Film Room: Breaking down the passing game options for UVa

In our last two editions of the Film Room installments, we took a look at the foundational elements of Tony Elliott’s Clemson offense and running game concepts.

In this third and final installment focused on the offense, we’re examining the passing game concepts that the new staff will implement this fall.

As was true of the running game, Clemson was very productive in the passing game during Elliott’s tenure but had a noticeable drop off in 2021. From 2015 to 2020, Clemson starting quarterbacks completed at least 65 percent of their passes each season, threw for at least 3,000 yards in all but one season (Kelly Bryant in 2017) and threw for 179 touchdowns to 55 interceptions. It helps that Clemson had a pair of future NFL first rounders, Deshaun Watson and Trevor Lawrence, at the helm. It should come as no surprise that Clemson’s offense was more productive with those two QBs than with Bryant and D.J. Uiagalelei but the Tigers still managed to score plenty of points with the latter two just with less consistency.

Pro Football Focus is a big help when reviewing the components of passing game, breaking down the type of throw and how often each type was used in the offense.

For this analysis, we’ll focus on 2020 (with Lawrence), as last year was an outlier of sorts. In 2020, 35 percent of Clemson’s throws came on play-action plays, which would include run-pass option plays. Clemson also ran quite a few screens, both to backs and receivers, totaling 87 plays. It’s no surprise but Lawrence was proficient in all types of pass plays, completing at least 60 percent of his passes in each category. He was particularly good on play-action, though, completing a lower percentage of passes than non-play action throws but going for 11.2 yards per attempt with 12 touchdowns and just one interception.

In terms of where the ball was thrown, Clemson threw a decent number of deep balls two years ago. Lawrence threw the ball 20+ yards on 15 percent of throws, with 10 touchdowns and two picks. Intermediate throws accounted for 22 percent of attempts and more than 55 percent of throws were either between 0-9 yards, or behind the line of scrimmage.

For comparison’s sake, we took a look at Brennan Armstrong’s numbers from last fall. Only 10.3 percent of Armstrong’s throws came on play-action, as Robert Anae’s offense didn’t include many run-pass options. Only 8.8 percent of Armstrong’s throws were screens. Virginia’s QB went beyond 20 yards on 18.2 percent of his throws, so more than Lawrence, but UVa threw more deep balls in 2021 than in other years, which makes sense given their talented QB/WR combinations.

So what happened to Clemson’s passing game in 2021? I watched nearly every Clemson offensive snap from the 2021 season for these film reviews and did so while also watching clips from 2020, 2019, and further back. The drop off from Lawrence to Uiagalelei was significant, and obvious. There’s no doubt that DJU has talent, and there is a reason he was so highly sought after as a recruit. But he looked like a player that was still learning the position, a far cry from Lawrence who was so technically sound. And Lawrence showed that ability as a freshman and looked far more ready than Uiagalelei from what I saw.

Many throws in the Elliott offense require a quarterback to make good decisions pre-snap and get the ball out quick to the right player. I didn’t see as much success there in the 2021 review, and after a while Clemson seemed to call less of those plays and more runs. And it worked, with the offense taking off after the Pitt loss.

There were also a few other factors that might not be the QB’s fault. Clemson had a lot of turnover at the skill positions and up front, and it certainly showed. Uiagalelei faced 123 pressures on 410 drop backs, or a 30-percent pressure rate, with 20 sacks. In 2020, Lawrence faced 89 pressures on 364 drop backs, or 24 percent, with 14 sacks. Lawrence’s receivers had a drop rate of 5.7 percent in 2020, but the drop rate rose to 10 percent with Uiagelelei.

In summary, it seemed liked the perfect storm of a quarterback that wasn’t quite ready, behind an offensive line that hadn’t put it all together, with a bunch of new receivers. It’s also worth noting that Clemson still averaged 36.4 points per game and went 5-0 in Elliott’s final five games as OC, and the team’s only three losses of the season came against the national champions on a neutral field, on the road at the eventual ACC champions, and in Raleigh against a 9-3 NC State team in overtime.

The first few plays are run-pass option examples that UVa will likely incorporate into the offense this year.

On the first play below, Clemson uses a route combination on the near side with the slot receiver flaring out and the outside receiver running a short post. Pitt is playing off on the outside, meaning that the receiver’s post is an easy win if two things happen. First, the Panther linebackers need to bite on the play fake, as you don’t want to make a throw into a crowded window if the linebackers drop back. And second, Pitt’s slot corner has to respect the flare route in the slot. He does, coming up towards the line of scrimmage, allowing the Tigers’ outside receiver to sneak in behind.

Lawrence does a great job of pre-snap recognition and post-snap read, leading to a quick and easy completion.

Our second clip is another example of how pre-snap reads can be so critical on this type of throw.

Here, Clemson sends a receiver in motion left to right, eventually lining up in the slot. The Tigers need four yards for the 1st down, and Virginia’s secondary is playing a bit off for the most part (I suppose Nick Howell didn’t want his DBs to get beat over the top, but we’re not here to relitigate that.). Lawrence knows the route combination, and Virginia does not. That gives the quarterback the advantage and he makes the right read here.

His slot receiver is running a quick out and he knows that with the DBs playing as far off as they are, he simply needs to make a quick throw and it will be a completion for a 1st down at a minimum.

The only thing that could disrupt that is if UVa played a flat zone coverage with its outside corner who could potentially come in to blow up the play, but if that happens Lawrence would have the option to pull the ball and make an over-the-top throw down the sideline.

This next play requires little analysis. Again, Lawrence knows the play and the defense doesn’t. He can see pre-snap that he has solo coverage on the outside and he’s confident that his receiver will win the battle.

At the snap, he can see that VT’s extra DB in the box to his left isn’t bolting back in coverage to help out, so the QB knows for sure he will have no safety help up top. The result is a great throw and a touchdown.

It is worth noting that Lawrence is very accurate down the field so not every quarterback is going to deliver a perfect throw here, even if they read it correctly.

Here is another play-action look, this time more of a traditional play action than a run-pass option.

Here, I just wanted to highlight the scheme, as this is basically a play designed to go deep. Elliott and Lawrence must’ve been getting a look that they liked for this play to be called and it worked quite well.

As you can see, the running back sets a great edge block in “max protection” on a scheme designed to give Lawrence enough time in the pocket for the route to develop downfield. It works well here, resulting in another touchdown throw. Virginia didn’t run a lot of these looks under Anae but they were more common in 2021 and could become even more common with the new staff.

The next play is one of my favorites that I found during my review. It’s a perfect combination of good set up from the play caller, a difficult scheme, a good fake, great recognition from the quarterback, and a nice throw for an easy score.

All of that, plus it also incorporates the H-back, a position we covered quite a bit in the first Film Room this summer. In the running game edition, we showed this play, a quick pitch to the running back, or a pitch that allows the quarterback to read the defensive end and either keep or pitch. Clemson runs it enough that defenses prepare for it, and here Elliott uses that preparation against them. Watch Georgia Tech’s middle linebacker after the snap. He clearly recognizes the concept based on movement from the backs and linemen, but falls right into the trap. He gets sucked into the run action, and doesn’t even realize that the H-back is running right by him until it’s too late.

This is an example of how football can be simple if executed well: Run plays, then use those plays to set the defense up for failure later.

Speaking of simple, here is a basic concept that is almost guaranteed to work unless the quarterback makes a bad throw.

Here, Clemson has two receivers against three UVa defensive backs but look how far off the secondary is playing. It’s 2nd and 3, and Clemson is all but guaranteed a fresh set of downs at a minimum with this play.

The slot receiver again flares out on a “bubble” route and the outside receiver works back towards the football to set a back-side block. UVa simply doesn’t have its players in the right position here, and both Lawrence and the play caller knew that pre-snap. Amari Rodgers was too quick to be caught after the catch, scoring on the play.

This is probably a play where both Elliott and Lawrence knew it would be a touchdown when both teams got lined up.

Elliott wasn’t around for the bowl game, but this play is still a good example of how fakes can work, and how the running back can get involved in the pass game. Check out Iowa State’s defenders on the far-side edge, and how they bite on the play fake from DJU. That allows the other back to flare out of the backfield, into open space for an easy pitch and catch.

Our final clip is another throw to a running back, something that UVa fans haven’t seen much of in recent years.

The back goes in motion pre-snap and Clemson’s slot receiver is set to block while the outside receiver runs his defender out of the play. BC’s middle linebacker actually does a fantastic job reading this play, which is designed to be an easy throw for the quarterback. Still, the play gains 8 yards despite a good defensive effort.

This play is dependent on the slot receiver setting a good block and the running back getting around it and they executed both portions of the play well on this occasion.

While there are certainly some unique concepts in Elliott’s passing game, many of the concepts are similar to things Anae ran in Charlottesville.

You should expect a lot of quick hitters, and the offense designed to create mismatches. That’s especially true in the slot, where Billy Kemp and Keytaon Thompson could thrive on mismatches created pre-snap.

One of the things that stuck with me through the film review, especially in seeing the difference in play between Lawrence and Uiagalelei, was the importance of a quarterback capable of reading the defense and finding the quick read. We’ve seen Armstrong do that quite a bit throughout his career, and one of his strengths has been the ability to get the ball out quick.

This can also offset a potentially patchwork offensive line that he will be throwing behind. This is why Elliott’s success convincing Armstrong to come back this year was his biggest offseason win by far.

In our next Film Room installment, we’ll switch to the other side of the ball to take a look at John Rudzinski’s defense, which is far more a mystery heading into fall camp than the offensive scheme.