Agents Take: Analyzing the 49ers Blueprint for Long Term Success

[Crimsoncrew]

We still could've gotten RJF, Williams, and Haggans a handful of snaps over the course of the game on early downs to give guys a breather and not over burden the guys on the front 7.

For the past two seasons our defense has faded at the end of the regular season and the lack of rotation has been a big part of that.

The Giants to me have proven that it's best to rotate guys up front and keep everyone fresher throughout the game and season.

Yeah, I don't disagree. We've got to do some more rotating this year. Our OLB depth should be quite good, and our DE depth looks promising assuming Tank and Dial can get healthy. You can't rely on our front-seven to play every snap, and there's no need to. If guys are fresher, they can make more of an impact when they are in. Though I'm not sure you could get a healthy Justin Smith and Ray McDonald off the field if you wanted to....

 

[dredinis21]

We still could've gotten RJF, Williams, and Haggans a handful of snaps over the course of the game on early downs to give guys a breather and not over burden the guys on the front 7.

For the past two seasons our defense has faded at the end of the regular season and the lack of rotation has been a big part of that.

The Giants to me have proven that it's best to rotate guys up front and keep everyone fresher throughout the game and season.

I don't disagree in theory but at the same time, you have to have the horses to pull that off. The Giants had like 6 guys that could be starters on any team on their front 4. We didn't. RJF was the closest and he got obliterated playing DE in place of Justin Smith.

 

[Crimsoncrew]

[/B]

I don't disagree in theory but at the same time, you have to have the horses to pull that off. The Giants had like 6 guys that could be starters on any team on their front 4. We didn't. RJF was the closest and he got obliterated playing DE in place of Justin Smith.

I wouldn't say he got obliterated, he just wasn't any kind of force in the passing game. It's a tall order to replace Smith. Tougher still when you are a run-plugger. We needed Dobbs and/or Tukuafu to rotate in on passing downs.

 

[dredinis21]

I wouldn't say he got obliterated, he just wasn't any kind of force in the passing game. It's a tall order to replace Smith. Tougher still when you are a run-plugger. We needed Dobbs and/or Tukuafu to rotate in on passing downs.

He was non-existent in the passing game and IIRC, he was constantly getting run at with good success. That can't 100% be attributed to him, but at the same time, he was targeted successfully as the weak point in the defense.

 

[Crimsoncrew]

He was non-existent in the passing game and IIRC, he was constantly getting run at with good success. That can't 100% be attributed to him, but at the same time, he was targeted successfully as the weak point in the defense.

That's fair re: the passing game. I didn't think we got run on too badly, though. Lynch put up a very solid 111 with a TD, but his 4.3 YPC average was the worst in what was a dominant six-game span for him. He'd put up 103 against the Niners in the prior meeting, and 107 and a TD in the last 2011 matchup. Arizona didn't do much of anything.

 

[Jikkle]

[/B]

I don't disagree in theory but at the same time, you have to have the horses to pull that off. The Giants had like 6 guys that could be starters on any team on their front 4. We didn't. RJF was the closest and he got obliterated playing DE in place of Justin Smith.

I agree that we need more depth to successfully pull off what the Giants do.

But concerning last year putting RJF for a handful of plays a game in place of Smith and McDonald on early downs wasn't going to make our defense fall apart which was the point I'm trying to make.

I don't disagree with having the starters in most of the game last season due to our circumstances but I would rather put in a Haggans or a RJF or a Williams on a couple of 1st downs or 2nd downs a game so you could allow guys to catch their breaths and ultimately be more effective.

My two main gripes with Fangio is his lack of defensive line rotation which I'll give him a slight pass last season considering injuries and his over reliance on the talent on the field and not putting a little more deception into our defense. It seems like offenses have no trouble figuring out or defense they just struggled to have the talent to overcome it.

 

[Crimsoncrew]

I agree that we need more depth to successfully pull off what the Giants do.

But concerning last year putting RJF for a handful of plays a game in place of Smith and McDonald on early downs wasn't going to make our defense fall apart which was the point I'm trying to make.

I don't disagree with having the starters in most of the game last season due to our circumstances but I would rather put in a Haggans or a RJF or a Williams on a couple of 1st downs or 2nd downs a game so you could allow guys to catch their breaths and ultimately be more effective.

My two main gripes with Fangio is his lack of defensive line rotation which I'll give him a slight pass last season considering injuries and his over reliance on the talent on the field and not putting a little more deception into our defense. It seems like offenses have no trouble figuring out or defense they just struggled to have the talent to overcome it.

This year we'd better see more of a rotation, especially at OLB where we're suddenly quite deep. I'd like to see Haralson in on early downs pretty regularly, and Lemonier coming in on obvious passing downs from time to time, probably in place of Brooks. DE is still a bit tough as Williams is a complete unknown - though the extension seems to indicate they have some faith in him? - Carradine and Dial are hurt, and our other backups are still UDFA types. Hopefully the draft picks get healthy. By the end of the year, I 'd like to see Carradine getting some legit time at DE, particularly on passing downs.

 

[Crimsoncrew]

This year we'd better see more of a rotation, especially at OLB where we're suddenly quite deep. I'd like to see Haralson in on early downs pretty regularly, and Lemonier coming in on obvious passing downs from time to time, probably in place of Brooks. DE is still a bit tough as Williams is a complete unknown - though the extension seems to indicate they have some faith in him? - Carradine and Dial are hurt, and our other backups are still UDFA types. Hopefully the draft picks get healthy. By the end of the year, I 'd like to see Carradine getting some legit time at DE, particularly on passing downs.

Meant to say DL is a bit tough, not just DE. Though the starting NT comes off so regularly there's not a huge need to rotate at that spot.

 

[Jikkle]

This year we'd better see more of a rotation, especially at OLB where we're suddenly quite deep. I'd like to see Haralson in on early downs pretty regularly, and Lemonier coming in on obvious passing downs from time to time, probably in place of Brooks. DE is still a bit tough as Williams is a complete unknown - though the extension seems to indicate they have some faith in him? - Carradine and Dial are hurt, and our other backups are still UDFA types. Hopefully the draft picks get healthy. By the end of the year, I 'd like to see Carradine getting some legit time at DE, particularly on passing downs.

I agree that we better and are likely to see better rotation this season or Fangio's seat might start to warm a little. I mean when you have your GM using the word "philosophical" reasons for the team using a light rotation on the line that to me is a slight jab at Fangio.

Because even to layman eyes like ours it's pretty obvious when your defense fades at the end of the regular season two seasons in a row they can't handle that massive workload over the course of the season. If we didn't earn the bye week in the playoffs those past two years I have serious doubt we would've made it as far as we did in 11 and 12.

 

[bigninerfan56]

I agree that we better and are likely to see better rotation this season or Fangio's seat might start to warm a little. I mean when you have your GM using the word "philosophical" reasons for the team using a light rotation on the line that to me is a slight jab at Fangio.

Because even to layman eyes like ours it's pretty obvious when your defense fades at the end of the regular season two seasons in a row they can't handle that massive workload over the course of the season. If we didn't earn the bye week in the playoffs those past two years I have serious doubt we would've made it as far as we did in 11 and 12.

I don't necessarily think it's only a Fangio philosophy, I think Harbaugh plays a part in that as well. I remember hearing a post game speech from Harbaugh where he stated something to the effect of, "remember guys, it's a sprint not a marathon". That's something I haven't heard from an NFL coach before, but it's right in line from what we've seen from our D.

It's hard to argue with it's success considering how much having a first round bye and home field advantage has helped us in the playoffs. I still want to see more of a rotation this year though.

 

[dredinis21]

I think that our defense and its play calling is much in line with what we do on offense. Roman and Harbaugh only show play calling that is necessary to win that particular game. Last year they made a point to avoid read options and then unleashed the fury vs the Pack. Fangio frustrates me in much the same manner, but it always seems to even out when they have play calling and scheme development much like the Pats game last year. I would like to see Fangio dial up a few more blitzes from Bowman and/or Willis but ultimately, I don't have too much gripe with how Fangio does things. If after the draft we just had with Tank, Lemonier, Dial, etc. and the continued development of guys like Ian Williams, Dobbs, etc., if we still don't sub more frequently, then YES, Fangio AND Harbaugh need to check how they are executing sub patterns and how it negatively affects our defense.

 

[deep9er]

I think that our defense and its play calling is much in line with what we do on offense. Roman and Harbaugh only show play calling that is necessary to win that particular game. Last year they made a point to avoid read options and then unleashed the fury vs the Pack. Fangio frustrates me in much the same manner, but it always seems to even out when they have play calling and scheme development much like the Pats game last year. I would like to see Fangio dial up a few more blitzes from Bowman and/or Willis but ultimately, I don't have too much gripe with how Fangio does things. If after the draft we just had with Tank, Lemonier, Dial, etc. and the continued development of guys like Ian Williams, Dobbs, etc., if we still don't sub more frequently, then YES, Fangio AND Harbaugh need to check how they are executing sub patterns and how it negatively affects our defense.

yes, and its called 'game planning'. when you game plan for that week, you attack their weakness and eliminate plays against their strength.

 

[dredinis21]

yes, and its called 'game planning'. when you game plan for that week, you attack their weakness and eliminate plays against their strength.

It's beyond game planning because they have shown a penchant for planning for not only the game at hand, but also for the games ahead by avoiding plays/formations they may want to use against other upcoming opponents.

 

[yossarian]

It's beyond game planning because they have shown a penchant for planning for not only the game at hand, but also for the games ahead by avoiding plays/formations they may want to use against other upcoming opponents.

You know, I read something like that in an interview with Roman, maybe it was from Mike Silver, where he talked about that a little bit and hinted it was part of what was going on in the Seattle blowout. As far as that game goes I don't buy it, losing that game made it a very tight division race which we won by only half a game. I find it really hard to believe they would potentially jeopardize their playoff position by keeping it close to the vest.

 

[deep9er]

You know, I read something like that in an interview with Roman, maybe it was from Mike Silver, where he talked about that a little bit and hinted it was part of what was going on in the Seattle blowout. As far as that game goes I don't buy it, losing that game made it a very tight division race which we won by only half a game. I find it really hard to believe they would potentially jeopardize their playoff position by keeping it close to the vest.

i agree, they should use plays to win the game at hand. even if they go outside the 'game plan', if game adjustments call for 'new' plays, use it. don't save it for the next game because you don't want it scouted.

would be nice to keep it under wraps, but if it wins you the game at hand, that is the first priority. if an opponent saw your play, doesn't mean they can stop it. it also gives them more to think about each play, makes them hesitate that split second.