2024 Fall Camp Notes - Receivers & Tight Ends

Do we really need Bonner as a slot receiver, or is this just another fetish type thing Satterfield has for hybrid type players?

 
Undone said:
Do we really need Bonner as a slot receiver, or is this just another fetish type thing Satterfield has for hybrid type players?
Click to expand...


Don't be dissing on my boy Bonner.

But, yes, it's important. We have a number of big body guys, whether they're considered WR or TE, that can play in that big slot and create massive problems for the defense. Go back to the play from the spring game, the TD from Raiola to Bonner. Bonner is in that big slot with 2 receivers outside of him and an inline TE on the single receiver side. You've moved a guy out about 2 gaps, put a more athletic guy there, but that's a power run formation. That's why play action works so well out of that alignment because as a defense you really have to respect the power run game.

There will be teams that try to match up with that role with a LB due to its proximity to the LOS and will get cooked on things like Corners and Flats. Other teams will try to use a Nickel because they only own 2 LBs and will struggle with the running game.

But let's be a little more creative. The staff has talked about the 49ers, so what would they do. Well, they do two things more often than the average NFL team; use motion and use 2 backs. Now, imagine we're in this same alignment with a single inline TE to the short side and we've just been torching the defense on the wide side, so they rotate their coverage to allow that field side safety to provide more help. If we had a WR that could play FB, we could motion him into the backfield into something like I or Splits and run a toss to the short side where the only thing out there is a napping CB whose been playing off coverage because he's lonely.

We used this formation several times in the spring game, sometimes with a single TE, sometimes with a solo WR, but what I personally love about it for this team is it allows us to spread the field, pulling defenders, but still play with power. We can do that because we have some big, athletic personnel that can play that role.

 
brophog said:
Don't be dissing on my boy Bonner.

But, yes, it's important. We have a number of big body guys, whether they're considered WR or TE, that can play in that big slot and create massive problems for the defense. Go back to the play from the spring game, the TD from Raiola to Bonner. Bonner is in that big slot with 2 receivers outside of him and an inline TE on the single receiver side. You've moved a guy out about 2 gaps, put a more athletic guy there, but that's a power run formation. That's why play action works so well out of that alignment because as a defense you really have to respect the power run game.

There will be teams that try to match up with that role with a LB due to its proximity to the LOS and will get cooked on things like Corners and Flats. Other teams will try to use a Nickel because they only own 2 LBs and will struggle with the running game.

But let's be a little more creative. The staff has talked about the 49ers, so what would they do. Well, they do two things more often than the average NFL team; use motion and use 2 backs. Now, imagine we're in this same alignment with a single inline TE to the short side and we've just been torching the defense on the wide side, so they rotate their coverage to allow that field side safety to provide more help. If we had a WR that could play FB, we could motion him into the backfield into something like I or Splits and run a toss to the short side where the only thing out there is a napping CB whose been playing off coverage because he's lonely.

We used this formation several times in the spring game, sometimes with a single TE, sometimes with a solo WR, but what I personally love about it for this team is it allows us to spread the field, pulling defenders, but still play with power. We can do that because we have some big, athletic personnel that can play that role.
Click to expand...


It def gives them some formation/personnel diversity, ie same play different looks.  It also gives them options with insert, cracks, and better perimeter blocking.   Think how Bruce Arians used his big slots like Hines Ward, Larry Fitzgerald, & Chris Godwin & how TO used guys like Vedral in the run game.  UF's LB's probably still get jumpy when they catch something in their peripheral.  And if you utilize your WR's inline like that, it's easier to get them loose on play action.  Will NU do any of this or is it all theoretical?  Which brings us back to Undone's original question.  

While in this thread, I think this is the most interesting receiver corps NU had had since Irving Fryar graduated, but I really wish Carter Nelson had been on campus for spring ball. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Great comments from @brophog and @floridacorn, as always. My original comment was intentionally brief to get some discussion going. This was the train of thought:

Let's say Raiola is capable of slinging the rock on a level greater than that of true freshman Adrian Martinez. If that is the case, it is my opinion that it is inadvisable to run a ton of 12 & 22 man stuff if you have good wide receiver talent at your disposal.

So if you're in 11 man personnel where Fidone is your tight end and you've got one running back, would you really expect Bonner to be your slot guy all that much? I ask in earnest.

Because you've got - not necessarily in this order but I mean maybe roughly - Banks, Coleman, Neyor, Lloyd. You'd take Bonner over two of those four guys in 11 man?

Not disparaging, just creating discussion.      :)      This comes back to my original assertion that we might wind up doing s*** just for the sake of doing it - something that is in my opinion potentially a squarely "Marcus Satterfield-eque" thing to do.

I don't really care about "being multiple" if the top playmakers aren't out on the field as much as they could be. We will need some really incredible QB play to leverage that level of X's & O's to gain an advantage.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
brophog said:
Don't be dissing on my boy Bonner.

But, yes, it's important. We have a number of big body guys, whether they're considered WR or TE, that can play in that big slot and create massive problems for the defense. Go back to the play from the spring game, the TD from Raiola to Bonner. Bonner is in that big slot with 2 receivers outside of him and an inline TE on the single receiver side. You've moved a guy out about 2 gaps, put a more athletic guy there, but that's a power run formation. That's why play action works so well out of that alignment because as a defense you really have to respect the power run game.

There will be teams that try to match up with that role with a LB due to its proximity to the LOS and will get cooked on things like Corners and Flats. Other teams will try to use a Nickel because they only own 2 LBs and will struggle with the running game.

But let's be a little more creative. The staff has talked about the 49ers, so what would they do. Well, they do two things more often than the average NFL team; use motion and use 2 backs. Now, imagine we're in this same alignment with a single inline TE to the short side and we've just been torching the defense on the wide side, so they rotate their coverage to allow that field side safety to provide more help. If we had a WR that could play FB, we could motion him into the backfield into something like I or Splits and run a toss to the short side where the only thing out there is a napping CB whose been playing off coverage because he's lonely.

We used this formation several times in the spring game, sometimes with a single TE, sometimes with a solo WR, but what I personally love about it for this team is it allows us to spread the field, pulling defenders, but still play with power. We can do that because we have some big, athletic personnel that can play that role.
Click to expand...
Great post! 

 
Not sure how it will play out by the time B1G season starts and through the rest of the year, but this is mostly the radar guys that we are familiar with.

Banks, Neyor....  IGC, Bullock,... Lloyd, Coleman, Bonner, Doss..... 

Banks Neyor and IGC are Seniors, Bullock is a Junior

At tight end, Fidone and Boerkircher are Juniors.  The rest are freshmen.

Need an uptick this year in speed, route running, spacing, catching, and YAC in comparison to last year.  Hoping Raiola helps them become even better.

 
Undone said:
Great comments from @brophog and @floridacorn, as always. My original comment was intentionally brief to get some discussion going. This was the train of thought:

Let's say Raiola is capable of slinging the rock on a level greater than that of true freshman Adrian Martinez. If that is the case, it is my opinion that it is inadvisable to run a ton of 12 & 22 man stuff if you have good wide receiver talent at your disposal.

So if you're in 11 man personnel where Fidone is your tight end and you've got one running back, would you really expect Bonner to be your slot guy all that much? I ask in earnest.

Because you've got - not necessarily in this order but I mean maybe roughly - Banks, Coleman, Neyor, Lloyd. You'd take Bonner over two of those four guys in 11 man?

Not disparaging, just creating discussion.      :)      This comes back to my original assertion that we might wind up doing s*** just for the sake of doing it - something that is in my opinion potentially a squarely "Marcus Satterfield-eque" thing to do.

I don't really care about "being multiple" if the top playmakers aren't out on the field as much as they could be. We will need some really incredible QB play to leverage that level of X's & O's to gain an advantage.
Click to expand...


Right, if Bonner is in the rotation as a "receiver", then utilizing all his strengths is a strategic advantage.  If he's not, you're limiting your offense utilizing him as a blocking slot IMO, and inevitably tipping your plays.  By reputation Rhule is known for being a big RPO guy and that has a similiar effect on the defense as an additional point of attack blocker.  I didn't see  much evidence of that last season, but in his defense, they were limited at the QB position.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Undone said:
Because you've got - not necessarily in this order but I mean maybe roughly - Banks, Coleman, Neyor, Lloyd. You'd take Bonner over two of those four guys in 11 man?
Click to expand...


We're getting into a rabbit hole here that could go on for days of discussion.

But let me ask you this: If you could just put four WR on the field, why would you ever use a flex TE?

One reason is to exploit how defenses are created. Regardless of how many silly positional names everyone has for things, every position has a set of traits that you're looking for. Our Jack has certain traits, our Rover has certain traits, etcetera. With that, every defense has rules on how to match up with certain alignments. One defense may always have a designated boundary and field CB, or always a left/right CB, or they always line up against twins...etc.

Let's come out in our 3x1 set again with 3 receivers to the wide side, but the single side is a TE lined up as the X receiver. He's not as fast as a WR, nor as agile. However, that CB he's up against wasn't recruited, developed, nor trained to go against a TE. Against a WR that's taking a vertical release, he may be in that hip pocket, capable of running with anyone, but TEs don't play like WRs, do they? This is a massive issue for the defense.

 
brophog said:
We're getting into a rabbit hole here that could go on for days of discussion.
Click to expand...


Mission: accomplished.      :D     Just killing time until the season starts.

brophog said:
But let me ask you this: If you could just put four WR on the field, why would you ever use a flex TE?

One reason is to exploit how defenses are created. Regardless of how many silly positional names everyone has for things, every position has a set of traits that you're looking for. Our Jack has certain traits, our Rover has certain traits, etcetera. With that, every defense has rules on how to match up with certain alignments. One defense may always have a designated boundary and field CB, or always a left/right CB, or they always line up against twins...etc.

Let's come out in our 3x1 set again with 3 receivers to the wide side, but the single side is a TE lined up as the X receiver. He's not as fast as a WR, nor as agile. However, that CB he's up against wasn't recruited, developed, nor trained to go against a TE. Against a WR that's taking a vertical release, he may be in that hip pocket, capable of running with anyone, but TEs don't play like WRs, do they? This is a massive issue for the defense.
Click to expand...


The bold is actually a really good response to my somewhat aggressive statement towards Bonner, that is a really great example. And we all know that when you have a tight end like Mark Andrews out there what the answer is; he has the size advantage, the receiving advantage, and the blocking advantage. And you went on to talk about that.

It's more about tipping off what we're going to do as floridacorn said, but it's also about weighing athletic talent advantage and X's & O's advantages. But hey, maybe Bonner lit it up in spring ball catching the rock?

Rhule has talked about how much he likes the 49ers' offense and Satterfield likes the big guys. I just want to see our team opening up the field this season, getting teams spread out and on their heels. I'll be pumped no matter how we accomplish that, if we're able.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top