Play Fakes vs Oakland

I thought this was worth posting a thread about in the Mains, it's something I've talked about in The Club a little.

During his Day After Press Conference, Tony Sparano specifically noted that he got his hands a little more dirty in the play calling and in talking to everyone, coaches, players, etc. He said he usually stays out of their way, but he didn't want to do that in this Oakland game. He wanted to make sure everyone stayed "convicted" on the ground game, ie. he's tired of us abandoning it at the first sign of trouble.

But one thing he also noted is that Chad Henne coming off the field "was good" because he told Sparano a couple of times things he didn't want called anymore, and if he doesn't want something called then it's a good idea not to give him that stuff anymore.

I believe I know exactly what Chad Henne requested, and it was a cessation of the Play Fakes on the pass plays.

I have a running theory about why Chad Henne has not become very good with his fakes over the last three years. He needs all the time he can get to read the defense, and the more realistic your play-action mechanics are, the more time you spend with your eyes off the defense. Dan Marino was awful at play-action mechanics, and that was the exact reason why. Marino has even stated it.

We know for a fact that Chad Henne has told the coaches that he doesn't like shotgun plays as much as dropback plays, specifically because he appreciates the extra time to read the defense that a dropback affords him, whereas in shotgun he has to look down to bring in the snap first. It's not exactly a very far jump to assume Henne also hates having to turn his back to the defense on play-action.

The Dolphins might have had a chance at getting Henne to be Peyton Manning with his play fakes, IF they didn't so thoroughly abuse the device. Like with drugs, there's use, and then there's abuse. The Dolphins abuse the play fake in their passing offense. They use it constantly, even on plays like 3rd & 10+ where nobody on the defense could possibly buy the fake.

Because of this dynamic, Henne has every incentive not to make his fakes very realistic, so that he can get his head around as quickly as possible and start reading the defense. He has no incentive to work on his fakes and make them uniform. Uniformity in your fakes takes time, practice, and commitment. Why should he be committed when he knows that half the time he'll be play faking on a play where the defense can tell by the situation, personnel or formation that there is very little chance that the play is actually a run?

That's what I mean by abusing the play fake in your offense. If you didn't abuse it, and you called play fakes when there was a legitimate chance of running the football, and you coached the offensive line and running backs well at selling the fake (currently, they are not very good at it)...then you might be able to convince a Chad Henne that the little extra fraction of a second he spends with his back turned, the little extra effort, will pay actual dividends...you might have stood a chance at making him work on his fake mechanics, striving for uniformity. But alas, the Dolphins haven't done any of the above.

That brings me to Oakland. Chad Henne's play fakes during the game were bad, even for him. Usually he's just inconsistent with it. In this game he was downright Marino-esque. He had zero commitment to the idea of a play fake.

In literally 9 of the first 14 pass calls during the Oakland game, Dan Henning called for Chad Henne to execute a play fake (even with a bum knee). But then in 20 of the final 21 pass calls, Chad Henne did not execute a play fake.

So what did he ask Sparano, when he went up to him and said "Don't give me anymore of this?" Pretty easy to guess.

Overall, on plays with a play fake, Henne was 5 of 9 for 89 yards with 1 TD, 1 INT, and 1 Sack for -9 yards. On plays without a fake, he was 12 of 21 for 218 yards, 1 TD, 0 INT, and 2 Sacks for -13 yards.

I think this is a significant development for a few reasons.

1. For one thing, I don't buy for one second that Dan Henning or the coaching staff just "didn't know" that Chad Henne doesn't like executing play fakes, especially useless ones. They've known forever that he prefers dropping back as opposed to the Shotgun. Even Omar Kelly's special needs bag boy at the grocery store could tell you that if a guy doesn't like Shotgun because it takes his eyes off the defense, he probably dislikes play fakes just as much if not more. So for Tony Sparano to intercede on Chad Henne's part means that something has changed, either in the way Chad Henne's willingness (or unwillingness) to execute their offense, or something has changed in Tony Sparano's willingness to step between a growing rift between Chad Henne and Dan Henning.

2. Are we seeing the death of the play fake in this offense period, as in for the rest of the season? If so, that's a very significant development. Michael Irvin wasn't just talkin out his arse before the Cincinnati game, when he noted that it seemed like Chad Henne threw a lot of his interceptions off play-action. Henne has had 12 interceptions this season. Some of them his fault, some of them not his fault. I've counted three interceptions this year that either were not interceptions at all (see: Steelers) or were absolutely not his fault at all. I've counted three more interceptions that were only marginally his fault, as in he probably could have thrown the ball a little bit better, but the primary fault still lay with the receiver for not playing the ball correctly or coming out of his break correctly. There were of course two more interceptions that were very situational, either you take a chance and stick the ball in there or your hopes of winning the game are dead. What is interesting is that all four of the remaining interceptions, that were just horrible decisions or horrible throws and can't be attributed to anyone but Chad Henne...were all off the play fake. That includes both Ninkovich interceptions, the Bengals interception, and the Raiders interception. Of the five interceptions that were mixed bags, two were off the play fake. That leaves only three interceptions on the year where he could even be marginally blamed (4th & Goal vs Jets, the high slant to alligator arms Marshall vs Ravens, the 36 seconds remaining pickoff by Josh Wilson vs Ravens), that did not come on play-action. If the Dolphins are giving up the ghost on play-action, then it does make you wonder if Chad Henne will be a lot safer with the football.

Going forward, I don't believe for one second that you can just take play-action out of the playbook period. That's not what I want and I doubt it's what Miami is going to do. What I would want is for Miami to be smart with the use of play fakes on their passing plays. It's not too much to ask. If you pare down the number of pass plays that involve a fake, to just the ones where a fake could actually be useful, you might stand a better chance of getting all of the players, Henne included, to actually sell the damn fake. When we fire Dan Henning and bring in a new coordinator, that is one thing that the new coordinator would have to address, to me, in interviews.

 

He's gotten a lot better about that this year especially his last five games or so. I really see him looking over both sides of the field, trying to find an open guy. And you don't have to look at the total opposite field and then come back over to a guy, in fact there's a SERIOUS danger in that...you just have not not stare down the guy you're throwing it to.

Here's one thing about the play fake that I rarely see talked about. It all but takes one of your receiving options out of the passing game. Yes, the guy you just faked it to can release on a route and ultimately get the ball, but his route is very delayed, and he's pretty easy to cover for a player either in man or zone. I mean hell, the idea of the play fake is to get people flowing toward that guy at the beginning of the play, so the chances are whoever is covering him is either already flowing toward him, or has a good eye on him.

So even though the Dolphins may not go "max protect" on every play, since they've often over-used the play fake, they have taken their running backs relatively out of the passing game even when they technically do release instead of staying in to block.

I mentioned in another thread in The Club a play that came two plays before the interception against the Raiders, how it was an odd play. The Raiders showed a big package blitz and ultimately came with six players. Miami was lined up real tight, I think you call it an Ace formation but anyway the unique thing about it is at the snap every single receiving option split off in a different direction. The backs immediately ran out to the flats, the receivers and tight end all released out, and the Raiders rushed with six players against five OLs. Since the six rushers were all pretty tight, Miami's OL was able to buy enough time with zone protection for Henne to quickly get the ball to a weak spot in the coverage, with Stanford Routt being unable (due to obstacles in his path) to stay with Brian Hartline in man as he dragged across the middle. It was a 3rd & Long situation and Hartline gained 23 yards on it.

Does that play happen if you call a play fake? No I don't think it does. The back that flared out to Hartline's side drew a linebacker with him, and I believe that linebacker helped get in Routt's way and prevent him being able to cover Hartline.

 

He does that a lot but it's not that necessary. Even if he's looking on the same side of the field, it doesn't mean he's tipping someone off. That 3rd & Goal pass to Hartline where the defender hit him and he couldn't haul it in, that defender didn't hit him because he was tipped off about where Henne was going. Henne was looking out at Fasano on the flat pattern but decided Michael Huff had him pretty good, and so he came back to Hartline on the curl and stuck it in there. The reason the defender was able to break up the play was simply because he was watching and read Hartline's route, and he actually got there early on what should have been called a pass interference penalty.

 

I agree. Although to me it does seem Dan Henning calls about one play a game, usually late in the game, that was set up pretty good. That touchdown against the Packers was a good example. The Packers had been biting on the back side and letting the back side receiver go all day and so Henning called the throwback screen.

 

Excellent observation. I remember the play, and I think the same thing.

 

I wouldn't accuse Dan Henning of being great at in-game adjustments, but I wouldn't accuse him of being incapable of them either. He does tend to notice one thing that ends up useful at some point later in the game.

But, that's not enough, IMO.

 

Fully agreed.

 

The thing to note about it is, first off the play fakes produced 8 yards a play, a TD and a INT, and the non play fakes produced 9 yards a play, a TD and no INTs, so the non-play fake plays WERE more successful, minimize it as some would like, it's true.

Second, before the turning point where they had called play fakes on 9 of 14 pass plays, and suddenly from then on they called play fakes on only 1 of 21 pass plays, Chad Henne had gone incomplete, intercepted, incomplete, sacked and incomplete on the last five play fakes. They had some success early in the game but the Raiders had started to adjust to what the Dolphins were doing on offense, and putting Henne behind the 8-ball on useless play fakes was too much of a hindrance to continue that success as the Raiders adjusted. And the so the play fakes ended.

 

The fact of the matter is, something changed. I'm sorry but I have no idea how anyone can deny that. As I said, 9 of the first 14 pass calls had a play fake to it. That's two-thirds of the pass plays, utilizing a play fake. Then, suddenly, only 1 of the next 21 play calls involved a fake.

Can anyone pretend that's just some random coincidence? The hell you say.

I don't know if it was Chad Henne coming off the sidelines and saying "no mas" to the fakes, or if the fakes were (this time around) a call that Henne had the ability to make at the line of scrimmage based on the defense. Dan Henning did just recently say that Henne had a lot more freedom in his audibling and in the protection calls this game, but that a lot of it had to do with the defense they were facing. Maybe with the Raiders playing so much man, and with DBs turning their backs to the play in order to play man, they just figured it's ok if Henne makes calls at the line to forego the fake in this game, and so it wasn't even a request on his part but his decision at the line to call no more of them. I don't know.

But there WAS a change. On his last five play fakes Henne had thrown three incompletions, gotten sacked, and threw an interception. He switched to no fakes, and started having success again.