49ers 2012 Roster

[Hangman]

OFFENSE
Quarterbacks
11-Alex Smith
7-Colin Kaepernick
3-Scott Tolzien

Running backs
21-Frank Gore
32-Kendall Hunter
45-Brandon Jacobs
23-LaMichael James
49-Bruce Miller
24-Anthony Dixon

Wide receivers
15-Michael Crabtree
84-Randy Moss
82-Mario Manningham
19-Ted Ginn
10-Kyle Williams
17-A.J. Jenkins

Tight ends
85-Vernon Davis
46-Delanie Walker
83-Demarcus Dobbs
48-Garrett Celek

Offensive line
74-Joe Staley
77-Mike Iupati
59-Jonathan Goodwin
75-Alex Boone
76-Anthony Davis
68-Leonard Davis
67-Daniel Kilgore
66-Joe Looney

Defensive line
91-Ray McDonald
90-Isaac Sopoaga
94-Justin Smith
95-Ricky Jean Francois
92-Will Tukuafu
93-Ian Williams
71-Matthew Masifilo

Outside linebackers
99-Aldon Smith
55-Ahmad Brooks
98-Parys Haralson

Inside linebackers
52-Patrick Willis
53-NaVorro Bowman
54-Larry Grant
56-Tavares Gooden

Cornerbacks
22-Carlos Rogers
25-Tarell Brown
29-Chris Culliver
20-Perrish Cox
26-Tramaine Brock

Safeties
38-Dashon Goldson
31-Donte Whitner
27-C.J. Spillman
30-Trenton Robinson
32-Darcel McBath

Specialists
2-David Akers
4-Andy Lee
86-Brian Jennings

 

[clyde_carbon]

No need for Dixon on this team. Replace him with an OLB. We're too shallow with just 3.

 

[mem49er]

No need for Dixon on this team. Replace him with an OLB. We're too shallow with just 3.

This. Same with Celek, tbh.


Why does Dobbs have 83 as his number?

 

[EaseUrStorm]

I think there's 54 on that list. My guess is Masifilo didn't make it.

 

[mem49er]

I think there's 54 on that list. My guess is Masifilo didn't make it.

Wasn't he already cut?

 

[EaseUrStorm]

I double checked and Barrows showed he's cut.

 

[I_am_1z]

Please cut Brock and sign Phillip Adams... if he makes it to us on waivers

 

[EaseUrStorm]

The strategy might be to keep Celek around until Dobbs comes back. So McBath or Dixon are probably the ones on the chopping block for an OLB. My gut tells my McBath could be the victim.

edit: Ian Williams is another possibility.

 

[imac_21]

The strategy might be to keep Celek around until Dobbs comes back. So McBath or Dixon are probably the ones on the chopping block for an OLB. My gut tells my McBath could be the victim.

edit: Ian Williams is another possibility.

This, although I believe against Denver Dobbs was standing up a bit. I remember something about him playing Aldon's position.

 

[mem49er]

This, although I believe against Denver Dobbs was standing up a bit. I remember something about him playing Aldon's position.

I think on passing downs only.

 

[imac_21]

I think on passing downs only.

I wondered about that. I wasn't watching closely enough to really notice though.

The biggest issue I have is the OL. With Boone now a guard, we only kept two OT.

 

[Bemular]

Dixon is a complete head scratcher - For 12 of our 18 games last year we activated 3 RB's and only 1 FB. And for only 4 of the 18 did we active and play all 5. So who on that list of 6 sits inactive on Sunday's so Dixon can play on ST's???

 

[imac_21]

Dixon is a complete head scratcher - For 12 of our 18 games last year we activated 3 RB's and only 1 FB. And for only 4 of the 18 did we active and play all 5. So who on that list of 6 sits inactive on Sunday's so Dixon can play on ST's???

How many safeties did we activate last year? I expect the inactives to come from different positions that won't contribute on ST.

For example, last year we had 5 ILB active including Costanzo, but it will just be 4 this year. Dixon may fill that role.

At safety we had Godlson, Whitner, Smith, Spillman and later in the season Jones as a ST guy.

I think another way of looking at the roster is that there are X number of active spots available to ST and one of those is designated for Dixon rather than a RB spot.

 

[mem49er]

I wondered about that. I wasn't watching closely enough to really notice though.

The biggest issue I have is the OL. With Boone now a guard, we only kept two OT.

I think I've heard that Boone would move to tackle if needed and someone else would play RG.

 

[imac_21]

I think I've heard that Boone would move to tackle if needed and someone else would play RG.

That's my assumption. I just don't like it at all. If Staley gets injured, that hurts two positions instead of just 1.

 

[mem49er]

That's my assumption. I just don't like it at all. If Staley gets injured, that hurts two positions instead of just 1.

I can see that view but I think it's also a "get the best 5 out there" situation. I'm more hoping that Looney can push Boone and take that RG spot from him later this year but that doesn't seem likely given his limited practice time.

 

[imac_21]

I can see that view but I think it's also a "get the best 5 out there" situation. I'm more hoping that Looney can push Boone and take that RG spot from him later this year but that doesn't seem likely given his limited practice time.

With the OL I think it's important to differentiate between the best 5 players and the best 5 man unit. Playing two backups on, in my mind, can't be better than playing 1 backup.

I would also be hesitant about Boone at OT when he's spent all his time at practice working at OG.

 

[mem49er]

With the OL I think it's important to differentiate between the best 5 players and the best 5 man unit. Playing two backups on, in my mind, can't be better than playing 1 backup.

I would also be hesitant about Boone at OT when he's spent all his time at practice working at OG.

I def understand this and not saying I totally agree with the approach. I think it's a bit of a gamble by the staff, like going with 3 OLB's last year (and sadly this year).

 

[Bemular]

How many safeties did we activate last year? I expect the inactives to come from different positions that won't contribute on ST.

For example, last year we had 5 ILB active including Costanzo, but it will just be 4 this year. Dixon may fill that role.

At safety we had Godlson, Whitner, Smith, Spillman and later in the season Jones as a ST guy.

I think another way of looking at the roster is that there are X number of active spots available to ST and one of those is designated for Dixon rather than a RB spot.

I hear what you're saying but my point goes beyond just the RB/FB's - Once you consider the WR's as well, it becomes risky on the defensive side of the ball and not just for actives.

 

[imac_21]

I def understand this and not saying I totally agree with the approach. I think it's a bit of a gamble by the staff, like going with 3 OLB's last year (and sadly this year).

It is a gamble. I was just reading Sando's comments and he mentioned we're probably watching the waiver wire for quality OTs.