Tim Kawakami - This guy is a FOOL !!

Originally posted by Legbreaker:
You are right Pete. Our 15 play, 80-yard drive was a result of the Cardinals "stubbornly" deciding to crowd the line, take away inside running lanes, and as a result it opened up the flats, slants, curls and outs that made up the drive.

The reason why I cringe at the term "inflexibility" is that it was precisely our ability to shift scheme and Arizona's refusal to do so that led to the go ahead TD.

That definitely was a well timed adjustment on our part. However, I think it's one that we could/should have made earlier. As you pointed out, they sent the inside linebackers pretty much every time we were in a run formation. I think that play action was there all game, as was the middle of the field in those situations. I don't see much of a difference between those short passes and running plays, and it was available all game long. We could have had a 40/20 time of possession advantage with just that little adjustment, IMO. And it would have made our actual running game more effective.

Even staying within the same philosophy that we have, I think there's considerable room to grow. And that's pretty exciting considering that we still won. I think we could have kicked their asses though, with the way our D played and with them giving us the middle of the field. (underneath, anyway)

Originally posted by Legbreaker:
Kawakami is a twit.

The article doesn't once mention that this is exactly the way the Niners need to play teams that have high octane offensive weapons. The runs weren't pretty, but they ate up a sh*tload of clock, contributed a score, and got the Arizona defense so interested in stopping anything between the tackles, that they and their D-Coordinator paid no attention to Gore as a receiver.

This game was a chess match, and the Niners played it right. They ate up the clock, used the pass rush abuse Kurt Warner, and just beat on the Cardinals until they broke.

Don't believe me? Just watch the Cards of the first quarter....and compare their play to the Cards of the fourth quarter. They got beat up. They got discouraged. By the time they had to execute to win, they couldn't.

That's fisical with an F, guys. Its what we were promised, and its working so far.

That strategy is more effective when you get first downs and move the chains. Otherwise, it is your defense that spends more time on the field. This team has weapons other than Gore and must use them in order to consistently win. The Cards were run blitzing all game and this team does not have the manpower to overcome that with simply the running game. Some swing passes to the Fullback and pop and slant passes to the Tight ends would have forced the Cards to play the run honestly.

I'm sorry, Raye has been in this league long enough to recognize and adjust to team's game planning against the run and his play calling did not give his running game a chance to succeed.

Originally posted by Legbreaker:

Originally posted by LA9erFan:

Originally posted by Legbreaker:
Kawakami is a twit.

The article doesn't once mention that this is exactly the way the Niners need to play teams that have high octane offensive weapons. The runs weren't pretty, but they ate up a sh*tload of clock, contributed a score, and got the Arizona defense so interested in stopping anything between the tackles, that they and their D-Coordinator paid no attention to Gore as a receiver.

This game was a chess match, and the Niners played it right. They ate up the clock, used the pass rush abuse Kurt Warner, and just beat on the Cardinals until they broke.

Don't believe me? Just watch the Cards of the first quarter....and compare their play to the Cards of the fourth quarter. They got beat up. They got discouraged. By the time they had to execute to win, they couldn't.

That's fisical with an F, guys. Its what we were promised, and its working so far.

IMO, the Cards were discouraged and beat up on the offensive side of the ball, not on defense. Their D-Line was hammering on our O-Line all game and getting a great push. It's not like our 15 play drive was a case of us "breaking" them and consistently getting 6 or 7 yard rushing gains because their D was worn out from pounding on them all game, almost everything was through the air.

I understand the point about eating up the clock and neutralizing a potent offense, but how much clock can you really eat up when you're consistently going 3 and out? That's exactly what we did on all of our 2nd half drives except for one. I think that part of being ball control offense is being able to get 6 or 7 yard gains by throwing the ball to your WRs on curl routes, hitting your TE in the middle of the field, or Gore in the flat. If we want to eat up clock, we gotta move the chains.

It's hard to complain when you beat the defending NFC champions in their house, but I don't think that this sort of offense is sustainable. I think that Hill's exhibited the ability to get those short gains without turning the ball over. We should take advantage of that. IMO, we won this game in spite of our offensive play calling, not because of it.

You are right Pete. Our 15 play, 80-yard drive was a result of the Cardinals "stubbornly" deciding to crowd the line, take away inside running lanes, and as a result it opened up the flats, slants, curls and outs that made up the drive.

The reason why I cringe at the term "inflexibility" is that it was precisely our ability to shift scheme and Arizona's refusal to do so that led to the go ahead TD.

The question is did we shift scheme out of desperation or because it was planned all along ? Id like to believe that this was all a masterplan to set up that 80 yard drive (13/15 passes) by consistently running it and succumbing to 3-and-outs throughout the game. The reality, however, is that our gameplan failed miserably, and Sing/Raye had no choice BUT to put the ball in Hill's hands and allow him to make plays.

This is not an effective strategy. If you go into a game thinking you are going to play one way, and end up switching gears midway though, you're more likely to come out on the losing end.

Thank God we had a great defensive outing, or this could have been messy this week. As LA said, we're better off being flexible..........and even in some circumstances, allow Hill's arm to set up the run. He makes good decisions, and if we can keep the defense honest, Gore might have more success running it. It would also help if Raye/Sing would stop reminding everyone that we plan on running it 95% of the time.

Jimmie Raye's eyes are going bad so he probably didn't notice the underneath middle of the field being wide open all day until the 4th quarter when he already saw 45 minutes of live game.

Originally posted by LA9erFan:

Originally posted by ads_2006:
I just read the article and he's right.

However, I believe if our running game gets going, our offense will be immensely better, as we could use more play action.

It's kind of a chicken or the egg thing, though. Our running game might actually get going if we're a legit threat to throw the ball. Our O-line didn't block all that well for him, but I'm not sure how much it would have mattered. The Cards were so keyed in on Gore, I don't think he would have had much of a chance either way.

That 15 play, 80 yard drive saved Singletary & Raye from a lot of b***hing today. And it's no coincidence that 13 of those plays were passes. Our other 5 drives in the 2nd half were all 3 and outs. I'm all for the premise of being a "power" football team, but you have to make teams pay if they're going to overplay you. And we can do that without being too concerned about turning the ball over, because one of Hill's strengths is decision making. We also have solid "possession" receivers. We need to take advantage of what we DO have going for us in the passing game.

Right. The 49ers CAN throw the ball. Not like the Manning brothers, or Brees, but they can throw it enough to keep the defense honest. However, when you spend six months saying you are going to run the ball, and then do only that for three quarters, you should EXPECT the opponent to be well-prepared to shut it down. AZ did.

Now the question will be; what adjustments will be made in preparation for Seattle. We can bet the mortgage payment (if you are still making it) that Seattle will come out the same way AZ did. If that happens, we will learn a lot about Jimmy Raye. A good coordinator is able to adjust when Plan A doesn't work.

Of course he's going to be bashing the 49ers, the newspaper is based out of Arizona!

He's pretty spot on w/ this article... great win anyway against the NFC Champs. It's just their angle to look at things cynically; It was ugly yes, but we have a defense that is for real and they won this game for us. I am happy as hell-- bring on the Seachicks!

For all the struggles offensivly, I have to give S Hill some props for not only managing the game, not turning the ball over, but when called upon to drive down the field using mainly his arm he was able to step up and drive down the field for a TD.

As long as Hill can coninue to make smart decisions in the passing game, I think our D will keep us in games, creating winnable situations for us late in the 4th quarter. The O is gonna need to sustain drives alittle longer so the D can be well rested.

Gonna be alot of nail bitter finishes this season but as long as we coninue to get wins I can live with the ulcers and stress

This article was agreeable. But FOCK A Tim Kawakami and a Ray Ratto!... POS's!

Originally posted by BigRon:
I am not a fan of Kawakami but this article is one of his better ones. He is matter of fact in his approach. I can understand not liking him but in no way does this article support the feeling of the guy being a fool.

I completely agree. I clicked on his article link thinking it would make me mad, but it was spot on.

Originally posted by LA9erFan:

Originally posted by Legbreaker:
You are right Pete. Our 15 play, 80-yard drive was a result of the Cardinals "stubbornly" deciding to crowd the line, take away inside running lanes, and as a result it opened up the flats, slants, curls and outs that made up the drive.

The reason why I cringe at the term "inflexibility" is that it was precisely our ability to shift scheme and Arizona's refusal to do so that led to the go ahead TD.

That definitely was a well timed adjustment on our part. However, I think it's one that we could/should have made earlier. As you pointed out, they sent the inside linebackers pretty much every time we were in a run formation. I think that play action was there all game, as was the middle of the field in those situations. I don't see much of a difference between those short passes and running plays, and it was available all game long. We could have had a 40/20 time of possession advantage with just that little adjustment, IMO. And it would have made our actual running game more effective.

Even staying within the same philosophy that we have, I think there's considerable room to grow. And that's pretty exciting considering that we still won. I think we could have kicked their asses though, with the way our D played and with them giving us the middle of the field. (underneath, anyway)

I agree that this team has a long way to go.

Part of the reason that we stayed way from play action had to do with the fact that the Cards were blitzing regardless. The advantage of "freezing" the backers and safeties just wasn't there.

I really feel like the screen and smoke routes were there and just ignored. Battle had a nifty first down on a smoke route, and there were a couple of screen opportunities that really could have reaped benefits. I am eager to see what changes we make to prepare for Seattle.

Either way, I am thrilled with the defensive output of yesterday's game. If you want a laugh, read my article "getting defensive" from July. It will trip you out.

Originally posted by cortana49:

Originally posted by BigRon:
I am not a fan of Kawakami but this article is one of his better ones. He is matter of fact in his approach. I can understand not liking him but in no way does this article support the feeling of the guy being a fool.

I completely agree. I clicked on his article link thinking it would make me mad, but it was spot on.

I think Sando made a better analysis:

"Mike Sando: The stats in the run game were worse than I perceived the run game to be. I thought the 49ers opened it up only when they absolutely had to open it up. And when they absolutely had to open it up, they made plays in the passing game. Production in the run game will improve. Arizona played terrific run defense.

The 49ers weren't that far off in the passing game. They completed a 12-yard pass on third-and-13 in the second quarter. They hit the 50-yarder to Bruce on third-and-10.

In the third quarter, San Francisco ran the ball three times on a three-and-out, somewhat ridiculous play-calling. But when Arizona scored a touchdown on its ensuing drive, putting the pressure back on San Francisco, the 49ers answered by passing on 16 of their next 18 plays, including 13 times on their 15-play touchdown drive to win the game.

The 49ers are going to be a conservative team on offense with Mike Singletary as head coach and Jimmy Raye as offensive coordinator. They will quite often play not to lose. The 49ers must prove they can avoid blowing games before they can feel more comfortable playing aggressively to win. They played aggressively to win last season and wound up firing the head coach and offensive coordinator.

We'll have plenty of time this season to critique the 49ers' approach on offense. The bottom line Sunday was that the 49ers did just enough to win the game. They won on the road against the defending division champion. I expected the 49ers to play a tough game Sunday, but I thought the Cardinals would have a little more success offensively and prevail. They're 1-0 heading into a home game against Seattle. That's significant."

http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcwest/post/_/id/4963/second-guessing-the-49ers-offense

[ Edited by Blitz on Sep 14, 2009 at 10:28:10 ]

Originally posted by Legbreaker:
I agree that this team has a long way to go.

Part of the reason that we stayed way from play action had to do with the fact that the Cards were blitzing regardless. The advantage of "freezing" the backers and safeties just wasn't there.

I really feel like the screen and smoke routes were there and just ignored. Battle had a nifty first down on a smoke route, and there were a couple of screen opportunities that really could have reaped benefits. I am eager to see what changes we make to prepare for Seattle.

Either way, I am thrilled with the defensive output of yesterday's game. If you want a laugh, read my article "getting defensive" from July. It will trip you out.

Fair enough, but I think they were keying on Gore with their blitzes. Just SOME kind of misdirection that used Gore as a decoy would have been effective, IMO. Totally agree on the smoke routes/screens as well. I think Battle's going to come in handy in this offense for his ability to run those routes, find the sticks, and block downfield. Everyone's been trying to stick a fork in him, but he can be very valuable, IMO.

*goes off to read that article*

Good call on that article, AJ. The pass rush was a really pleasant surprise, with Haralson, Smith, & Lawson providing a lot of heat. I think that we're a top notch NT away from being a real handful defensively.

Originally posted by Legbreaker:
Kawakami is a twit.

The article doesn't once mention that this is exactly the way the Niners need to play teams that have high octane offensive weapons. The runs weren't pretty, but they ate up a sh*tload of clock, contributed a score, and got the Arizona defense so interested in stopping anything between the tackles, that they and their D-Coordinator paid no attention to Gore as a receiver.

This game was a chess match, and the Niners played it right. They ate up the clock, used the pass rush abuse Kurt Warner, and just beat on the Cardinals until they broke.

Don't believe me? Just watch the Cards of the first quarter....and compare their play to the Cards of the fourth quarter. They got beat up. They got discouraged. By the time they had to execute to win, they couldn't.

That's fisical with an F, guys. Its what we were promised, and its working so far.

No they didn't. You can't eat the clock without getting first downs.

Run, Run, Pass, Punt does not eat the clock.

Kawakami is spot on on that article.