Schotty's playcalling last night (1 Viewer)

[sholditch]

I own Rivers so I am a little concerned, but I also think that they went so heavy on the run simply because they didn't respect their opponent. I seriously doubt anything close to the run/pass ratio will be seen again (except maybe when they play Tennessee next week), but it did make me question whether Schotty is really all that comfortable with Rivers. I mean, 48 rushes to 11 pass attempts? That's not a sign of things to come is it? Rivers looked great when he let him pass. Just wondering how short this leash will be against real opponents (sorry Raider fans.)

 

[Sigmund Bloom]

Not a sign of lack of confidence.

For reference, See: The number of pass attempts Roethlisberger gets when the Steelers are ahead all game.

 

[Colin Dowling]

Ideally, you could win games without ever passing the ball. Less chance of turnover, clock keeps running, offensive line can dictate the tempo, etc. In other words, there is no need to pass the ball when you are ahead and have a good running game.

 

[Lauryn]

I also think that they went so heavy on the run simply because they didn't respect their opponent.

 

[redman]

Why pass when LT, Turner and Co. are steamrolling the defense?

I think it's exactly the right thing to have done with a young QB who is new to the starting lineup, on the road against an overmatched team looking for any spark at all to get going. He had some yards and nice completions, a TD and no INT's. Declare victory and vacate the battlefield.

 

[Cowboys#1]

when you have LT2 you barely need a qb.

in all honesty the o-line did a good job, lt2 and neal were doing great, no need to shake the kids conifdence with a pick or something.

good playcalling i thought

 

[delusional]

Hope it isnt like this all season or us gates owners are screwed

 

[Synthesizer]

They won 27-0. You'll probably see similar run/pass ratios whenever they are completely dominating a team on both sides of the ball.

 

[sholditch]

That's what I was thinking when watching it. Still, there were several 3 and out drives that stalled because he refused to throw the ball and ran three times in a row. Then again, those were in their own territory. Hopefully when they play opponents capable of scoring points they will open it up a little bit.

 

[salmonstud]

Maybe just coach/player speak...but from the NFL.com Recap:

Tomlinson showed little sign of rust after sitting out the entire preseason, topping 100 yards rushing in the second quarter. He has 837 yards rushing in his past six meetings with Oakland.

"When you have a young quarterback, you run the football a lot," Tomlinson said. "You don't ever want to put a young quarterback in a situation to make a turnover unless you have to. We played conservative and our defense was playing well so we had to ride our defense."

Rivers, who spent his first two seasons as a backup, went 8-for-11 for 108 yards, including a 4-yard touchdown pass to Antonio Gates in the fourth quarter that made it 20-0.

The Chargers ran the ball on 48 of 59 plays, and Rivers threw only two passes to wide receivers.

"That was dictated by the score," Schottenheimer said. "If I had Dan Marino, I would have done the same thing. Everything he was asked to do, he did in a winning fashion."

 

[BIGDAL88]

"That was dictated by the score," Schottenheimer said. "If I had Dan Marino, I would have done the same thing.

I call B.S. on that.

But I liked the playcalling for the first game......LT will not run the ball 31 times every game, unless he plans for an early retirement.

I think as the season progresses, you'll see Rivers become more involved with the passing game.

He had nice touch on a swing pass to Tomlinson early in the game.....he can develop that downfield touch as the season wears on.

Dal

 

[Fla\/\/ed]

I have no problem with Schotty's playcalling last night however he does have a reputation for "playing not to lose" and much of the 3rd quarter reminded me of that.

 

[H.K.]

That's what I was thinking when watching it. Still, there were several 3 and out drives that stalled because he refused to throw the ball and ran three times in a row. Then again, those were in their own territory. Hopefully when they play opponents capable of scoring points they will open it up a little bit.

There were many times when a pass should have been called, but they essentially elected to run and punt.Speaks volumes IMO. From a football perspective it was the right thing to do. From a fantasy perspective, you should substantially downgrade all aspects of the SD passing game. Especially Gates.

 

[cws3030]

I got the feeling that SD knew they could have their way with OAK and just kept it simple: run the ball, eat up clock, and leave it to the D.

They will take the 2001 Ravens philosophy this year. Run/Field Position/Let the D do their job/No QB mistakes.

Rivers was really 8-10 that screen pass to Tomlinson when he has tossed to the ground was a busted play and he had to throw it away. That pass to Parker was more than impressive, I think Rivers will be fine when called upon.

 

[packersfan]

That's what I was thinking when watching it. Still, there were several 3 and out drives that stalled because he refused to throw the ball and ran three times in a row. Then again, those were in their own territory. Hopefully when they play opponents capable of scoring points they will open it up a little bit.

There were many times when a pass should have been called, but they essentially elected to run and punt.Speaks volumes IMO. From a football perspective it was the right thing to do. From a fantasy perspective, you should substantially downgrade all aspects of the SD passing game. Especially Gates.

I think it was the right thing to do from a football perspective against the Raiders. If the Chargers were facing an actual NFL team they may have had some real problems with all of the Run-Run-Pass-Punt series they were engineering - especially in the third quarter. I thought it was very obvious Schottenheimer wanted to keep Rivers from having to do too much. That can hardly be faulted when you have LT in the backfield, but as the season progresses I don't see the Chargers having a realistic shot at the playoffs using this type of strategy. Eventually, they have to throw the ball because good teams will just load up to stop LT and succeed if Schottenheimer won't adjust. Hell, the Raiders were stopping LT in the third quarter but they were just too inept offensively to take advantage. The game was Oakland's for the taking in the third quarter but they simply are so bad offensively they couldn't take advantage.

 

[sholditch]

That's what I was thinking when watching it. Still, there were several 3 and out drives that stalled because he refused to throw the ball and ran three times in a row. Then again, those were in their own territory. Hopefully when they play opponents capable of scoring points they will open it up a little bit.

There were many times when a pass should have been called, but they essentially elected to run and punt.Speaks volumes IMO. From a football perspective it was the right thing to do. From a fantasy perspective, you should substantially downgrade all aspects of the SD passing game. Especially Gates.

And those came when it was still 13-0. That's what made me worry. It became really obvious that the Chargers were going to run and the Raiders were going to stuff it and still no passes. The good thing is that there is no way that the Chargers can win playing with a 5-1 run/pass ratio, and Rivers looked solid.

 

[trader jake]

Martyball is defined by "playing not to lose" and last night was no different. Marty coached like it was one of his many playoff game disappointments. It's difficult to bash his decisions considering how the Chargers dominated the Raiders.

The Chargers gave the Raiders a chance by playing that way though. The score was 13-0 and the Raiders had the ball a few times. Of course they did zip on offense last night but we've all watched games where Randy Moss makes some crazy play and the game changes. The Raiders would have the crowd back, the team would be pumped up, and the new QB would be in a whole new ballgame.

This is the exact type of scenerio that Marty has lost numerous times in the playoffs. See Tony Dungy when he coached the Bucs. If the Charger defense does what it did last night it won't matter...too bad the Chargers will have to play some NFL teams the rest of season (except their 2nd game against the Raiders of course).

 

[redman]

The "playing not to lose" thing is obviously problematic versus a playoff team, but the Raiders cannot at this point be confused with such an opponent.

 

[tommyGunZ]

That's what I was thinking when watching it. Still, there were several 3 and out drives that stalled because he refused to throw the ball and ran three times in a row. Then again, those were in their own territory. Hopefully when they play opponents capable of scoring points they will open it up a little bit.

There were many times when a pass should have been called, but they essentially elected to run and punt.Speaks volumes IMO. From a football perspective it was the right thing to do. From a fantasy perspective, you should substantially downgrade all aspects of the SD passing game. Especially Gates.

This will be by far the fewest passes Rivers throws in a game this season, and yet Gates was on the receiving end of 25% of his completions and caught Rivers' only touchdown.If you were predicting more than 90 catches, 1100 yards, and 14 TDs, it may be time to downgrade Gates. Otherwise, Gates is still BY FAR the #1 TE in football.

 

[sholditch]

How long do you guys think the leash will be against TEN? Penny ripped them apart but I'm wondering if Marty won't revert to the same philosophy against another subpar team (although one that did manage to put up some points).

 

[Sigmund Bloom]

That's what I was thinking when watching it. Still, there were several 3 and out drives that stalled because he refused to throw the ball and ran three times in a row. Then again, those were in their own territory. Hopefully when they play opponents capable of scoring points they will open it up a little bit.

There were many times when a pass should have been called, but they essentially elected to run and punt.Speaks volumes IMO. From a football perspective it was the right thing to do. From a fantasy perspective, you should substantially downgrade all aspects of the SD passing game. Especially Gates.

This will be by far the fewest passes Rivers throws in a game this season, and yet Gates was on the receiving end of 25% of his completions and caught Rivers' only touchdown.If you were predicting more than 90 catches, 1100 yards, and 14 TDs, it may be time to downgrade Gates. Otherwise, Gates is still BY FAR the #1 TE in football.

- he's still the #1 target in the passing offense - only Gonzo and maybe Watson can say that.- he's still the most talented TE in the game- he's still the #1 target when the Chargers pass in the red zoneThis will be one of his worst 2 games of the year for catches and yardage - and he still caught a TD.

 

[tommyGunZ]

How long do you guys think the leash will be against TEN? Penny ripped them apart but I'm wondering if Marty won't revert to the same philosophy against another subpar team (although one that did manage to put up some points).

The Bolts will be heavy favorites at home against the Titans, but no way does Philip end up with 11 PA against Tennessee. Remember, last night was a divisional game, on the road, in a hostile environment, and it was Rivers' starting debut. Unless the Titans quit like the Raiders did last night, expect 25+ passes and 2 TDs from Rivers vs. Tenn.

 

[imeimex]

My biggest problem is why continue to run the dives over and over again. Tomlinson took a pounding and he does much better on tosses/sweeps/screens. I think the game should have been determined well before it was by using a couple different run plays. After LT2 had the long run, they did not go outside again until the 4th quarter.

 

[MU Seminole]

SD will have to open it up just a little more than they had to last night. They got a two TD lead, OAK posed absolutely no offensive threat, and SD was pinned with bad field position the whole second half, it seemed...I know this style from watching Bobby Bowden teams for years...The running game was not great in the second half as OAK loaded the box, but given field position, a QB making his first ever start, and SD's DEF dominance, Marty was content to burn a few minutes with every possession.

They won't be able to do this against every opponent and will have to open it up a little more, but I certainly don't expect Rivers to put up Brees numbers.

 

[DPRugby]

I was at the game and it was scary when Marty went into that 3rd quarter shell. It was only 13-0 and if the Raiders had gotten one big play (which they didn't thanks to Mr. Merriman) the place would have went bananas and Rivers would have found it even harder to pass.

I think he did great and I wish Marty would loosen the leash just a tad next week.

Also, in the 3rd quarter there was a 3rd down swing pass to Tomlinson where Rivers missed him by a large margin that had he gotten the ball to LT, LT would have gone 40+ yards easy if not to the house.

Anyway, LT is a God and Rivers is going to be fine at QB, the big question is if Marty can figure out a way to become more conservative and predictable in his game plan.

 

[WhoDat]

Ideally, you could win games without ever passing the ball. Less chance of turnover, clock keeps running, offensive line can dictate the tempo, etc. In other words, there is no need to pass the ball when you are ahead and have a good running game.

Exactly.If you can run the football and play defense like the Chargers did last night, while absolutely humiliating a divisional opponent on the road, there is no reason to throw the football. Why give the Raiders the chance to pick one off and return it for 6, while letting them back in the game? Step on their neck and snap it. The Chargers hammered the Raiders last night. That is the kind of ### beating that will set a team back for a season. Even on those 3rd downs when Marty, well, was Marty he did not need to pass. The Raiders could not move the football. Don't turn it over. Make the Raiders face your defense. Lock up a win on the road against a rival. Get home healthy and happy. No need to get cute and open the playbook if not necessary. If the Titans do not play any better than the Raiders, then I would expect more of the same in terms of playcalling.

 

[dreadlocks]

Ideally, you could win games without ever passing the ball. Less chance of turnover, clock keeps running, offensive line can dictate the tempo, etc. In other words, there is no need to pass the ball when you are ahead and have a good running game.

Exactly.If you can run the football and play defense like the Chargers did last night, while absolutely humiliating a divisional opponent on the road, there is no reason to throw the football. Why give the Raiders the chance to pick one off and return it for 6, while letting them back in the game? Step on their neck and snap it. The Chargers hammered the Raiders last night. That is the kind of ### beating that will set a team back for a season. Even on those 3rd downs when Marty, well, was Marty he did not need to pass. The Raiders could not move the football. Don't turn it over. Make the Raiders face your defense. Lock up a win on the road against a rival. Get home healthy and happy. No need to get cute and open the playbook if not necessary. If the Titans do not play any better than the Raiders, then I would expect more of the same in terms of playcalling.

I couldn't disagree more. You have an opponent that is totally overmatched. You have a young quarterback who needs real game passing experience and you can't insert some low risk passing plays. If you don't trust Rivers now, how do you trust him later. This is about more than just winning this game, they need to develop Rivers for the tougher games down the road.

 

[Gold Plated Nails]

Rivers had a 133+ passer rating, tops in the NFL. If you saw his passes they looked fantastic. Most weeks the Bolts will actually have to pass the ball (they dont play Oakland every week). If anything, it's a buy low in my mind for Rivers and Gates.

 

[kylechoffman]

He managed the game - well done.. Keep it up schotty.

 

[sholditch]

hmmm, the rivers owner in one of my leagues has Peyton. Time to make a move

 

[WhoDat]

Ideally, you could win games without ever passing the ball. Less chance of turnover, clock keeps running, offensive line can dictate the tempo, etc. In other words, there is no need to pass the ball when you are ahead and have a good running game.

Exactly.If you can run the football and play defense like the Chargers did last night, while absolutely humiliating a divisional opponent on the road, there is no reason to throw the football. Why give the Raiders the chance to pick one off and return it for 6, while letting them back in the game? Step on their neck and snap it. The Chargers hammered the Raiders last night. That is the kind of ### beating that will set a team back for a season.

Even on those 3rd downs when Marty, well, was Marty he did not need to pass. The Raiders could not move the football. Don't turn it over. Make the Raiders face your defense. Lock up a win on the road against a rival. Get home healthy and happy. No need to get cute and open the playbook if not necessary.

If the Titans do not play any better than the Raiders, then I would expect more of the same in terms of playcalling.

I couldn't disagree more. You have an opponent that is totally overmatched. You have a young quarterback who needs real game passing experience and you can't insert some low risk passing plays. If you don't trust Rivers now, how do you trust him later. This is about more than just winning this game, they need to develop Rivers for the tougher games down the road.

Take the results from last night's game. Grab a large sample of football coaches from any level...Pop Warner, Junior High, High School, College or NFL. Present those coaches with the following hypothetical.Your team in this scenario is the Chargers. You have a QB making his first start against a divisional rival. Here are the results of that game. Would you have done anything differently? For example, would you have passed the football more often despite the fact the opponent could not stop your running game and, likewise, the opponent could not move the football against you?

I would hedge my bet that 95% or higher of those coaches would not change a thing. Rivers did exactly what he was asked to do to the tune of 8/11; a TD; no turnovers and a win. He made no glaring mistakes and the team left in pretty good shape.

No coach in his right mind would jack ### around with those results or how they were achived. The Chargers destroyed the Raiders and only had to throw the football 11 times. That is an ### beating and I do not know one coach that would change anything in that type of win espeically on the road against a rival.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

I don't think Marty was trying to protect anyone with his playcalling -- I think it was dictated by the defense the Raiders were in (a nickel the whole first half) and the game situation (blowout in the second half with the Raiders unable to get a first down on offense).

But to the extent Marty was trying to protect anyone with his playcalling, I think it was Marcus McNeill more than Rivers.

Notice that on Rivers' first real pass attempt (excluding the dump-off to LT), Rivers did a half roll to his right away from McNeill.

McNeill ended up having a very good game -- but if there was a question mark on offense before the game started, it was McNeill rather than Rivers.

Both played well, and I think the Chargers will not hesitate to open up the offense whenever they need to. Last night, they didn't need to.

 

[DPRugby]

I don't think Marty was trying to protect anyone with his playcalling -- I think it was dictated by the defense the Raiders were in (a nickel the whole first half) and the game situation (blowout in the second half with the Raiders unable to get a first down on offense).

But to the extent Marty was trying to protect anyone with his playcalling, I think it was Marcus McNeill more than Rivers.

Notice that on Rivers' first real pass attempt (excluding the dump-off to LT), Rivers did a half roll to his right away from McNeill.

McNeill ended up having a very good game -- but if there was a question mark on offense before the game started, it was McNeill rather than Rivers.

Both played well, and I think the Chargers will not hesitate to open up the offense whenever they need to. Last night, they didn't need to.

Hey MT,Probably a silly question here but do you think that Rivers' confidence takes a hit due to the play calling and could that affect a young kid like PR? Obviously at some point in the near future Rivers is going to have to win a game with his arm and I'd hate to see Marty undermine his confidence by running in obvious passing down situations all the time.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Probably a silly question here but do you think that Rivers' confidence takes a hit due to the play calling and could that affect a young kid like PR?

Nope. They won 27-0. As Rivers said in his post-game interview, there will be games when the best way to win is to run the ball 50 times, and there will be games when the best way to win is to throw the ball 50 times. Rivers is ready either way. He knows he'll get his opportunities in every game -- some more than others. (He only had a few last night, but made the most of them.)Marty is very confident in Rivers and I think the whole team knows it. I would not take last night's playcalling as a signal of a lack of confidence, and I don't think Rivers will take it that way.

 

[Neil Beaufort Zod]

I don't think Marty was trying to protect anyone with his playcalling -- I think it was dictated by the defense the Raiders were in (a nickel the whole first half) and the game situation (blowout in the second half with the Raiders unable to get a first down on offense).

But to the extent Marty was trying to protect anyone with his playcalling, I think it was Marcus McNeill more than Rivers.

Notice that on Rivers' first real pass attempt (excluding the dump-off to LT), Rivers did a half roll to his right away from McNeill.

McNeill ended up having a very good game -- but if there was a question mark on offense before the game started, it was McNeill rather than Rivers.

Both played well, and I think the Chargers will not hesitate to open up the offense whenever they need to. Last night, they didn't need to.

Hey MT,Probably a silly question here but do you think that Rivers' confidence takes a hit due to the play calling and could that affect a young kid like PR? Obviously at some point in the near future Rivers is going to have to win a game with his arm and I'd hate to see Marty undermine his confidence by running in obvious passing down situations all the time.

I'll throw in my .02, even though you didn't ask. Rivers probably gained a lot of confidence after the throw to Parker with Sapp in his face. That was a thrid-and-long and he nailed the pass. He also got some confidence when Schottenheimer called a pass play near the goal-line. He didn't have to put it in the air; LT was in the backfield, I think. But he calleda simple roll-out and got Rivers his first TD pass. If he had NO confidence in him he could have just run it in. So considering it was a blowout and he didn't have to do much, Rivers can feel pretty good about the game. He made good throws, I didn't see any "almost picked off" passes and when they botched the handoff on the reverse, he did the right thing and covered the ball. He even did the little things right.

 

[Evilhomer3k]

In 2004 the Chargers beat the Browns 21-0. Brees threw 6 passing attempts. Now I know weather had an effect on this game but we are talking about 6 attempts here. Tomlinson was 26-111. This was game 16. Brees was 4 of 6 for 85 yards and one td.

I don't think this had anything to do with protecting Rivers. This was simply what the coaches thought would win them the game. That's it. You can try to spin it any way you want but they wanted to win the game and the Chargers did excactly what they needed to do to win it.

 

[Sweetness_34]

Lots of good discussion about Rivers, LT2, Schotty and Gates

But what about Keenan McCardell????????????

What are people who have him as a WR3 in 2 leagues supposed to do (leagues that start 3 WRs mind you)??



The fact that Coles and Cotchery just lit up the Tenessee secondary has me really tempted to start KMac again as a WR3. But is it a shark move to start him against Tenn????

 

[BoltzNBrew]

Marty probably just wanted to give Oakland the most boring game he possibly could. Old school Marty Ball. I was wondering why he wasn't throwing at all early in the 2nd half but if you think about their field position, how the D was dominating and that they were only up 13 he probably didn't want to see Rivers throw a pick and give the Raiders an easy score. Punt it and watch the D slaughter the OAK offence.

 

[jurb26]

Ideally, you could win games without ever passing the ball. Less chance of turnover, clock keeps running, offensive line can dictate the tempo, etc. In other words, there is no need to pass the ball when you are ahead and have a good running game.

While this is true, I totally disagree that it worked for the Chargers that way last night. I thought in the second half Oak stuffed the SD run extremely well and how many times in that 3rd quarter did Oak have great field position due to 3 n outs by SD? All of those 3 n outs were because Oak flat shut downthe running game for a great portion of that game. If Oak offensive coaches could have pulled their heads out of their for a few drives and actually called some real plays then Oak very easily could have crawled back into a game they had no business being in. SD could have easily slammed the door shut in that early 3rd quart IMO. They were fortunate to play a team so inept as Oak that they got away with it still. Good teams will take advantage of that consistant field position and 3 n outs. Oak simply was not a good team nor prepaired to play. Now, I dont expect this to continue so really it's not a big deal. I could be wrong however and maybe it does continue.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Ideally, you could win games without ever passing the ball. Less chance of turnover, clock keeps running, offensive line can dictate the tempo, etc. In other words, there is no need to pass the ball when you are ahead and have a good running game.

While this is true, I totally disagree that it worked for the Chargers that way last night. I thought in the second half Oak stuffed the SD run extremely well and how many times in that 3rd quarter did Oak have great field position due to 3 n outs by SD? All of those 3 n outs were because Oak flat shut downthe running game for a great portion of that game. If Oak offensive coaches could have pulled their heads out of their for a few drives and actually called some real plays then Oak very easily could have crawled back into a game they had no business being in. SD could have easily slammed the door shut in that early 3rd quart IMO. They were fortunate to play a team so inept as Oak that they got away with it still. Good teams will take advantage of that consistant field position and 3 n outs. Oak simply was not a good team nor prepaired to play.

I think Marty and Cam remember week two at Denver last season. It was a similar situation early in the second half. The Chargers seemed to have control of the game . . . until Brees through an INT that was picked by Champ Bailey and returned for a touchdown. That let the Broncos back in the game and they ended up winning.I think that may have been in the back of the coaches' minds last night. No need to take a similar risk when the D is playing so well.

 

[phillzphan]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/boxscore?gameId=241219005

 

[dreadlocks]

Ideally, you could win games without ever passing the ball. Less chance of turnover, clock keeps running, offensive line can dictate the tempo, etc. In other words, there is no need to pass the ball when you are ahead and have a good running game.

While this is true, I totally disagree that it worked for the Chargers that way last night. I thought in the second half Oak stuffed the SD run extremely well and how many times in that 3rd quarter did Oak have great field position due to 3 n outs by SD? All of those 3 n outs were because Oak flat shut downthe running game for a great portion of that game. If Oak offensive coaches could have pulled their heads out of their for a few drives and actually called some real plays then Oak very easily could have crawled back into a game they had no business being in. SD could have easily slammed the door shut in that early 3rd quart IMO. They were fortunate to play a team so inept as Oak that they got away with it still. Good teams will take advantage of that consistant field position and 3 n outs. Oak simply was not a good team nor prepaired to play.

I think Marty and Cam remember week two at Denver last season. It was a similar situation early in the second half. The Chargers seemed to have control of the game . . . until Brees through an INT that was picked by Champ Bailey and returned for a touchdown. That let the Broncos back in the game and they ended up winning.I think that may have been in the back of the coaches' minds last night. No need to take a similar risk when the D is playing so well.

Totally agree with Jurb. They took more risk when they decided to be totally one dimensional. Never thought Shotenheimer would give new meaning to the term "Marty Ball".

 

[Gr00vus]

SD could have easily slammed the door shut in that early 3rd quart IMO.

See, the thing is, they DID slam the door shut. That 13 points may as well have been 130 - the Raiders were done, probably somewhere in the middle of the 2nd quarter and the D never let their feet of the Raiders necks once. Marty knew it, Brooks knew it Moss knew it, Sapp knew it - and Marty played it out excactly the way you should. Until the Raiders show some signs of life and force you to take a risk, you don't - end of discussion.

 

[PahtyTom]

Ideally, you could win games without ever passing the ball. Less chance of turnover, clock keeps running, offensive line can dictate the tempo, etc. In other words, there is no need to pass the ball when you are ahead and have a good running game.

While this is true, I totally disagree that it worked for the Chargers that way last night. I thought in the second half Oak stuffed the SD run extremely well and how many times in that 3rd quarter did Oak have great field position due to 3 n outs by SD? All of those 3 n outs were because Oak flat shut downthe running game for a great portion of that game. If Oak offensive coaches could have pulled their heads out of their for a few drives and actually called some real plays then Oak very easily could have crawled back into a game they had no business being in. SD could have easily slammed the door shut in that early 3rd quart IMO. They were fortunate to play a team so inept as Oak that they got away with it still. Good teams will take advantage of that consistant field position and 3 n outs. Oak simply was not a good team nor prepaired to play.

I think Marty and Cam remember week two at Denver last season. It was a similar situation early in the second half. The Chargers seemed to have control of the game . . . until Brees through an INT that was picked by Champ Bailey and returned for a touchdown. That let the Broncos back in the game and they ended up winning.I think that may have been in the back of the coaches' minds last night. No need to take a similar risk when the D is playing so well.

Totally agree with Jurb. They took more risk when they decided to be totally one dimensional. Never thought Shotenheimer would give new meaning to the term "Marty Ball".

If Marty was really concerned about having Rivers throw, wouldn't having a 13-0 lead be MORE of a reason to open it up? What if after one of SD's 3 runs and out Oakland somehow scored a TD and then it's 13-7? Then you may really need Rivers to throw, but now there's pressure and the consequences of a bad play are worse. Did he think of that and just had the confidence in Rivers already if it came to that so he didn't mind? Or did he not think of that and just wanted Rivers to have as little impact on the game as possible? If we're trying to predict whether what we saw is what we will continue to see or if it was just a result of the circumstances, I don't think anyone knows with any degree of certainty. I can give you my opinion as someone who has been watching Rivers and the Chargers' situation religiously this offseason and season, but it's probably not worth any more than anyone else's.

 

[Urinal Mint]

There were many games (in the Dallas hey-day of the 90s) where Troy Aikman threw the ball 15-18 times, with about 60-70% of those balls being thrown in the first half. They would grind teams into mush running the ball and swarming them with defense.

Why push the passing game if you're able to demoralize the opponent with the running game and pin them back in terrible field position if you have to punt? I did not watch the game, but what I gather is that Rivers made the throws he needed to make when he needed to make them. That's what we should really draw from this.

There is nothing wrong with "ultra-conservative" playcalling if the other team can't stop you from ramming it down their throats on the ground.

 

[jurb26]

SD could have easily slammed the door shut in that early 3rd quart IMO.

See, the thing is, they DID slam the door shut. That 13 points may as well have been 130 - the Raiders were done, probably somewhere in the middle of the 2nd quarter and the D never let their feet of the Raiders necks once. Marty knew it, Brooks knew it Moss knew it, Sapp knew it - and Marty played it out excactly the way you should. Until the Raiders show some signs of life and force you to take a risk, you don't - end of discussion.

I coulndt disagree more. Oak had several chances to get back into that game due to field position and short drives given up by SD. It looked as though, for a great portion of the 3rd quater anyway, that Oak was just hanging around and ready to strike becuase SD let them hang around. They finally seemed to realize that quick hitting passes were the way to beat the heavy speed rush of SD and used those passes wonderfully to Moss on 3 drives. Inexplicably however, on all 3 of those same drives Oak at some point went back the the 7 step drop, abandoning both the run and the quick hitting pass and taking huge losses again. IF the scheme would have been better, I thought Oak had a very good c hance of making that a ball game when it had no business being one. All because SD allowed it to happen. The score was STILL only 13-0, a 2 score game heading into the 4th quarter. Oak dominated field position the entire 3rd quarter. To say the door was slammed shut any early than 9:56 in the 4th (when SD scored thier 2nd TD) is highly misleading IMO. A 2 score game with field position on your side is never a game the opponet has in hand in the NFL. At least is should not be.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

I was going to post this in the game thread, but I found this one first.

There are some good videos from Monday's press conference up here, with Marty, Rivers, and Merriman talking about the game. Marty and Rivers both address the conservative playcalling.

 

[tommyGunZ]

SD could have easily slammed the door shut in that early 3rd quart IMO.

See, the thing is, they DID slam the door shut. That 13 points may as well have been 130 - the Raiders were done, probably somewhere in the middle of the 2nd quarter and the D never let their feet of the Raiders necks once. Marty knew it, Brooks knew it Moss knew it, Sapp knew it - and Marty played it out excactly the way you should. Until the Raiders show some signs of life and force you to take a risk, you don't - end of discussion.

I coulndt disagree more. Oak had several chances to get back into that game due to field position and short drives given up by SD. It looked as though, for a great portion of the 3rd quater anyway, that Oak was just hanging around and ready to strike becuase SD let them hang around. They finally seemed to realize that quick hitting passes were the way to beat the heavy speed rush of SD and used those passes wonderfully to Moss on 3 drives. Inexplicably however, on all 3 of those same drives Oak at some point went back the the 7 step drop, abandoning both the run and the quick hitting pass and taking huge losses again. IF the scheme would have been better, I thought Oak had a very good c hance of making that a ball game when it had no business being one. All because SD allowed it to happen. The score was STILL only 13-0, a 2 score game heading into the 4th quarter. Oak dominated field position the entire 3rd quarter. To say the door was slammed shut any early than 9:56 in the 4th (when SD scored thier 2nd TD) is highly misleading IMO. A 2 score game with field position on your side is never a game the opponet has in hand in the NFL. At least is should not be.

13-0 is a pretty big lead when the team with 0 has ~ 50 total yards in 3 quarters.