Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 678
Results 106 to 119 of 119
  1. #106
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Tucson, Arizona
    Posts
    30,552
    Look dude Iím not saying we have elite players on defense and I understand the defense needs some work but you canít allow a team to run for 300 yards on you. I mean the 49ers literally said hey we are going to run it until you stop it and guess what? We didnít stop jack ****. Thereís no reason why Mike couldnít at least try something different and force the 49ers to throw it.

  2. #107
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    11,784
    But there is a reason and that reason is the players sucked and got dominated. When the DL gets blown off the ball and cant win a 1 on 1, there's no need to double team them. When there's no need to double team them, OL, TE and the FB get to the 2nd and even 3rd level. When your LBs can't win a 1 on 1 at the 2nd level you're relying on your safeties to make play. Our safeties didn't do that.

    Plus, when they ran to the outside, they let Martinez run free knowing full well with the push they got at the DL and OLB spots there was no way the backside ilb, whether it was Martinez or Goodson, was fast enough catch the RB. So they didn't even have to account for that spot, which frees up another blocker. And when they ran more inline, they blocked it so it would be mosteart vs a safety since everyone else got dominated on their block. And not only was it RB vs S, it's that guys got blown off the ball so badly that the holes were enormous so it was an open field play we asked out safeties to make. Not even a close quarters tackle.

    How do you fix that? What adjustment do you make? Do you slant the line and blitz, which is a complete guess of where the run is going to go? Maybe, but that probably doesn't work and it opens up even more monster plays on the end around they ran. That also allows the OL to wash the slanting DL down and the rb can cut inside where the slanting guy vacated and it opens up massive cutback lanes if someone doesn't get to their slant lane. Which judging by how much they dominated us, there's a good chance multiple guys don't get to their slant lane. Do you go with more down lineman and linebackers? That doesn't work because like I said, they know the backside isn't fast enough so they'll just leave those backside backers unblocked.

    I'm not saying pettine called a perfect game, had a perfect plan or is a perfect coach. But the whole make adjustments or do something different crowd that doesn't suggest any actual adjustments or doesn't acknowledge how badly everyone got dominated is just foolish. We played more plays with 3 down lineman and 4 lbs than any other game. We adjusted and had a gsme plan specifically for this.

    It's not like it was one weakness they exploited. It's not like they ran to the same side or the same spot every play. They were successful running at whoever they wanted, inside or outside, left or right, strong side or weak side. When it's one thing, you can switch sides of the field, slant that direction, blitz that direction, pull players. When it's every facet of the run, you're left guessing at best.

  3. #108
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Schofield, WI
    Posts
    2,858
    Quote Originally Posted by crewfan13 View Post
    But there is a reason and that reason is the players sucked and got dominated. When the DL gets blown off the ball and cant win a 1 on 1, there's no need to double team them. When there's no need to double team them, OL, TE and the FB get to the 2nd and even 3rd level. When your LBs can't win a 1 on 1 at the 2nd level you're relying on your safeties to make play. Our safeties didn't do that.

    Plus, when they ran to the outside, they let Martinez run free knowing full well with the push they got at the DL and OLB spots there was no way the backside ilb, whether it was Martinez or Goodson, was fast enough catch the RB. So they didn't even have to account for that spot, which frees up another blocker. And when they ran more inline, they blocked it so it would be mosteart vs a safety since everyone else got dominated on their block. And not only was it RB vs S, it's that guys got blown off the ball so badly that the holes were enormous so it was an open field play we asked out safeties to make. Not even a close quarters tackle.

    How do you fix that? What adjustment do you make? Do you slant the line and blitz, which is a complete guess of where the run is going to go? Maybe, but that probably doesn't work and it opens up even more monster plays on the end around they ran. That also allows the OL to wash the slanting DL down and the rb can cut inside where the slanting guy vacated and it opens up massive cutback lanes if someone doesn't get to their slant lane. Which judging by how much they dominated us, there's a good chance multiple guys don't get to their slant lane. Do you go with more down lineman and linebackers? That doesn't work because like I said, they know the backside isn't fast enough so they'll just leave those backside backers unblocked.

    I'm not saying pettine called a perfect game, had a perfect plan or is a perfect coach. But the whole make adjustments or do something different crowd that doesn't suggest any actual adjustments or doesn't acknowledge how badly everyone got dominated is just foolish. We played more plays with 3 down lineman and 4 lbs than any other game. We adjusted and had a gsme plan specifically for this.

    It's not like it was one weakness they exploited. It's not like they ran to the same side or the same spot every play. They were successful running at whoever they wanted, inside or outside, left or right, strong side or weak side. When it's one thing, you can switch sides of the field, slant that direction, blitz that direction, pull players. When it's every facet of the run, you're left guessing at best.
    Not sure it would have made a difference, but Pettine should have went to Keke/Adams at DE earlier. Lowry is jag and Lancaster sucks. Were getting blown off the ball. Not sure Keke/Adams would have forced Kittle to double them but they couldn't do worse. SF scouted well and knew off tackle was the way to go. Not only were ILBs too slow, but DE getting rolled coupled with ZaDarius going KGB/Clay with his outside rush created massive holes.

  4. #109
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Posts
    663
    I had a heated argument with a friend about this. Even gave him the facts about lining up in a 3-4 so much and he refuses to get it. His response is we shouldve tried a 4-3 because thats how you stop the run. I was like wtf... We havent played a 4-3 in like 12 years. Were a 3-4 defense, with 3-4 personnel. You cant run a 4-3 with a 3-4 roster. The whole problem is our DL guys suck. Putting more ****** DL on the field does nothing.

    This is the simplest example ive ever seen of a defense just being physically overwhelmed. Some people just refuse to see it and blame the coach. I literally have no idea what anyone expected Pettine to do, short of suiting ip and playing and i think we all know thats not the answer.

  5. #110
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    11,784
    Quote Originally Posted by gopackgo87 View Post
    Not sure it would have made a difference, but Pettine should have went to Keke/Adams at DE earlier. Lowry is jag and Lancaster sucks. Were getting blown off the ball. Not sure Keke/Adams would have forced Kittle to double them but they couldn't do worse. SF scouted well and knew off tackle was the way to go. Not only were ILBs too slow, but DE getting rolled coupled with ZaDarius going KGB/Clay with his outside rush created massive holes.
    There's a run that's getting posted on Twitter as a great design and a great example of the 49ers dominance. It's from the right hash (from the defenses back) and runs off the left hash. It gains a bunch of yards and jaire has to make a tackle from behind to prevent a TD. But, while it happened to everyone, it was the first play Clark sat out and Adams came in at DE and the run goes right at him. He's blown like 5+ yards off the ball. So I doubt he's an upgrade at all.

  6. #111
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    11,784
    Quote Originally Posted by bigfishguy85 View Post
    I had a heated argument with a friend about this. Even gave him the facts about lining up in a 3-4 so much and he refuses to get it. His response is we shouldve tried a 4-3 because thats how you stop the run. I was like wtf... We havent played a 4-3 in like 12 years. Were a 3-4 defense, with 3-4 personnel. You cant run a 4-3 with a 3-4 roster. The whole problem is our DL guys suck. Putting more ****** DL on the field does nothing.

    This is the simplest example ive ever seen of a defense just being physically overwhelmed. Some people just refuse to see it and blame the coach. I literally have no idea what anyone expected Pettine to do, short of suiting ip and playing and i think we all know thats not the answer.
    Exactly. And our DL got destroyed. What makes someone think adding another DL to the mix was the secret ingredient. We didnt even have 3 passable DL this year much less 4.

    But you're exactly right. I've had some complaints with pettine this year for sure. But there was virtually nothing he could have done differently. His guys just got man handled. We were somehow both slower and weaker.

  7. #112
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    111,262
    Quote Originally Posted by crewfan13 View Post
    This forums refusal to accept that maybe players have some blame year after year is so laughable. If coaching hiring and firing decisions were made by this forum we would be the Cleveland Browns and cylce through coaches and coordinators every year.

    If you were 49ers fans you would have wanted Saleh fired last year. Now he's leading a top 5 defense in the super bowl.

    Changing coordinators and schemes every year or two is not what good teams do. Our defense was improved this year. It wasn't perfect, but neither was the personnel. It's not Mike pettines fault that his inside linebackers were Martinez and Goodson. Of that he had to play Tyler Lancaster on 60% of the snaps or Dean Lowry on 80% of the snaps. Pettines scheme didn't tell his guys to get blown off the ball every time.

    Scheme can be used to get free runners at times. But it's not at all times and no one's scheme does that. For at least 75% of the game, you need to win more one on one battles than the other team. Offense, defense, special teams, it doesn't matter.

    Schemes can get free runners. Schemes can get guys open, but that stuff only works if you're executing and winning the 1 on 1 battles on your core plays. It's that simple. Everyone wants to pretend its complex and the coaches have all the power in the world but they don't. Not saying coaching doesn't matter, but coaching and schemimg is putting guys in the best position to succeed. If they don't succeed, that doesn't make the plan bad. We got dominated man on man. Adjustments dont matter when everyone loses their battle. Someone needs to win their battle to negatively impact the offense. If that doesn't happen, you're out of luck.
    i didnt say fire anyone... not even putting all the blame on him because of course its players as well but to literally ignore it the way he did even during the game is down right disgusting

  8. #113
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Posts
    663
    Quote Originally Posted by More-Than-Most View Post
    i didnt say fire anyone... not even putting all the blame on him because of course its players as well but to literally ignore it the way he did even during the game is down right disgusting
    So youre suggesting he should have just tried something different for the sake of being different even if he had no reaaon to believe it would have worked?

  9. #114
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    11,784
    We played base 3-4 on probably twice as many snaps as any other game. Goodson played about 35% of the snaps all year. He played over 70% against San Fran. I don't remember what the exact percentages were, but a similar thing was true for Lancaster. Lowry played more snaps than usual. If jaire wouldn't have gotten hurt, tramon would have played under 40% of the snaps and possibly under 30%.

    We tried different stuff than we did all year. We had safeties in the box quite often. Not sure what else we reasonably could have done. Blitzing isn't always effective against the run because if the blitz goes to the wrong spot, it's a long td. We essentially had what should have been our best run stuffing unit on the field for the majority of the game and it didn't matter. Not sure what else could have changed outside someone actualy holding their ground.

  10. #115
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Posts
    663
    Quote Originally Posted by crewfan13 View Post
    We played base 3-4 on probably twice as many snaps as any other game. Goodson played about 35% of the snaps all year. He played over 70% against San Fran. I don't remember what the exact percentages were, but a similar thing was true for Lancaster. Lowry played more snaps than usual. If jaire wouldn't have gotten hurt, tramon would have played under 40% of the snaps and possibly under 30%.

    We tried different stuff than we did all year. We had safeties in the box quite often. Not sure what else we reasonably could have done. Blitzing isn't always effective against the run because if the blitz goes to the wrong spot, it's a long td. We essentially had what should have been our best run stuffing unit on the field for the majority of the game and it didn't matter. Not sure what else could have changed outside someone actualy holding their ground.

    Im just glad someone else sees this as clearly as I do. I usually feel like Im the crazy one.

  11. #116
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    111,262
    Quote Originally Posted by bigfishguy85 View Post
    So youre suggesting he should have just tried something different for the sake of being different even if he had no reaaon to believe it would have worked?
    yes and no reason to believe it would have worked? WHAT IT HAVE MATTERED IF IT WAS WORSE LMFAO

  12. #117
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    111,262
    Quote Originally Posted by crewfan13 View Post
    We played base 3-4 on probably twice as many snaps as any other game. Goodson played about 35% of the snaps all year. He played over 70% against San Fran. I don't remember what the exact percentages were, but a similar thing was true for Lancaster. Lowry played more snaps than usual. If jaire wouldn't have gotten hurt, tramon would have played under 40% of the snaps and possibly under 30%.

    We tried different stuff than we did all year. We had safeties in the box quite often. Not sure what else we reasonably could have done. Blitzing isn't always effective against the run because if the blitz goes to the wrong spot, it's a long td. We essentially had what should have been our best run stuffing unit on the field for the majority of the game and it didn't matter. Not sure what else could have changed outside someone actualy holding their ground.
    yes but it wasnt like we were stopping them even at all or holding them to a fg every other drive... so what if we get killed with the blitz WE WERE GETTING KILLED ANYWAY... To sit back and allow it and refuse to try something that could be dangerous was stupid because they showed run/gave no ****s and said we are running it and we still ran the same stupid **** while they went down the field with the run game in like 5 plays.


    again troy aikman said we know they are running and we arent doing anything about it and then said after that drive... we got our manhood took... and we just kept doing the same ****.

  13. #118
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    11,784
    And Troy Aikman was right. It was the players that got their manhood taken. When coordinating an offense or a defense, there's only so much you can do. When your players are getting manhandled, there's virtually nothing you can do. When you have your beat run stopping personnel in the game and are still getting crushed, your hands are basically tied.

    If he would have tried something "new" and ran a bunch of ineffective blitzes, you all would be bashing him for that. And blitzing isn't even the best way to stop the run. The problem is that every level and every side of the field got destroyed. All San Fran had to do was call away from the defense. If the ends widen to stop the outside run, run up the middle. If we shade the strong side, they ran to the weak side. If we played straight up, they could run to the strong side. All that blitzing and slanting works if you have an area where you are strong, you can blitz and slant away from that to supplement it. We didn't have that. They could run whereever they wanted and it didnt matter.

  14. #119
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    111,262
    https://www.prosportsdaily.com/artic...em-611683.html

    lets see what happens when a team comes in and says we are stopping the run period and to hell with the pass because the other teams QB hasnt proven he can actually throw in a big game against a top team.

Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 678

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •