Why play calling is so vastly overrated

[JW82]

Play design is really what we're talking about when we talk about play calling, IMO. You can give the QB all the freedom to audible you want, but unless your plays get folks open, create mismatches or cause an ounce of confusion or hesitation for the defense it won't matter. There is a reason the dallas QBs have more tight window throws than anyone. Wrs have to be perfect to get any separation and the qb has to be perfect to complete passes.

 

[charron]

Honestly this is why teams need offenses that can run a multitude of plays from the same formations. Bob is right it's not always about the call but it is about the formation and what they can do in it. This is how goff took the rams to the SB.

 

[Loso86]

You see it all the time from fans during an NFL game after a failed play. “What a bad call.” Usually it’s a “bad call” when a play doesn’t work, or a turnover happens, etc. A “good call” always seems to happen when the play works, lol.

But when you really break it down, play calling IMO is very overrated. Sure having a ”good call” made helps but most fans don’t realize that the play called by the OC or HC is not always the play that is run or that the reason the play failed wasn’t the call, but actually the lack of execution by the players.

Here’s what I mean:

• NFL QBs (especially experienced ones) have a ton of freedom at the line of scrimmage to change the called play and check into something else. That happens at least 30-40% of the time according to what I’ve read over the years. So when the play caller calls a run and the QB checks into a pass that doesn’t work, is it a “bad call” by the play caller or not?
• Execution is so critical on every play. If one player blows an assignment on a key block or does not run a correct route resulting in a turnover or a sack, was it a “bad call” or was it poor execution? Too often as fans, we fail to understand that if the play had been executed properly, it would have been a “great call.”

So is having a “great play called” only as good as having each player executing their assignment properly? Isn’t it also the QB reading the defense accurately and being able to check into the right play and protection just as important? Or do we put 100% on the guy calling plays?

You lost me with the title. Play calling is VERY important! Not the WHAT and HOW so much as the WHEN. It SHOULD be a chess match between the OC and DC. Using the players you have to adjust and get the advantage. I'm going to assume your not a huge football guy just a fan

 

[Diehardblues]

You see it all the time from fans during an NFL game after a failed play. “What a bad call.” Usually it’s a “bad call” when a play doesn’t work, or a turnover happens, etc. A “good call” always seems to happen when the play works, lol.

But when you really break it down, play calling IMO is very overrated. Sure having a ”good call” made helps but most fans don’t realize that the play called by the OC or HC is not always the play that is run or that the reason the play failed wasn’t the call, but actually the lack of execution by the players.

Here’s what I mean:

• NFL QBs (especially experienced ones) have a ton of freedom at the line of scrimmage to change the called play and check into something else. That happens at least 30-40% of the time according to what I’ve read over the years. So when the play caller calls a run and the QB checks into a pass that doesn’t work, is it a “bad call” by the play caller or not?
• Execution is so critical on every play. If one player blows an assignment on a key block or does not run a correct route resulting in a turnover or a sack, was it a “bad call” or was it poor execution? Too often as fans, we fail to understand that if the play had been executed properly, it would have been a “great call.”

So is having a “great play called” only as good as having each player executing their assignment properly? Isn’t it also the QB reading the defense accurately and being able to check into the right play and protection just as important? Or do we put 100% on the guy calling plays?

Landry always said it was about the execution.

But there are exceptions with calls made in timely and intuitively situations along with brilliant gimmick and trickery calls not to mention with instincts going for it on 4th down.

So execution is obviously a huge part regardless the situation. Even trickery has to be well executed.

 

[75boyz]

I agree 100% on execution, but I think when people say "play calling" they should really be talking about "play design" particularly with their personnel.

I'm super curious to see how much Ben Johnson is a product of the talent he gets to work with vs him elevating it. I have no idea. Could Kellen Moore do the same with Detroit? Would Ben Johnson elevate the Eagles?

Nice post.

 

[Cowfan75Lives]

I can never understand that cadence. I don't know, but it seems that the defense will know when the ball gets snapped? "Yeaaaah, here we goooo"! The defense has to know that the ball is getting snapped right after that.

It was said, I think, that the oline wanted it that way, but I think it is just a Dak thing that he wanted so he could stand out as being different and large and in charge. I mean he even says that when he is not even playing a game, just because he must think it's cool.

I would prefer the old methods. 321, 321, set, 321...snap, something like that, and change it up so often so the defense won't have a clue. But, what the hell do I know.

It just sounds stupid like the dancing before games, the sky pointing and all the other Dak stuff.

Even worse is when we still had to honor it when Rush went in, lest anyone forget we were still stuck with Dak. But I guess defenses have always known when we were going snap the ball. Before the dumb current cadence, we used to take it down to the last second. In the Romo Era, we did that every single play.

 

[beware_d-ware]

Honestly this is why teams need offenses that can run a multitude of plays from the same formations. Bob is right it's not always about the call but it is about the formation and what they can do in it. This is how goff took the rams to the SB.

Yep, the Rams call entire games out of 11 personnel. And if I remember, their offensive linemen all take a zone-blocking bucket step even on pass plays. I might be confusing that with a different team.

McVay is like a major-league pitcher who works to make his curveball look exactly like his fastball when it leaves his hand. His runs, passes, and play actions all look identical right until the snap, and even for a few ticks afterwards.

 

[beware_d-ware]

Before the dumb current cadence, we used to take it down to the last second. In the Romo Era, we did that every single play.

I never understood that. Pure heart attack stuff... the play clock would be at 1 and Romo would still be shouting audibles.

 

[gimmesix]

Offenses used to be good at their jobs and it didn't matter the playcall. I remember the glory days when teams knew 22 was getting the ball and still couldn't stop him. Irvin was gonna run a slant and you couldn't stop him. But that team was loaded and coached well. They were good at imposing their will on the defense. I'm not sure today's offense has a will to impose.

Too many weak links today. The weak links break when you just rely on execution, so you have to scheme ways to overcome your weak links. Then, you have to execute that.

Those 1990s teams didn't have weak links. Sure, not everybody was an All-Pro, but you had players who could hold their own at every position on offense while several could do more than that. A lot easier to just rely on execution when you have that.

 

[Bobhaze]

I agree 100% on execution, but I think when people say "play calling" they should really be talking about "play design" particularly with their personnel.

I'm super curious to see how much Ben Johnson is a product of the talent he gets to work with vs him elevating it. I have no idea. Could Kellen Moore do the same with Detroit? Would Ben Johnson elevate the Eagles?

Great questions in the last paragraph. All play callers are certainly helped tremendously by the talent that runs the offense.

 

[TheCritic]

Good topic. I always suspected that Dak had a lot to do with McCarthy abandoning the run in the early part of the season. I also wonder if it's more than a coincidence that the Cowboys run game improved when Rush took over, meaning perhaps that Rush is/was less likely to audible the play at the line of scrimmage.

 

[BHendri5]

You see it all the time from fans during an NFL game after a failed play. “What a bad call.” Usually it’s a “bad call” when a play doesn’t work, or a turnover happens, etc. A “good call” always seems to happen when the play works, lol.

But when you really break it down, play calling IMO is very overrated. Sure having a ”good call” made helps but most fans don’t realize that the play called by the OC or HC is not always the play that is run or that the reason the play failed wasn’t the call, but actually the lack of execution by the players.

Here’s what I mean:

• NFL QBs (especially experienced ones) have a ton of freedom at the line of scrimmage to change the called play and check into something else. That happens at least 30-40% of the time according to what I’ve read over the years. So when the play caller calls a run and the QB checks into a pass that doesn’t work, is it a “bad call” by the play caller or not?
• Execution is so critical on every play. If one player blows an assignment on a key block or does not run a correct route resulting in a turnover or a sack, was it a “bad call” or was it poor execution? Too often as fans, we fail to understand that if the play had been executed properly, it would have been a “great call.”

So is having a “great play called” only as good as having each player executing their assignment properly? Isn’t it also the QB reading the defense accurately and being able to check into the right play and protection just as important? Or do we put 100% on the guy calling plays?

You know football, there’s so many in here that don’t know football, and some do know but choose to be ignorant, really you are just wasting your time because they will believe what they want

 

[gtb1943]

I never understood that. Pure heart attack stuff... the play clock would be at 1 and Romo would still be shouting audibles.

Romo made it work but I always thought that was stupid. Vary it; make the defense uncertain when it will happen.

 

[Hadenough]

Oh come on. That dude up in Detroit is an offensive innovator.

And all he has to work with is Goff and Gibbs and Montgomery and St. Brown and Williams and Laporta and one of the best OL in football.

Now THAT is coaching.

Don't laugh! If Dak were there that team is one and done. Goff puts that ball in the hands of his playmakers while they are running. Dak has to have his guys slow down or even stop.

 

[thunderpimp91]

I never understood that. Pure heart attack stuff... the play clock would be at 1 and Romo would still be shouting audibles.

Payton Manning made a career out of that as well. Adjust your offense under 5 seconds and the defense is pretty locked in to their play call and cant adjust.

 

[BleedSilverandBlue]

Don’t disagree. But if you’re Kyle Shanahan or Ben Johnson, it’s easier to be a great play caller with Deebo Samuel, Christian McAfree, Jahmir Gibbs, Amon-Ra St. Brown, Sam LaPorta, etc with those guys and the guys executing the plays. Even an average QB looks great when you have a good scheme, weapons, and great execution.

Put it another way…if you have Cedee Lamb (who is the only “elite” skill position guy we have), Rico Dowdle, Brandin Cooks, Jake Ferguson, a very young OL, AND a scheme designed for the 90s and early 2000s, the “calls” are not likely to be great.

Well yeah, that’s true, but some of the most modern NFL schemes clearly help get guys open.

Our players are definitely worse, but our scheme could be better.

 

[CATCH17]

You know football, there’s so many in here that don’t know football, and some do know but choose to be ignorant, really you are just wasting your time because they will believe what they want

What he is talking about is Audibling and doesn’t really go with the theme of the thread about playcalling not mattering.

Playcalling matters.

It’s the NFL and everyone is good. When teams are more evenly matched of course things like coaching matter tremendously.


A Cowboy fan that hasn’t learned this by now with how we get completely out coached in the playoffs is no better than the Jones’s.

 

[vlad]

Great questions in the last paragraph. All play callers are certainly helped tremendously by the talent that runs the offense.

Yeah Bob - those teams are maybe the two best offensive lines in football, amongst the best backfields, best WR corp. That's not gonna hurt!

 

[Bobhaze]

What he is talking about is Audibling and doesn’t really go with the theme of the thread about playcalling not mattering.

Playcalling matters.

It’s the NFL and everyone is good. When teams are more evenly matched of course things like coaching matter tremendously.


A Cowboy fan that hasn’t learned this by now with how we get completely out coached in the playoffs is no better than the Jones’s.

Catch I didn’t say in the OP that “play calling doesn’t matter”. I said it is overrated. Big difference.

So to clarify…I think making the right play calls in the right moment is important. What I’m saying is when we as fans judge a play that didn’t work as a “bad call”, it may have failed because of either poor execution or the QB checked into a different play…or the defense just made a good play.

You are free to disagree with this. I just wanted to clarify that I never said “play calling doesn’t matter”.

 

[Whirlwin]

I used to like when Bill Walsh, 49ers head coach which script the entire first quarter and not deviated