The Importance of Picking up the Blitz

[GTripp0012]

Completely unrelated to the blitz, but:

Since 2004, Antwaan Randle El has been considerably worse on second down than either first or third down in every single season going back to Pittsburgh.

Any possible reasons for this? Anyone?

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Completely unrelated to the blitz, but:

Since 2004, Antwaan Randle El has been considerably worse on second down than either first or third down in every single season going back to Pittsburgh.

Any possible reasons for this? Anyone?

Just an "off the top of the head" thought. Both Pitt & us are run-first teams. On first down the threat of run makes the D play more honest with a run-first D, either man coverage or some sort of balanced zone. If 2nd down turns out to be a pass, it's normally because 1st down was an incomplete or the run was 2yds or less. The D is now in a pass D. ARE is small, is an average route-runner and has average hands, so he has a difficult time creating space against a pass D, therefore he's less successful. On third down, if it's a pass, it's either a surprise play call on 3rd and short in which case the D is playing run-first or ARE is some sort of a check down option and makes the catch but may not necessarily pick up the yds for the first.

or I could be completely off-base and it's just coincidence.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

Just an "off the top of the head" thought. Both Pitt & us are run-first teams. On first down the threat of run makes the D play more honest with a run-first D, either man coverage or some sort of balanced zone. If 2nd down turns out to be a pass, it's normally because 1st down was an incomplete or the run was 2yds or less. The D is now in a pass D. ARE is small, is an average route-runner and has average hands, so he has a difficult time creating space against a pass D, therefore he's less successful. On third down, if it's a pass, it's either a surprise play call on 3rd and short in which case the D is playing run-first or ARE is some sort of a check down option and makes the catch but may not necessarily pick up the yds for the first.

or I could be completely off-base and it's just coincidence.

That's my first thought as well. I'll look at some other complementary targets from those two offenses and see if they are also weaker on second down.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

Just an "off the top of the head" thought. Both Pitt & us are run-first teams. On first down the threat of run makes the D play more honest with a run-first D, either man coverage or some sort of balanced zone. If 2nd down turns out to be a pass, it's normally because 1st down was an incomplete or the run was 2yds or less. The D is now in a pass D. ARE is small, is an average route-runner and has average hands, so he has a difficult time creating space against a pass D, therefore he's less successful. On third down, if it's a pass, it's either a surprise play call on 3rd and short in which case the D is playing run-first or ARE is some sort of a check down option and makes the catch but may not necessarily pick up the yds for the first.

or I could be completely off-base and it's just coincidence.

You know, Heath Miller has the same bizarre second down trend, but only since ARE left for Washington. In Miller's rookie year, he was actually better on second down than any other down.

Seems like just a coincidence, but it's a really, really well traveled coincidence.

[GMScud]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

You know, Heath Miller has the same bizarre second down trend, but only since ARE left for Washington. In Miller's rookie year, he was actually better on second down than any other down.

Seems like just a coincidence, but it's a really, really well traveled coincidence.

Yeah I think that's just it. The very first thing I thought was the same as you and SS33 - both the Skins and Pitt propensity for running on 1st down, etc. But I really can't think of that stat being anything but coincidental.