm not buying into this screen crap. I've seen enough of it to know it's not consistent.

Edit: Tbh, 3-5 yards might be generous.

It's not that the bubble screen is a bad play, really. It's just how they've been called. Sometimes Ben will even audible in a Bubble Screen, and it'll turn into something good. This is with exception of the one he audibled in against the Rat's

All it really is, is a replacement to the run, but when it doesn't work, we get screwed.

You know what, i'm going to have to backtrack. It's crazy how negative plays of a certain type can overshadow the positive output of the same play at different times.

http://www.steelersdepot.com/2012/01/breaking-down-the-steelers-2011-wide-receiver-bubble-screens/

While it's obvious the Bubble Screen is good for 3-5 yards a try on average, it also has the potential to go backwards for a loss of around that same amount. Looking at some of the running plays that NFL runningback's do on an average basis, it's rare to see a running play go for a loss of 6. So I think we need to concentrate on getting Mendenhall more carries next year. He's ran it 96 times less this year than last year, and he's only missed one game. And as a user on here said earlier, Rooney wanted more run plays last year. No need to change the entire offensive scheme when you've made it to the Super Bowl. Maybe that's why we just didn't have it this year

bayz101 wrote:

supytalpeht wrote:

bayz101 wrote:

supytalpeht wrote:

effyou515 wrote:

i wouldn't mind the bubble screen if they only throw it to the speed guys like Brown or Wallace these guys could make some yards after the catch.

The majority of them did go to Brown or Wallace

Quote :

what about screens to the backs?

What about them? Find an article about them as this article is about the dreaded wr screen.

Your right, the majority did go to Brown and Wallace, and the majority of them didn't work. Arians at his best

That'll trick 'em!

I guess you consider over 6 yards per attempt not working.

I don't particularly pay attention to stats much at all, to be quite honest. I know i've watched every game this year and 90% of the time a screen is run it's either stopped short of the line of scrimmage, or it goes for a short gain of 3-5 yards. However, every now and then Wallace or Brown will break out (Likely against lesser defenses) and get a gain of 10-20 yards. That's where your inflated 6.0 yards per attempt comes from, as i'm not buying into this screen crap. I've seen enough of it to know it's not consistent.

Edit: Tbh, 3-5 yards might be generous.

You don't pay attention to stats and then you make up stats to support your stance? Instead of making things up why don't you actually look at the chart included in the link? I could make it easy and point out that 14 of 45 went for less than 5 yards.

For the love of dog Rooney never said we needed to run the fucking ball more. He said "we need to figure out how to be more effective running the football".

Mendy might have gotten 96 fewer carries, but Redman got more carries.

This is why I need to refrain from listening to some of the fuckers on here

Tell me something, I bite the bait, and then get thrown into the oven and cooked

Why must I go and confirm everything i'm told

I don't get for the life of me why people twist words around. Sooner or later someone's going to take those twisted words and use them, and that's where the roasting begins. The name of the user the posted the Rooney information is "SteelFury". The one who told me Rooney had mentioned that the runningback's needed more carries was is on here. Refrain from listening to them apparently.

Either way, Mendy did have 96 less carries, right? I think that's a little dramatic of a change to make coming off a SuperBowl berth???

Your right, but only about 50. There's still a 40 carry gap. I'm assuming that's where the screens came in. I think just running the ball more next year would help all around. We seem to abandon it pretty quickly in the second half.

bayz101 wrote:

This is why I need to refrain from listening to some of the fuckers on here

Tell me something, I bite the bait, and then get thrown into the oven and cooked

Why must I go and confirm everything i'm told

I don't get for the life of me why people twist words around. Sooner or later someone's going to take those twisted words and use them, and that's where the roasting begins. The name of the user the posted the Rooney information is "SteelFury". The one who told me Rooney had mentioned that the runningback's needed more carries was is on here. Refrain from listening to them apparently.

Either way, Mendy did have 96 less carries, right? I think that's a little dramatic of a change to make coming off a SuperBowl berth???

We ran the ball 37 fewer times in 2011. Making a blanket statement like Mendy got 96 fewer carries doesn't mean crap if you don't look at the whole picture. I can't decide if some of the fire arians people are just trying to make things fit their argument or what.



/edit Crap my math is wrong 37 fewer carries.

supytalpeht wrote:

bayz101 wrote:

This is why I need to refrain from listening to some of the fuckers on here

Tell me something, I bite the bait, and then get thrown into the oven and cooked

Why must I go and confirm everything i'm told

I don't get for the life of me why people twist words around. Sooner or later someone's going to take those twisted words and use them, and that's where the roasting begins. The name of the user the posted the Rooney information is "SteelFury". The one who told me Rooney had mentioned that the runningback's needed more carries was is on here. Refrain from listening to them apparently.

Either way, Mendy did have 96 less carries, right? I think that's a little dramatic of a change to make coming off a SuperBowl berth???

We ran the ball 17 fewer times in 2011. Making a blanket statement like Mendy got 96 fewer carries doesn't mean crap if you don't look at the whole picture. I can't decide if some of the fire arians people are just trying to make things fit their argument or what. Crap my math is wrong 37 fewer carries.

LMAO! I don't want Arian's to be fired, I don't know how many time's I need to say that! I think firing Arians would be an awful idea at this point. Who the fuck exactly is going to fill his position if he is fired??? Everyone knows it's a minor rebuilding process when something like that happens, and I don't think the Steelers are in a rebuilding mode! Hell, Rooney mentioned some similar to that in his recent interview.

Rushing 2011:
434 plays- 4.4 average per carry

Rushing 2010:
471 plays - 4.1 average per carry

Passing 2011:

341 Comp - 539 Att - 15 Int's - 8.0 Yards per pass

Passing 2010:

298 Comp - 479 Att - 9 Int's - 8.1 Yards per pass

Passing ranking 2010: 14th

Passing ranking 2011: 21st

Rushing ranking 2010: 11th

Rushing ranking 2011: 14th

Looks to me like our offense was better when we ran the ball more, and passed the ball less

Let's agree to disagree, I have to go to work at midnight.

bayz101 wrote:

supytalpeht wrote:

bayz101 wrote:

This is why I need to refrain from listening to some of the fuckers on here

Tell me something, I bite the bait, and then get thrown into the oven and cooked

Why must I go and confirm everything i'm told

I don't get for the life of me why people twist words around. Sooner or later someone's going to take those twisted words and use them, and that's where the roasting begins. The name of the user the posted the Rooney information is "SteelFury". The one who told me Rooney had mentioned that the runningback's needed more carries was is on here. Refrain from listening to them apparently.

Either way, Mendy did have 96 less carries, right? I think that's a little dramatic of a change to make coming off a SuperBowl berth???

We ran the ball 17 fewer times in 2011. Making a blanket statement like Mendy got 96 fewer carries doesn't mean crap if you don't look at the whole picture. I can't decide if some of the fire arians people are just trying to make things fit their argument or what. Crap my math is wrong 37 fewer carries.

LMAO! I don't want Arian's to be fired, I don't know how many time's I need to say that! I think firing Arians would be an awful idea at this point. Who the fuck exactly is going to fill his position if he is fired??? Everyone knows it's a minor rebuilding process when something like that happens, and I don't think the Steelers are in a rebuilding mode! Hell, Rooney mentioned some similar to that in his recent interview.

Rushing 2011:
434 plays- 4.4 average per carry

Rushing 2010:
471 plays - 4.1 average per carry

Passing 2011:

341 Comp - 539 Att - 15 Int's - 8.0 Yards per pass

Passing 2010:

298 Comp - 479 Att - 9 Int's - 8.1 Yards per pass

Passing ranking 2010: 14th

Passing ranking 2011: 21st

Rushing ranking 2010: 11th

Rushing ranking 2011: 14th

Looks to me like our offense was better when we ran the ball more, and passed the ball less

Let's agree to disagree, I have to go to work at midnight.

psstt

You're leaving out one really really really big piece of the puzzle from last year, Ben didn't play for the first 4 games.

supytalpeht wrote:

bayz101 wrote:

supytalpeht wrote:

bayz101 wrote:

This is why I need to refrain from listening to some of the fuckers on here

Tell me something, I bite the bait, and then get thrown into the oven and cooked

Why must I go and confirm everything i'm told

I don't get for the life of me why people twist words around. Sooner or later someone's going to take those twisted words and use them, and that's where the roasting begins. The name of the user the posted the Rooney information is "SteelFury". The one who told me Rooney had mentioned that the runningback's needed more carries was is on here. Refrain from listening to them apparently.

Either way, Mendy did have 96 less carries, right? I think that's a little dramatic of a change to make coming off a SuperBowl berth???

We ran the ball 17 fewer times in 2011. Making a blanket statement like Mendy got 96 fewer carries doesn't mean crap if you don't look at the whole picture. I can't decide if some of the fire arians people are just trying to make things fit their argument or what. Crap my math is wrong 37 fewer carries.

LMAO! I don't want Arian's to be fired, I don't know how many time's I need to say that! I think firing Arians would be an awful idea at this point. Who the fuck exactly is going to fill his position if he is fired??? Everyone knows it's a minor rebuilding process when something like that happens, and I don't think the Steelers are in a rebuilding mode! Hell, Rooney mentioned some similar to that in his recent interview.

Rushing 2011:
434 plays- 4.4 average per carry

Rushing 2010:
471 plays - 4.1 average per carry

Passing 2011:

341 Comp - 539 Att - 15 Int's - 8.0 Yards per pass

Passing 2010:

298 Comp - 479 Att - 9 Int's - 8.1 Yards per pass

Passing ranking 2010: 14th

Passing ranking 2011: 21st

Rushing ranking 2010: 11th

Rushing ranking 2011: 14th

Looks to me like our offense was better when we ran the ball more, and passed the ball less

Let's agree to disagree, I have to go to work at midnight.

psstt

You're leaving out one really really really big piece of the puzzle from last year, Ben didn't play for the first 4 games.

Charlie Batch and Dixon won every one of those games, and combined threw three touchdowns, and four interceptions with 606 yards.

Ben went 2-2 in his first four starts this season with three touchdowns and five interceptions with 1,148 yards.

I don't think the difference between the first four games of this year and last year justify last year's ranking, and this years

Whatever. It takes a team effort to win games, no point in making arguments about individual shit it'll get you nowhere.

Stats aside, I still dislike the bubble screen.

supytalpeht wrote:

There's lot's of good stuff to gnaw on here.

Looking at the numbers below you will see that 45 breaks down to 2.65 a game, a far cry from the 5 or even 10 times a game that fans claim that Arians or Roethlisberger calls it during a game. According to my charting there were 4 games that it wasn't used at all in, so even removing those games from the average it was used 3.46 times a game. 25 times the play produced 4 or more yards and 33 of the 45 times it produced positive yardage. 20 times it produced a first down and the yards per attempt average was a respectable 6.09. There was the 1 interception against the Baltimore Ravens on a nice play by Terrell Suggs and 4 fell incomplete. 1 of the 45 went for a touchdown by Mike Wallace against the Cincinnati Bengals.
When you look at the 2011 bubble screens by target you see that Hines Ward was targeted 11 times for a 4.55 yards per target. How many of these were game planned in to get him some "easy catches" during his march to 1,000 we will never know, but you have to think quite a few were. Those catches accounted for nearly 25% of the balls he caught this past season. Wallace was targeted on 17 of the bubble screens for a very healthy 8.35 yards per attempt. Maybe they didn't throw it to him enough based on those stats. Outside of the 2 incompletions and the interception, Wallace was only held to less than 5 yards on the bubble screen twice and none of the completions went for negative yards.

Stats can be used to prove anything. And sometimes stats don't mean crap. What I want to know is out of the 12 times it produced 0 or negative yardage, how many times was it used on 2nd down and put us in third and long situations? And of the 33 times it resulted in positive yardage, how many of those passes still put us in 3rd and long situations? Just because the screen pass resulted in positive yards doesn't mean it was the right play call at the right time. You can't cherry pick stats, as Steelers Depot did here, to prove a point.

Tomlin and Arians can talk highly about our running back corps all day long, but the fact of the matter is that we're using the bubble screen as an alternative during the course of the game. Use the running back's to their potential, don't let them rot on the bench. Stats don't really mean anything, because it's situational football. It's a team sport. You can use stats to make a point about the bubble screen, but the fact of the matter is, our offense was better last year statistically. With the talent we have, that shouldn't be.