There are 64 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Tully Banta-Cain

Originally posted by NCommand:
Originally posted by OKC49erFan:
Originally posted by socal81:
This guy was terrible when he was on our squad. I was watching the games this weekend and I see this player come up with a pick and it's TBC. Then I hear the announcer say that he led the team in sacks this season. Sure enought I checked and he has 10 SACKS!!! Did we give up on him too early or was it that we didn't know how to use him?

I think the bolded. Although, I would have been curious to see how Manusky would have used him without Nolan.

I have been saying this for YEARS now. Manusky's scheme is the most vanilla 3-4 in the game. B/c of continuity in the system, we played solid this year but he does NOT have the exotic attacking schemes most DC's have in this league. TBC is a perfect example of how it may not matter who is playing the WILL or SAM, we just don't use them right. Even if Brooks takes over at the SAM, I don't know if he'll be much more successful then Haralson b/c the scheme is predictable and lacks unpredictability that most 3-4 defenses bring!

  • CalgaryNiner
  • Info N/A
Originally posted by lamontb:
Originally posted by NCommand:
Originally posted by 9erred:
Originally posted by socal81:
This guy was terrible when he was on our squad. I was watching the games this weekend and I see this player come up with a pick and it's TBC. Then I hear the announcer say that he led the team in sacks this season. Sure enought I checked and he has 10 SACKS!!! Did we give up on him too early or was it that we didn't know how to use him?

This scenario has played out time and time again,

Smiley is a pro bowler in Miami
Harvey Dahl played back up OT and starting Guard in Atlanta, got cut by the niners
Kyle Kosier, solid guard for Dallas
Tully Banta Cain got more sacks in NE than any niner this year.
The DT who is starting NT for the broncos now and looking good

Now when Jason Hill WR leaves, he will be a solid PR/KR number 3 WR for another team.

It was mostly Nolan and Company, but this team wastes talent, it is coaching.

I agree. And TBC was great with NE BEFORE he came here, sucked here, went back to NE and is GREAT again. That is coaching and scheme...mostly scheme.

I think TBC was pretty average before he came to the Niners. The guy had 8 sacks in 4 years with the pats, and 4 sacks in 2 years with the Niners. That's 12 sacks in 6 seasons. this year he had 10. i think it's just one of those things where he just beasted out for this year. I wouldn't expect to see him continue to put up those numbers. But maybe he just developed, or needed more playing time. Plus let's not forget Franklin wasn't playing this well when TBC was on the field for the Niners.

I agree with this - he was a backup in NE before he came here. To call him "great" before he came here is a pretty gratuitous use of the word.
  • kem99
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 572
Originally posted by 9erred:
Originally posted by socal81:
This guy was terrible when he was on our squad. I was watching the games this weekend and I see this player come up with a pick and it's TBC. Then I hear the announcer say that he led the team in sacks this season. Sure enought I checked and he has 10 SACKS!!! Did we give up on him too early or was it that we didn't know how to use him?

This scenario has played out time and time again,

Smiley is a pro bowler in Miami
Harvey Dahl played back up OT and starting Guard in Atlanta, got cut by the niners
Kyle Kosier, solid guard for Dallas
Tully Banta Cain got more sacks in NE than any niner this year.
The DT who is starting NT for the broncos now and looking good

Now when Jason Hill WR leaves, he will be a solid PR/KR number 3 WR for another team.

It was mostly Nolan and Company, but this team wastes talent, it is coaching.

Lets be fair....

Smiley was allowed to leave because of a cap considerations and Miami was willing to overpay. I don't recall too many people arguing to keep Smiley at the number he ended up getting from Miami.

Dahl's biggest claim to fame at this point is that he is considered one of the league's dirtier players and Atlanta's OL struggled at times this year as well and finished 15th in the league in rushing.

Kosier I'll give you.

TBC...it could be coaching/scheme but it also could be TBC latched on to the Pats as a FA, created a role for himself, got a big contract here in SF, got a bit lazy/fat, got let go and re-motivated in landing with the Pats again. I don't know what his contract is but I suspect it is nowhere near what he got in SF.

Fields...He played okay in Denver, he played okay here. The Denver defense (and offense) faltered as the season went along. Denver was very good against the pass but 26th against the run (49ers were 6th). Fields had 37 tackles, 0 sacks and 1 tackle for loss (that's right, 1). While numbers aren't everything when talking about interior linemen, those numbers suggest the 49ers did not lose anything by letting him go.

At the same time...the 49ers signed and developed Brooks into a young impact pass rusher; Franklin has developed from a reserve into one of the better NT's; Spencer went from a nickel CB to their most reliable CB; Goldson came on strong in his first year starting.

Not saying the 49ers have not made mistakes, they have...just like every team does. Let's just be fair in the criticism.
Originally posted by NCommand:
Originally posted by OKC49erFan:
Originally posted by socal81:
This guy was terrible when he was on our squad. I was watching the games this weekend and I see this player come up with a pick and it's TBC. Then I hear the announcer say that he led the team in sacks this season. Sure enought I checked and he has 10 SACKS!!! Did we give up on him too early or was it that we didn't know how to use him?

I think the bolded. Although, I would have been curious to see how Manusky would have used him without Nolan.

I have been saying this for YEARS now. Manusky's scheme is the most vanilla 3-4 in the game. B/c of continuity in the system, we played solid this year but he does NOT have the exotic attacking schemes most DC's have in this league. TBC is a perfect example of how it may not matter who is playing the WILL or SAM, we just don't use them right. Even if Brooks takes over at the SAM, I don't know if he'll be much more successful then Haralson b/c the scheme is predictable and lacks unpredictability that most 3-4 defenses bring!

Brooks played great in limited time. The scheme is good.
  • CalgaryNiner
  • Info N/A
Originally posted by NCommand:
Originally posted by OKC49erFan:
Originally posted by socal81:
This guy was terrible when he was on our squad. I was watching the games this weekend and I see this player come up with a pick and it's TBC. Then I hear the announcer say that he led the team in sacks this season. Sure enought I checked and he has 10 SACKS!!! Did we give up on him too early or was it that we didn't know how to use him?

I think the bolded. Although, I would have been curious to see how Manusky would have used him without Nolan.

I have been saying this for YEARS now. Manusky's scheme is the most vanilla 3-4 in the game. B/c of continuity in the system, we played solid this year but he does NOT have the exotic attacking schemes most DC's have in this league. TBC is a perfect example of how it may not matter who is playing the WILL or SAM, we just don't use them right. Even if Brooks takes over at the SAM, I don't know if he'll be much more successful then Haralson b/c the scheme is predictable and lacks unpredictability that most 3-4 defenses bring!

I'm sorry, but I couldn't disagree more with this. We were tied for 3rd in the league in sacks without any dominant pass rushers. If that doesn't scream generating pressure with scheme, I don't know what does.

Also, you don't confuse and frustrate Peyton Manning while running a "vanilla" scheme the way we frustrated him. I thought the gameplan Manusky came up with for that game was anything but vanilla.

If NE is so good at scheming and developing pass rushers that we are apparently "unable" to, why did we finish the season with 44 sacks to NE's 31?

[ Edited by CalgaryNiner on Jan 13, 2010 at 10:31:53 ]
  • kem99
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 572
Originally posted by NCommand:
Originally posted by OKC49erFan:
Originally posted by socal81:
This guy was terrible when he was on our squad. I was watching the games this weekend and I see this player come up with a pick and it's TBC. Then I hear the announcer say that he led the team in sacks this season. Sure enought I checked and he has 10 SACKS!!! Did we give up on him too early or was it that we didn't know how to use him?

I think the bolded. Although, I would have been curious to see how Manusky would have used him without Nolan.

I have been saying this for YEARS now. Manusky's scheme is the most vanilla 3-4 in the game. B/c of continuity in the system, we played solid this year but he does NOT have the exotic attacking schemes most DC's have in this league. TBC is a perfect example of how it may not matter who is playing the WILL or SAM, we just don't use them right. Even if Brooks takes over at the SAM, I don't know if he'll be much more successful then Haralson b/c the scheme is predictable and lacks unpredictability that most 3-4 defenses bring!

Years? Really? Lets see...This was Manusky's 3rd year as DC but the first year and a half, he was running Nolan's defense, not his. When Nolan was let go in the middle of 2008, the defense suddenly rose from the mid-20's to finish 13th in total defense. This year the defense finished was 4th in points allowed, 6th in rush defense, tied for 3rd in sacks and were 5th in takeaways. All while spending much of the season not getting a lot of support from the offense. Also, under his watch, Franklin has gone from a back-up to being talked about among the best NTs in the league. Spencer has become a very solid starting CB. Brooks went from being but by the Bengals as an ILB to an impact pass rusher as an OLB.

Can the defense be better? No question. The secondary can certainly be better. The pass rush can be more consistent. They need to get off the field on 3rd down. But, overall, the defense was pretty good. Manusky must be doing something right in terms of scheme and using players given that many of the 49ers rankings were higher than a lot of the teams with the "exotic attacking schemes."
anyone came close to 10 sacks since we lett 96 go ? !!
Originally posted by Stevec9932:
Tubby played hard cuz that team was going to the playoffs

Thank you... Alot of the time it has to do with the players mentality and will. Tully had more then enough time to show his stuff in SF. The guy is a winner when he is on a winning team, what we need are players who play hard no matter what... aka, Willis, Smith, Franklen and a few others.
Originally posted by CalgaryNiner:
Originally posted by NCommand:
Originally posted by OKC49erFan:
Originally posted by socal81:
This guy was terrible when he was on our squad. I was watching the games this weekend and I see this player come up with a pick and it's TBC. Then I hear the announcer say that he led the team in sacks this season. Sure enought I checked and he has 10 SACKS!!! Did we give up on him too early or was it that we didn't know how to use him?

I think the bolded. Although, I would have been curious to see how Manusky would have used him without Nolan.

I have been saying this for YEARS now. Manusky's scheme is the most vanilla 3-4 in the game. B/c of continuity in the system, we played solid this year but he does NOT have the exotic attacking schemes most DC's have in this league. TBC is a perfect example of how it may not matter who is playing the WILL or SAM, we just don't use them right. Even if Brooks takes over at the SAM, I don't know if he'll be much more successful then Haralson b/c the scheme is predictable and lacks unpredictability that most 3-4 defenses bring!

I'm sorry, but I couldn't disagree more with this. We were tied for 3rd in the league in sacks without any dominant pass rushers. If that doesn't scream generating pressure with scheme, I don't know what does.

Also, you don't confuse and frustrate Peyton Manning while running a "vanilla" scheme the way we frustrated him. I thought the gameplan Manusky came up with for that game was anything but vanilla.

If NE is so good at scheming and developing pass rushers that we are apparently "unable" to, why did we finish the season with 44 sacks to NE's 31?

Thank YOU! How can anyone criticize a Defense that forced, what, 29 turnovers??? Tying us for 3rd most in the league!!! 3rd Most SACKS in the league with 44!!! The #4 scoring defense, meaning they allowed the 4th fewest points....IN THE ENTIRE LEAGUE!!! Yet Manusky runs a "vanilla" defense??? Wow, some people need to actually watch the games....Niners D was, at times, DOMINATING!!! Watch how they confused Peyton Manning....yes, Peyton manning!!!! Whatever Manusky is doing, however "VANILLA" it may or may not be, he did a great job, and don't be surprised if teams come calling his name in the near future....hopefully we can keep him around for a while!

NINERS4LIFE!!!
We have had bad coaches & very questionable GM decisions over the last several years. There have been a lot of players they didn't use effectively, and many personnel choices made that were not a good fit for whatever schemes they were trying to do.
  • Chico
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 2,129
Tubby did have that fluke of a play against AZ in overtime when he recovered that fumble and won the game.

However, that was a LOT of luck because i think Tubby was probably so fat and lazy and he just fell asleep and happen to fall on the ball at the right time.
Originally posted by kem99:
Originally posted by 9erred:
Originally posted by socal81:
This guy was terrible when he was on our squad. I was watching the games this weekend and I see this player come up with a pick and it's TBC. Then I hear the announcer say that he led the team in sacks this season. Sure enought I checked and he has 10 SACKS!!! Did we give up on him too early or was it that we didn't know how to use him?

This scenario has played out time and time again,

Smiley is a pro bowler in Miami
Harvey Dahl played back up OT and starting Guard in Atlanta, got cut by the niners
Kyle Kosier, solid guard for Dallas
Tully Banta Cain got more sacks in NE than any niner this year.
The DT who is starting NT for the broncos now and looking good

Now when Jason Hill WR leaves, he will be a solid PR/KR number 3 WR for another team.

It was mostly Nolan and Company, but this team wastes talent, it is coaching.

Lets be fair....

Smiley was allowed to leave because of a cap considerations and Miami was willing to overpay. I don't recall too many people arguing to keep Smiley at the number he ended up getting from Miami.

Dahl's biggest claim to fame at this point is that he is considered one of the league's dirtier players and Atlanta's OL struggled at times this year as well and finished 15th in the league in rushing.

Kosier I'll give you.

TBC...it could be coaching/scheme but it also could be TBC latched on to the Pats as a FA, created a role for himself, got a big contract here in SF, got a bit lazy/fat, got let go and re-motivated in landing with the Pats again. I don't know what his contract is but I suspect it is nowhere near what he got in SF.

Fields...He played okay in Denver, he played okay here. The Denver defense (and offense) faltered as the season went along. Denver was very good against the pass but 26th against the run (49ers were 6th). Fields had 37 tackles, 0 sacks and 1 tackle for loss (that's right, 1). While numbers aren't everything when talking about interior linemen, those numbers suggest the 49ers did not lose anything by letting him go.

At the same time...the 49ers signed and developed Brooks into a young impact pass rusher; Franklin has developed from a reserve into one of the better NT's; Spencer went from a nickel CB to their most reliable CB; Goldson came on strong in his first year starting.
Not saying the 49ers have not made mistakes, they have...just like every team does. Let's just be fair in the criticism.

I like your points here. Remember, every point you hit on was this year during Singletary's regime and not Nolan. Man, Nolan really sucked and set this franchise back a couple of years looking back at it.

By the way, the 10 sacks that TBC had this year, he only had 10 starts
Originally posted by zaro49er:
Originally posted by CalgaryNiner:
Originally posted by NCommand:
Originally posted by OKC49erFan:
Originally posted by socal81:
This guy was terrible when he was on our squad. I was watching the games this weekend and I see this player come up with a pick and it's TBC. Then I hear the announcer say that he led the team in sacks this season. Sure enought I checked and he has 10 SACKS!!! Did we give up on him too early or was it that we didn't know how to use him?

I think the bolded. Although, I would have been curious to see how Manusky would have used him without Nolan.

I have been saying this for YEARS now. Manusky's scheme is the most vanilla 3-4 in the game. B/c of continuity in the system, we played solid this year but he does NOT have the exotic attacking schemes most DC's have in this league. TBC is a perfect example of how it may not matter who is playing the WILL or SAM, we just don't use them right. Even if Brooks takes over at the SAM, I don't know if he'll be much more successful then Haralson b/c the scheme is predictable and lacks unpredictability that most 3-4 defenses bring!

I'm sorry, but I couldn't disagree more with this. We were tied for 3rd in the league in sacks without any dominant pass rushers. If that doesn't scream generating pressure with scheme, I don't know what does.

Also, you don't confuse and frustrate Peyton Manning while running a "vanilla" scheme the way we frustrated him. I thought the gameplan Manusky came up with for that game was anything but vanilla.

If NE is so good at scheming and developing pass rushers that we are apparently "unable" to, why did we finish the season with 44 sacks to NE's 31?

Thank YOU! How can anyone criticize a Defense that forced, what, 29 turnovers??? Tying us for 3rd most in the league!!! 3rd Most SACKS in the league with 44!!! The #4 scoring defense, meaning they allowed the 4th fewest points....IN THE ENTIRE LEAGUE!!! Yet Manusky runs a "vanilla" defense??? Wow, some people need to actually watch the games....Niners D was, at times, DOMINATING!!! Watch how they confused Peyton Manning....yes, Peyton manning!!!! Whatever Manusky is doing, however "VANILLA" it may or may not be, he did a great job, and don't be surprised if teams come calling his name in the near future....hopefully we can keep him around for a while!

NINERS4LIFE!!!

Yes, the three years he has been here and before that even in running a 3-4 esp. when compared to other successful 3-4 defenses in the league during that time.

TBC had 5.5 sacks in JUST 5 starts for the Pats before coming to SF. In SF he had only 4 total sacks. He goes back to NE and gets 10. That is not a motivation or individual issues d/t him being overweight. His heaviest weight was 280 (start of training camp). Merriman played at 272 pounds and other successful OLB's also play in this heavier weight category.

The "scheme" issue I'm talking about it about putting your WILL & SAM (especially) and MIKE & TED's in the best position to generate pressure. That is where Manusky fails no matter who's in these positions. Willis & Spikes have been underutilized in this aspect and Haralson & Lawson/Brooks are used as pseudo DE's in on each down and rarely switch sides, stand up, move behind the LOS looking for a gap to attack, drop back, etc.

OUR team sacks came mostly from the d-line and safety and CB blitzes. Only this year did Manusky start to use more of Willis & Spikes. The bottom line is, we have always relied on coverage sacks to generate pressure with individual efforts of the d-line and sneak-attacks with CB blitzes. The majority of our sacks SHOULD be coming from all four LB's, particularly the WILL & SAM positions where our team leader in sacks is ONLY 6.5 sacks. That, my friends, is scheme.

And against good teams, we were dominated in "team" sacks, often times not even sniffing the QB - we made some average QB's, WR's & TE's look like all-stars. But in other games we'd get 8 sacks. Overall, it looks good esp. when you factor in turnovers this year but it still does not dismiss the fact that Manusky needs to go back to his San Diego roots and learn a more exotic blitz scheme. I agree he'll still be one-dimensional with Lawson at the SAM (meaning the sacks will have to come from Brooks & Haralson) but that doesn't dismiss the fact that offenses are easily making the blocking calls at the LOS based on where we line up pre-snap.

Here is our defense:
Willis & Spikes - expect few blitzes a game and not much attention is needed to account for either
Lawson - always lines up as a psuedo LDE and can be blocked using an OT, TE or RB rather easily; just push him out wide in pass rush but beware against him in the run game
Haralson - there's film on him now and always lines up as a pseudo RDE. Can be blocked rather easy; no need to use an extra man.
Brooks - only comes in on obvious pass rushing downs (3rd downs or down and distance); hard to account for with little game film and he lines up at both SAM & WILL

Done.
Originally posted by NCommand:
Originally posted by zaro49er:
Originally posted by CalgaryNiner:
Originally posted by NCommand:
Originally posted by OKC49erFan:
Originally posted by socal81:
This guy was terrible when he was on our squad. I was watching the games this weekend and I see this player come up with a pick and it's TBC. Then I hear the announcer say that he led the team in sacks this season. Sure enought I checked and he has 10 SACKS!!! Did we give up on him too early or was it that we didn't know how to use him?

I think the bolded. Although, I would have been curious to see how Manusky would have used him without Nolan.

I have been saying this for YEARS now. Manusky's scheme is the most vanilla 3-4 in the game. B/c of continuity in the system, we played solid this year but he does NOT have the exotic attacking schemes most DC's have in this league. TBC is a perfect example of how it may not matter who is playing the WILL or SAM, we just don't use them right. Even if Brooks takes over at the SAM, I don't know if he'll be much more successful then Haralson b/c the scheme is predictable and lacks unpredictability that most 3-4 defenses bring!

I'm sorry, but I couldn't disagree more with this. We were tied for 3rd in the league in sacks without any dominant pass rushers. If that doesn't scream generating pressure with scheme, I don't know what does.

Also, you don't confuse and frustrate Peyton Manning while running a "vanilla" scheme the way we frustrated him. I thought the gameplan Manusky came up with for that game was anything but vanilla.

If NE is so good at scheming and developing pass rushers that we are apparently "unable" to, why did we finish the season with 44 sacks to NE's 31?

Thank YOU! How can anyone criticize a Defense that forced, what, 29 turnovers??? Tying us for 3rd most in the league!!! 3rd Most SACKS in the league with 44!!! The #4 scoring defense, meaning they allowed the 4th fewest points....IN THE ENTIRE LEAGUE!!! Yet Manusky runs a "vanilla" defense??? Wow, some people need to actually watch the games....Niners D was, at times, DOMINATING!!! Watch how they confused Peyton Manning....yes, Peyton manning!!!! Whatever Manusky is doing, however "VANILLA" it may or may not be, he did a great job, and don't be surprised if teams come calling his name in the near future....hopefully we can keep him around for a while!

NINERS4LIFE!!!

Yes, the three years he has been here and before that even in running a 3-4 esp. when compared to other successful 3-4 defenses in the league during that time.

TBC had 5.5 sacks in JUST 5 starts for the Pats before coming to SF. In SF he had only 4 total sacks. He goes back to NE and gets 10. That is not a motivation or individual issues d/t him being overweight. His heaviest weight was 280 (start of training camp). Merriman played at 272 pounds and other successful OLB's also play in this heavier weight category.

The "scheme" issue I'm talking about it about putting your WILL & SAM (especially) and MIKE & TED's in the best position to generate pressure. That is where Manusky fails no matter who's in these positions. Willis & Spikes have been underutilized in this aspect and Haralson & Lawson/Brooks are used as pseudo DE's in on each down and rarely switch sides, stand up, move behind the LOS looking for a gap to attack, drop back, etc.

OUR team sacks came mostly from the d-line and safety and CB blitzes. Only this year did Manusky start to use more of Willis & Spikes. The bottom line is, we have always relied on coverage sacks to generate pressure with individual efforts of the d-line and sneak-attacks with CB blitzes. The majority of our sacks SHOULD be coming from all four LB's, particularly the WILL & SAM positions where our team leader in sacks is ONLY 6.5 sacks. That, my friends, is scheme.

And against good teams, we were dominated in "team" sacks, often times not even sniffing the QB - we made some average QB's, WR's & TE's look like all-stars. But in other games we'd get 8 sacks. Overall, it looks good esp. when you factor in turnovers this year but it still does not dismiss the fact that Manusky needs to go back to his San Diego roots and learn a more exotic blitz scheme. I agree he'll still be one-dimensional with Lawson at the SAM (meaning the sacks will have to come from Brooks & Haralson) but that doesn't dismiss the fact that offenses are easily making the blocking calls at the LOS based on where we line up pre-snap.

Here is our defense:
Willis & Spikes - expect few blitzes a game and not much attention is needed to account for either
Lawson - always lines up as a psuedo LDE and can be blocked using an OT, TE or RB rather easily; just push him out wide in pass rush but beware against him in the run game
Haralson - there's film on him now and always lines up as a pseudo RDE. Can be blocked rather easy; no need to use an extra man.
Brooks - only comes in on obvious pass rushing downs (3rd downs or down and distance); hard to account for with little game film and he lines up at both SAM & WILL

Done.


You are 100% correct about this point.
Don't let the sacks fool you. He's still bad.