Do you miss the Martz Offense?

No, I don't miss Martz's offense and all the sacks that come with it. I do hope, however, that at some point it does open up.

Originally posted by GEEK:
Raye will expand the playbook once Hill gets comfortable with the players around him and the system.

The speed of Brandon Jones will help establish the vertical passing game.

I agree I think that Raye will continue to expand the playbook and I think that Hill continues to get more comfortable within the system.

I agree that Brandon Jone's speed could certainly help when Hill gets familiar with him but wasn't it Smith who was continuing to hit Jone's behind our own defense in practice and not Hill ??? Hill and the WR's need to do more together and become more much consistent as a group.

I will take Hill and Raye and very few turnovers ------ and wins any damn day. I love Singletary's we have to continue to improve each week.

Martz let his ego get in the way of his play calling

Well I can tell you why Jimmy Raye fell asleep during practice....from watching his own offense. As much I am excited about Gore's runs and the wins we have, to be honest most of the offense of the last two games has been boring. There have been bright spots with Vernon Davis and Gore, but other than that..zzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

In the super bowl years, we had balanced attack finesse passing and good running. We cannot continue to rely on our defense the whole season unless you believe that our defense is as good as the Raven's defense of 2000. Somewhere down the road the lack of a passing game is going bite us in the ass because we will need to come from behind.

Yeah we beat the defending NFC champs on the road. But it's going to get tougher because teams will have more more film on our defensive schemes and we will be facing tougher defenses.

It seems that we only need Isaac Bruce as a receiver. We can fill in the rest of slots with any receiver good or bad and come away with the same result. This is the "Anti-Martz" offense.

Jimmy Raye has improved the running game since last year, but has completely neglected the passing game. When most of all your receivers are invisible, you have to blame the coaches.

Forget about Crabtree. Find a better use of the wide receivers we do have, instead putting them behind center and throwing stupid passes.

Originally posted by 49ERwhiner:

I will take Hill and Raye and very few turnovers ------ and wins any damn day. I love Singletary's we have to continue to improve each week.

wins are wins, and yes -- they are somewhat boring... but honestly, the defensive play keeps me more than entertained. watching them fly around the field lets me not worry about not watching 30 yrd gainers through the air. let's face it, we have a limited -- albeit a winner -- QB.

we're gonna have to mix it up more against the vikes tho... cuz we're not breaking 80 yrd runs on them.

Originally posted by 9erfanAUS:
So after game 2, we have the 30th ranked passing attack with an offense that doesn't seem to need any WRs.

From Singletary's recent comments, this doesn't seem to be changing any time soon.

Do you miss the excitement of the big passing plays and aggressive playcalling? Sending the ball through the air and watching the WRs stack up the yardage?

Was the excitement worth the turnovers, sacks and little to no running game?

-9fA

this is a joke right

Originally posted by jimmythegreekjr:
Well I can tell you why Jimmy Raye fell asleep during practice....from watching his own offense. As much I am excited about Gore's runs and the wins we have, to be honest most of the offense of the last two games has been boring. There have been bright spots with Vernon Davis and Gore, but other than that..zzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

In the super bowl years, we had balanced attack finesse passing and good running. We cannot continue to rely on our defense the whole season unless you believe that our defense is as good as the Raven's defense of 2000. Somewhere down the road the lack of a passing game is going bite us in the ass because we will need to come from behind.

Yeah we beat the defending NFC champs on the road. But it's going to get tougher because teams will have more more film on our defensive schemes and we will be facing tougher defenses.

It seems that we only need Isaac Bruce as a receiver. We can fill in the rest of slots with any receiver good or bad and come away with the same result. This is the "Anti-Martz" offense.

Jimmy Raye has improved the running game since last year, but has completely neglected the passing game. When most of all your receivers are invisible, you have to blame the coaches.

Forget about Crabtree. Find a better use of the wide receivers we do have, instead putting them behind center and throwing stupid passes.

Originally posted by chico49erfan:

Originally posted by 49ERwhiner:

I will take Hill and Raye and very few turnovers ------ and wins any damn day. I love Singletary's we have to continue to improve each week.

wins are wins, and yes -- they are somewhat boring... but honestly, the defensive play keeps me more than entertained. watching them fly around the field lets me not worry about not watching 30 yrd gainers through the air. let's face it, we have a limited -- albeit a winner -- QB.

we're gonna have to mix it up more against the vikes tho... cuz we're not breaking 80 yrd runs on them.

I agree that Raye and Hill will probably need to open it up a bit against the Vikings.

Originally posted by Native49erFan:
I did like how Martz modified his passing attack when Hill started playing last year. Nothing too long, just medium routes. Ideally, I'd love to see the Martz passing attack working to perfection with our 2006 running results. Is there such a coordinator, or was that Norv only?

There was one available in 2008. Cam Cameron, but Nolan hired Martz, and screwed us.

Originally posted by Brazilian49er:

Originally posted by AXEGRINDER:

Originally posted by Brazilian49er:

Originally posted by AXEGRINDER:

Originally posted by 9erfanAUS:

Originally posted by dman:

Originally posted by AXEGRINDER:
Why would I miss turnovers which = losing?

Maybe I don't understand the question.

Turnovers are generally a part of an aggressive offense.....

So what i'm trying to say is that would you take an aggressive offense with with a few turnovers here and there to one with no turnovers but less aggressive.

-9fA

This team cannot win when they give away the game.

I know you mean that an aggressive offense generally fills the sky full of footballs, but I seem to think that pounding the ball relentlessly can also be described as being aggressive. What's not aggressive about beating the opponent into submission with the run?

I was at the game yesterday and it was quite satisfying to see the Seahawks defense bent over at the waist all tired in the 3rd and 4th quarters. I did not see the 49ers defense tired at all because why? Because we chewed the clock to hell.

This 49er team is far better suited for a ball control offense rather than.....I guess an "aggressive" offense.

I don't miss a Martz offense and I don't miss his face.

PS we had more than just a few turnovers here and there, we lost games because of turnovers. At least 3 or 4.

Come on, I'm happy we're winning but let's call a spade a spade. Our offense is NOT controlling the clock. The reason we've been winning the T.O.P. is because of our DEFENSE.

Wanna see the proof: 3rd down efficiency against ARI: 28%
3rd down efficiency against SEA: 33%

Stop the presses! We're the first "ball control" offense that can't convert on 3rd downs!

We have a joke of an OC and make no mistake, he is gonna cost us some games. We could have blown ARI and SEA out and instead kept them in the game.

My hope is that Singletary seems aware of this issue (from what I've been able to tell from his press conferences).

Don't agree. While our defense has been good, it's partly because the offense is allowing them to rest. It's common football knowledge that the longer the defense is on the field, eventually they will give up points. Only the offense executing all the way down the field, allows the defense to rest and come in fresh.

Ask our defense if they would prefer a Martz offense. Ask our O-line and qb if they would prefer a Martz offense. Ask Frank Gore if he would prefer Martz offense or the "joke of an OC" offense.

I'm all for what wins, and so far the ball control offense is doing just that.

It isn't about agreeing. It's 28 % 3rd down efficiency!!!! Thas a fact, not an opinion. How is our offense allowing them to rest?? THEY CANT STAY ON THE FIELD!

Yes, our D would be MUCH better with Martz offense. At least our O was able to convert more than 30% of the 3rd downs.

Have you been watching the first part of last season? Obvioulsy not!

Originally posted by JeuSF49:

Originally posted by Brazilian49er:

Originally posted by AXEGRINDER:

Originally posted by Brazilian49er:

Originally posted by AXEGRINDER:

Originally posted by 9erfanAUS:

Originally posted by dman:

Originally posted by AXEGRINDER:
Why would I miss turnovers which = losing?

Maybe I don't understand the question.

Turnovers are generally a part of an aggressive offense.....

So what i'm trying to say is that would you take an aggressive offense with with a few turnovers here and there to one with no turnovers but less aggressive.

-9fA

This team cannot win when they give away the game.

I know you mean that an aggressive offense generally fills the sky full of footballs, but I seem to think that pounding the ball relentlessly can also be described as being aggressive. What's not aggressive about beating the opponent into submission with the run?

I was at the game yesterday and it was quite satisfying to see the Seahawks defense bent over at the waist all tired in the 3rd and 4th quarters. I did not see the 49ers defense tired at all because why? Because we chewed the clock to hell.

This 49er team is far better suited for a ball control offense rather than.....I guess an "aggressive" offense.

I don't miss a Martz offense and I don't miss his face.

PS we had more than just a few turnovers here and there, we lost games because of turnovers. At least 3 or 4.

Come on, I'm happy we're winning but let's call a spade a spade. Our offense is NOT controlling the clock. The reason we've been winning the T.O.P. is because of our DEFENSE.

Wanna see the proof: 3rd down efficiency against ARI: 28%
3rd down efficiency against SEA: 33%

Stop the presses! We're the first "ball control" offense that can't convert on 3rd downs!

We have a joke of an OC and make no mistake, he is gonna cost us some games. We could have blown ARI and SEA out and instead kept them in the game.

My hope is that Singletary seems aware of this issue (from what I've been able to tell from his press conferences).

Don't agree. While our defense has been good, it's partly because the offense is allowing them to rest. It's common football knowledge that the longer the defense is on the field, eventually they will give up points. Only the offense executing all the way down the field, allows the defense to rest and come in fresh.

Ask our defense if they would prefer a Martz offense. Ask our O-line and qb if they would prefer a Martz offense. Ask Frank Gore if he would prefer Martz offense or the "joke of an OC" offense.

I'm all for what wins, and so far the ball control offense is doing just that.

It isn't about agreeing. It's 28 % 3rd down efficiency!!!! Thas a fact, not an opinion. How is our offense allowing them to rest?? THEY CANT STAY ON THE FIELD!

Yes, our D would be MUCH better with Martz offense. At least our O was able to convert more than 30% of the 3rd downs.

Have you been watching the first part of last season? Obvioulsy not!

I did watch it. And our offense moved the ball very well and put points on the board (in the first few weeks JTO looked like a very good QB). Then JTO simply imploded.

Our D was much much worse last year. Remember: we were running that stupid 3-4/4-3 hybrid that couldn't get off the field.

Originally posted by Brazilian49er:

Originally posted by JeuSF49:

Originally posted by Brazilian49er:

Originally posted by AXEGRINDER:

Originally posted by Brazilian49er:

Originally posted by AXEGRINDER:

Originally posted by 9erfanAUS:

Originally posted by dman:

Originally posted by AXEGRINDER:
Why would I miss turnovers which = losing?

Maybe I don't understand the question.

Turnovers are generally a part of an aggressive offense.....

So what i'm trying to say is that would you take an aggressive offense with with a few turnovers here and there to one with no turnovers but less aggressive.

-9fA

This team cannot win when they give away the game.

I know you mean that an aggressive offense generally fills the sky full of footballs, but I seem to think that pounding the ball relentlessly can also be described as being aggressive. What's not aggressive about beating the opponent into submission with the run?

I was at the game yesterday and it was quite satisfying to see the Seahawks defense bent over at the waist all tired in the 3rd and 4th quarters. I did not see the 49ers defense tired at all because why? Because we chewed the clock to hell.

This 49er team is far better suited for a ball control offense rather than.....I guess an "aggressive" offense.

I don't miss a Martz offense and I don't miss his face.

PS we had more than just a few turnovers here and there, we lost games because of turnovers. At least 3 or 4.

Come on, I'm happy we're winning but let's call a spade a spade. Our offense is NOT controlling the clock. The reason we've been winning the T.O.P. is because of our DEFENSE.

Wanna see the proof: 3rd down efficiency against ARI: 28%
3rd down efficiency against SEA: 33%

Stop the presses! We're the first "ball control" offense that can't convert on 3rd downs!

We have a joke of an OC and make no mistake, he is gonna cost us some games. We could have blown ARI and SEA out and instead kept them in the game.

My hope is that Singletary seems aware of this issue (from what I've been able to tell from his press conferences).

Don't agree. While our defense has been good, it's partly because the offense is allowing them to rest. It's common football knowledge that the longer the defense is on the field, eventually they will give up points. Only the offense executing all the way down the field, allows the defense to rest and come in fresh.

Ask our defense if they would prefer a Martz offense. Ask our O-line and qb if they would prefer a Martz offense. Ask Frank Gore if he would prefer Martz offense or the "joke of an OC" offense.

I'm all for what wins, and so far the ball control offense is doing just that.

It isn't about agreeing. It's 28 % 3rd down efficiency!!!! Thas a fact, not an opinion. How is our offense allowing them to rest?? THEY CANT STAY ON THE FIELD!

Yes, our D would be MUCH better with Martz offense. At least our O was able to convert more than 30% of the 3rd downs.

Have you been watching the first part of last season? Obvioulsy not!

I did watch it. And our offense moved the ball very well and put points on the board (in the first few weeks JTO looked like a very good QB). Then JTO simply imploded.

Our D was much much worse last year. Remember: we were running that stupid 3-4/4-3 hybrid that couldn't get off the field.

Yes he moved the ball and then turned it over when should have scored.
Moving the ball up and down the field an then turning it over usually loses games.

Originally posted by rum53:
Not at all. I'd rather win with a no frills offense than lose with an exciting offense.

No , I would rather Lose than have a fake 2 game wining streak cuz this s**t will not be good on the road ! we will lose until we start useing our WR's and QB and TE for that matter !

Originally posted by 49ERwhiner:

Originally posted by GEEK:
Raye will expand the playbook once Hill gets comfortable with the players around him and the system.

The speed of Brandon Jones will help establish the vertical passing game.

I agree I think that Raye will continue to expand the playbook and I think that Hill continues to get more comfortable within the system.

I agree that Brandon Jone's speed could certainly help when Hill gets familiar with him but wasn't it Smith who was continuing to hit Jone's behind our own defense in practice and not Hill ??? Hill and the WR's need to do more together and become more much consistent as a group.

I will take Hill and Raye and very few turnovers ------ and wins any damn day. I love Singletary's we have to continue to improve each week.

The fact that Singletary actually means this compared to Mike Nolan's press conferences should be noted as well haha.

It's also worth pointing out that Hill doesn't have the strength and accuracy to establish a legit vertical passing game. Short and medium range throws are ideal for his skill set, and that's why RBs, TEs, and FBs are utilized more than WRs.

Davis, Walker, Gore, and Robinson all create mismatches when covered by DEs, LBs, and Ss.

Originally posted by oscarug:

Originally posted by Ceadderman:

Originally posted by AXEGRINDER:

Originally posted by Brazilian49er:

Originally posted by AXEGRINDER:

Originally posted by Brazilian49er:

Originally posted by AXEGRINDER:

Originally posted by 9erfanAUS:

Originally posted by dman:

Originally posted by AXEGRINDER:
Why would I miss turnovers which = losing?

Maybe I don't understand the question.

Turnovers are generally a part of an aggressive offense.....

So what i'm trying to say is that would you take an aggressive offense with with a few turnovers here and there to one with no turnovers but less aggressive.

-9fA

This team cannot win when they give away the game.

I know you mean that an aggressive offense generally fills the sky full of footballs, but I seem to think that pounding the ball relentlessly can also be described as being aggressive. What's not aggressive about beating the opponent into submission with the run?

I was at the game yesterday and it was quite satisfying to see the Seahawks defense bent over at the waist all tired in the 3rd and 4th quarters. I did not see the 49ers defense tired at all because why? Because we chewed the clock to hell.

This 49er team is far better suited for a ball control offense rather than.....I guess an "aggressive" offense.

I don't miss a Martz offense and I don't miss his face.

PS we had more than just a few turnovers here and there, we lost games because of turnovers. At least 3 or 4.

Come on, I'm happy we're winning but let's call a spade a spade. Our offense is NOT controlling the clock. The reason we've been winning the T.O.P. is because of our DEFENSE.

Wanna see the proof: 3rd down efficiency against ARI: 28%
3rd down efficiency against SEA: 33%

Stop the presses! We're the first "ball control" offense that can't convert on 3rd downs!

We have a joke of an OC and make no mistake, he is gonna cost us some games. We could have blown ARI and SEA out and instead kept them in the game.

My hope is that Singletary seems aware of this issue (from what I've been able to tell from his press conferences).

Don't agree. While our defense has been good, it's partly because the offense is allowing them to rest. It's common football knowledge that the longer the defense is on the field, eventually they will give up points. Only the offense executing all the way down the field, allows the defense to rest and come in fresh.

Ask our defense if they would prefer a Martz offense. Ask our O-line and qb if they would prefer a Martz offense. Ask Frank Gore if he would prefer Martz offense or the "joke of an OC" offense.

I'm all for what wins, and so far the ball control offense is doing just that.

It isn't about agreeing. It's 28 % 3rd down efficiency!!!! Thas a fact, not an opinion. How is our offense allowing them to rest?? THEY CANT STAY ON THE FIELD!

Yes, our D would be MUCH better with Martz offense. At least our O was able to convert more than 30% of the 3rd downs.

What do you mean the offense can't stay on the field?

49ers TOP=31:37
Ariz. TOP=28:23

49ers TOP=34:31
Seattle TOP=25:29

Those numbers are a little skewed given that Sheattle was not able to get back on the field for most of the 4th quarter.

3rd down percentages kill that though, given that we weren't converting alot of our drives. Only think that kept us in the lead were those two 80 yarders that Frank ripped on them.

Of course it doesn't help to run a WC on 3rd and 28. That is solely on Raye.

~Ceadder

lol.. its like complaining Gore had another bad game if you take away the 2 long runs...

our O is winning the TOP battle. and for 2 weeks has had key drives in the 4th quarter.. what more do you want? its not like we have backups who are pro-bowlers that are not playing...

Raye is still new to the team.. he still doesn't trust Shaun Hill, who is learning a new offense and plays OK when asked to pass the ball.

the offensive team that i see we compare with the most is the Vikings.. they have a superstar RB and a passing game that is asked to not f**k up! is favre putting up big numbers.. no.. hes being asked to be a Dilfer QB(play it safe)

If Hill and Raye get going this year and the passing game becomes something the team can rely on.. which can happen.. this 49er team will be scary good! something we all haven't seen in a long time!

Okay, how about this then, if we go up against Dallas with this current squad the way they are playing right now, do you think that Frank will rip off ONE long TD strike let alone two?

Or how about the Giants?

Or the Dolfins?

I'm not saying he can't but geez gimme a break the team cannot be carried by Frank and the Defense all season long. That's how injuries occur.

So that being said, lets say for the sake of the argument that Frank can't come up with the score? Where do the points come from besides Nedney?

Cause the way I see it right now, you may consider it funny that I can dismiss them like they didn't happen(which I didn't btw) yet you can't seem to bring yourself to admit that Hill was saved in a HUGE way.

Don't get me wrong I want Hill to succeed, but I want to be CONVINCED that he's the guy. And he is making a really good case to be yanked. I don't see him performing HALF as well as he did this past week, but never know he may show us that he indeed deserved the spot. So far though I have not been impressed.

And the idea that it's cause he didn't get the reps with the 1st team offense is laughable. No you didn't state this but I've seen it several times in the past. Considering that he had a 7-3 record with most of our Offense, there is no excuse for such a weak performance.

~Ceadder