There are 183 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

The Keep-Manning-Off-the-field Strategy Does Not Work

Well I'm not gonna say what's gonna work and what won't. But it is knid of funny that he's 1-3 vs us. Just don't know at what point since 98
Originally posted by BurritoSmuggler:
miami was the closest to beating them.. and thats what they did.. looked like a good game plan to me

We're not Miami. We don't have the ability to run at will.

We need a balanced attack like San Diego has done to beat them in the playoffs the past few years. Yeah we're going to need 25 rushes for 100+ yards, but we're also going to need an effective passing game. 24 points minimum.
Originally posted by Jersey9er:
Well I'm not gonna say what's gonna work and what won't. But it is knid of funny that he's 1-3 vs us. Just don't know at what point since 98

Per NFL.com

Quote:
San Francisco has won seven of the last nine meetings

linky
Originally posted by nickbradley:
Originally posted by Overkill:
LOL

The "Keep-Manning-Off-the-field Strategy" may not be 100% effective, but the "Rely-on-our-offense-to-keep-pace-with-Manning Strategy" is destined for failure.

1. We do not have the tools to execute a run-first strategy anyway.

2. Peyton Manning has always had problems with 4-3 defenses. My guess as to why is because 3-4 defenses, by design, are a better match vs. spread out offenses. during the preseason, I remember reading that so many teams are switching to the 3-4 because GMs believe "The Spread" college look is on its way to the NFL. And the Colts have ran the NFL version of the spread for 10 years.
http://espn.go.com/blog/afcsouth/post/_/id/1178/manning-s-playoff-record-vs-3-4-defenses-not-good

Originally posted by nickbradley:
Originally posted by Overkill:
LOL

The "Keep-Manning-Off-the-field Strategy" may not be 100% effective, but the "Rely-on-our-offense-to-keep-pace-with-Manning Strategy" is destined for failure.

1. We do not have the tools to execute a run-first strategy anyway.

2. Peyton Manning has always had problems with 4-3 defenses. My guess as to why is because 3-4 defenses, by design, are a better match vs. spread out offenses. during the preseason, I remember reading that so many teams are switching to the 3-4 because GMs believe "The Spread" college look is on its way to the NFL. And the Colts have ran the NFL version of the spread for 10 years.
http://espn.go.com/blog/afcsouth/post/_/id/1178/manning-s-playoff-record-vs-3-4-defenses-not-good

LOL, our offense doesn't have the tools to keep pace with Manning either. To pretend one half play against a weak Texan defense sitting on a 21 point lead refutes that is silly.

You have to win T.O.P. to help your defense, or you could just pray one of the greatest QB's in the game falls flat on his face while our (potentially former) first round bust steps up his game against one of the top pass defenses in the league. I know which makes more sense to me.

And every college conference that has seen the spread adopted heavily has also witnessed the demise of the 3-4 defense shortly thereafter (see the Big 12). The reason is simple - you spend so much time in Nickel and Dime coverages that have to build an effective 4 man DL, which means traditional DT's & DE's. Staying in the base 3-4 also puts a LB on a WR, which creates the exact type of mis-match OC's love.

You also may want to look at the prominent 3-4 defenses Manning has faced in the AFC playoffs. Pittsburgh, Baltimore, and NE. He's struggled because they were good defenses, not because they play the 3-4.
UNLEASH THE LASER SQUIRRELS!!!

Man... why didn't we draft Peyton Manning??? Then all of our problems would be solved.
  • kem99
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 586
Originally posted by nickbradley:
Exhibit A - Miami vs. Indy. 45 min. of possession and more yards than Indy...yet still lost.

Manning excels in hurry-up situations because he calls his own plays from the line of scrimmage. Forcing Manning into a no-huddle situation will only get you burned.

The best strategy, from what I've seen, is to try and match them while hoping for a mistake by the Colts offense.

Everybody falls for the theory that you must run against the Colts to keep Manning off the field. Here are the problems with that:

1. Manning is better in the hurry offense than in the normal offense.
2. The Colts defense is MUCH better when they have 8 men in the box -- Bob Sanders gets to play the run instead of the pass (Sanders is amazing vs. the run, so-so vs. the pass)

So, by running on them, you play right into their hands. The only team that DOESN'T take a run-first approach to the Colts is San Diego, and they're been pretty successful vs. Indy. The Steelers aren't afraid to get into a shoot-out w/ Manning Either.

Thoughts?

Let's Air it out!

You're wrong and here's why...

1. As many do here, you've cited to a single instance (the Colts v. Miami game) and established that as the rule rather than the exception. Yes, Miami lost but they were ahead late into the 4th quarter. Miami's 2-4 this year, the Colts are 6-0. Sorry, but if the 49ers can significantly win Time of Possession, I'll take may chances. I'd rather force Manning to beat me while only having the ball 15-20 minutes of clock time than to give him the ball an additional 2-3 times.

2. I'll again take my chances with the Colts defense putting 8 men in the box. If they're doing that, they're out of the Tampa-2 and there should be plays down the field. You've also ignored that in recent years the Colts have been one of the worst defenses in allowing 3rd down conversions so apparently their 8 men in the box hasn't been that good.

3. The Chargers have had good success against the Colts but much of that has been due to their defense against Manning, including the game they intercepted Manning 6 times. The other part you're missing is that the Chargers and Steelers have Pro Bowl QBs and with proven receivers. The 49ers have a resurrected Alex Smith and a bunch of young receivers plus Bruce, most of whom have not been on the field at the same time with Smith under center for more than possibly the 2nd half against the Texans. Until the bye week, Smith hadn't even thrown any of the 49ers routes since the end of TC.

You're crazy if you think the 49ers best option is to get into a shoot-out on the road with the Colts and Manning. Their best option is to play smart, hang around by running the ball with Gore and converting 3rd downs with Smith's throws, not turn the ball over and then try to win it in the 4th quarter.
Member Milestone: This is post number 400 for nickbradley.
Originally posted by kem99:
Originally posted by nickbradley:
Exhibit A - Miami vs. Indy. 45 min. of possession and more yards than Indy...yet still lost.

Manning excels in hurry-up situations because he calls his own plays from the line of scrimmage. Forcing Manning into a no-huddle situation will only get you burned.

The best strategy, from what I've seen, is to try and match them while hoping for a mistake by the Colts offense.

Everybody falls for the theory that you must run against the Colts to keep Manning off the field. Here are the problems with that:

1. Manning is better in the hurry offense than in the normal offense.
2. The Colts defense is MUCH better when they have 8 men in the box -- Bob Sanders gets to play the run instead of the pass (Sanders is amazing vs. the run, so-so vs. the pass)

So, by running on them, you play right into their hands. The only team that DOESN'T take a run-first approach to the Colts is San Diego, and they're been pretty successful vs. Indy. The Steelers aren't afraid to get into a shoot-out w/ Manning Either.

Thoughts?

Let's Air it out!

You're wrong and here's why...

1. As many do here, you've cited to a single instance (the Colts v. Miami game) and established that as the rule rather than the exception. Yes, Miami lost but they were ahead late into the 4th quarter. Miami's 2-4 this year, the Colts are 6-0. Sorry, but if the 49ers can significantly win Time of Possession, I'll take may chances. I'd rather force Manning to beat me while only having the ball 15-20 minutes of clock time than to give him the ball an additional 2-3 times.

2. I'll again take my chances with the Colts defense putting 8 men in the box. If they're doing that, they're out of the Tampa-2 and there should be plays down the field. You've also ignored that in recent years the Colts have been one of the worst defenses in allowing 3rd down conversions so apparently their 8 men in the box hasn't been that good.

3. The Chargers have had good success against the Colts but much of that has been due to their defense against Manning, including the game they intercepted Manning 6 times. The other part you're missing is that the Chargers and Steelers have Pro Bowl QBs and with proven receivers. The 49ers have a resurrected Alex Smith and a bunch of young receivers plus Bruce, most of whom have not been on the field at the same time with Smith under center for more than possibly the 2nd half against the Texans. Until the bye week, Smith hadn't even thrown any of the 49ers routes since the end of TC.

You're crazy if you think the 49ers best option is to get into a shoot-out on the road with the Colts and Manning. Their best option is to play smart, hang around by running the ball with Gore and converting 3rd downs with Smith's throws, not turn the ball over and then try to win it in the 4th quarter.

1. I merely cited the most prominent example; Furthermore, Manning in the hurry-up puts our defense at a comparative disadvantage
2. The Cover 2 (Tampa 2) is weak against the Tight end. The Tight End is our best weapon.
3. We have weapons just like San Diego, but we're green.
Originally posted by tohara3:
I say we come out aggressively.

This isn't date night! It's football!
Course it works it you can do it (which is hard obviously), that Miami game isn't an example it doesn't work. If The Miami Dolphins had a little more speed to their defense, especially at safety, they would of won that game.
Miami may have lost despite dominating Indy in TOP. But dominating the TOP battle is still the best way to beat Indy rather than getting into a shootout you'll definitely lose.
  • kem99
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 586
Originally posted by nickbradley:
Originally posted by kem99:
Originally posted by nickbradley:
Exhibit A - Miami vs. Indy. 45 min. of possession and more yards than Indy...yet still lost.

Manning excels in hurry-up situations because he calls his own plays from the line of scrimmage. Forcing Manning into a no-huddle situation will only get you burned.

The best strategy, from what I've seen, is to try and match them while hoping for a mistake by the Colts offense.

Everybody falls for the theory that you must run against the Colts to keep Manning off the field. Here are the problems with that:

1. Manning is better in the hurry offense than in the normal offense.
2. The Colts defense is MUCH better when they have 8 men in the box -- Bob Sanders gets to play the run instead of the pass (Sanders is amazing vs. the run, so-so vs. the pass)

So, by running on them, you play right into their hands. The only team that DOESN'T take a run-first approach to the Colts is San Diego, and they're been pretty successful vs. Indy. The Steelers aren't afraid to get into a shoot-out w/ Manning Either.

Thoughts?

Let's Air it out!

You're wrong and here's why...

1. As many do here, you've cited to a single instance (the Colts v. Miami game) and established that as the rule rather than the exception. Yes, Miami lost but they were ahead late into the 4th quarter. Miami's 2-4 this year, the Colts are 6-0. Sorry, but if the 49ers can significantly win Time of Possession, I'll take may chances. I'd rather force Manning to beat me while only having the ball 15-20 minutes of clock time than to give him the ball an additional 2-3 times.

2. I'll again take my chances with the Colts defense putting 8 men in the box. If they're doing that, they're out of the Tampa-2 and there should be plays down the field. You've also ignored that in recent years the Colts have been one of the worst defenses in allowing 3rd down conversions so apparently their 8 men in the box hasn't been that good.

3. The Chargers have had good success against the Colts but much of that has been due to their defense against Manning, including the game they intercepted Manning 6 times. The other part you're missing is that the Chargers and Steelers have Pro Bowl QBs and with proven receivers. The 49ers have a resurrected Alex Smith and a bunch of young receivers plus Bruce, most of whom have not been on the field at the same time with Smith under center for more than possibly the 2nd half against the Texans. Until the bye week, Smith hadn't even thrown any of the 49ers routes since the end of TC.

You're crazy if you think the 49ers best option is to get into a shoot-out on the road with the Colts and Manning. Their best option is to play smart, hang around by running the ball with Gore and converting 3rd downs with Smith's throws, not turn the ball over and then try to win it in the 4th quarter.

1. I merely cited the most prominent example; Furthermore, Manning in the hurry-up puts our defense at a comparative disadvantage
2. The Cover 2 (Tampa 2) is weak against the Tight end. The Tight End is our best weapon.
3. We have weapons just like San Diego, but we're green.

Why you're wrong again....

1. Manning and the Colts run a no-huddle anyway to put every defense at a "comparative disadvantage." Teams put the Colts at a "comparative disadvantage" by keeping the ball away from Manning and giving him less possessions to try to score.

2. The Tampa-2 is the Colts base defense. Anything you can do to get them out of their base defense is to your advantage. If you can force them to put 8 men in the box, it probably means either a LB is trying to cover Davis or Sanders is trying to cover Davis from closer to the line of scrimmage or the deep safety is responsible for Davis, which means there is no help over the top against the WRs...so exactly, which part of that is bad for the 49ers?

3. The 49ers have weapons that have played exactly 1 half of the type of football you are advocating. Their best WR has been with the team 2 weeks, just played his first game and struggled during the 2 minute drill just because he hasn't had enough time to practice it. Their QB hasn't started a game since 2007. This is the first game week since TC that he will be getting reps with the 49ers offense and throwing the 49ers routes. You want to compare that to the Chargers having the top ranked passing QB from last year and the Steelers having a 2-time SB winning QB.

The funny thing is if the 49ers did "open it up" like you claim you want and Smith goes out and throws 3 picks in the first half and the 49ers get blown out, you'll be the first one on here calling for Smith, Raye and Singletary's head.
I think most of us can agree that trying to simply win TOP isn't going to work. For those that say we don't have this or that, why don't you just write letters to the 49ers office asking them to forfeit these supposedly winnable games?

Clearly our defense will have to play lights out to win this game. I'd like to see Manny Lawson matched up against Dallas Clark. Clark is a player that creates nightmares for most defenses, but we may have a guy in Lawson that can cover him. I honestly don't understand why Lawson isn't used to cover guys like a Dallas Clark, Owen Daniels, or a Tony Gonzales. Our corners also need to get physical with the Colts receivers at the line of scrimmage. They need to rough them up as much as the refs will allow for that game. The only other ingredient that is needed by our defense is to create pressure on Peyton Manning. We've come close, but often times do not get to the QB in time to create sacks.

On the offensive side of the ball, Smith needs to get rid of the ball quickly because I don't expect him to have much time to throw. Using all of our skill players in the passing game will spread the ball around and allow our backs to have more room to run as the game progresses. We could also give Smith max protection and hope that our guys get open. The only drawback is that Vernon Davis has to be involved in the passing game. He, along with Crabtree may be the biggest help to our running game this Sunday if both of them get going.

It doesn't look good, but I said in another thread the Colts have to lose at some point. Why not us?
  • kem99
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 586
Originally posted by nickbradley:
Originally posted by kem99:
Originally posted by nickbradley:
Exhibit A - Miami vs. Indy. 45 min. of possession and more yards than Indy...yet still lost.

Manning excels in hurry-up situations because he calls his own plays from the line of scrimmage. Forcing Manning into a no-huddle situation will only get you burned.

The best strategy, from what I've seen, is to try and match them while hoping for a mistake by the Colts offense.

Everybody falls for the theory that you must run against the Colts to keep Manning off the field. Here are the problems with that:

1. Manning is better in the hurry offense than in the normal offense.
2. The Colts defense is MUCH better when they have 8 men in the box -- Bob Sanders gets to play the run instead of the pass (Sanders is amazing vs. the run, so-so vs. the pass)

So, by running on them, you play right into their hands. The only team that DOESN'T take a run-first approach to the Colts is San Diego, and they're been pretty successful vs. Indy. The Steelers aren't afraid to get into a shoot-out w/ Manning Either.

Thoughts?

Let's Air it out!

You're wrong and here's why...

1. As many do here, you've cited to a single instance (the Colts v. Miami game) and established that as the rule rather than the exception. Yes, Miami lost but they were ahead late into the 4th quarter. Miami's 2-4 this year, the Colts are 6-0. Sorry, but if the 49ers can significantly win Time of Possession, I'll take may chances. I'd rather force Manning to beat me while only having the ball 15-20 minutes of clock time than to give him the ball an additional 2-3 times.

2. I'll again take my chances with the Colts defense putting 8 men in the box. If they're doing that, they're out of the Tampa-2 and there should be plays down the field. You've also ignored that in recent years the Colts have been one of the worst defenses in allowing 3rd down conversions so apparently their 8 men in the box hasn't been that good.

3. The Chargers have had good success against the Colts but much of that has been due to their defense against Manning, including the game they intercepted Manning 6 times. The other part you're missing is that the Chargers and Steelers have Pro Bowl QBs and with proven receivers. The 49ers have a resurrected Alex Smith and a bunch of young receivers plus Bruce, most of whom have not been on the field at the same time with Smith under center for more than possibly the 2nd half against the Texans. Until the bye week, Smith hadn't even thrown any of the 49ers routes since the end of TC.

You're crazy if you think the 49ers best option is to get into a shoot-out on the road with the Colts and Manning. Their best option is to play smart, hang around by running the ball with Gore and converting 3rd downs with Smith's throws, not turn the ball over and then try to win it in the 4th quarter.

1. I merely cited the most prominent example; Furthermore, Manning in the hurry-up puts our defense at a comparative disadvantage
2. The Cover 2 (Tampa 2) is weak against the Tight end. The Tight End is our best weapon.
3. We have weapons just like San Diego, but we're green.

The Colts last 4 losses, the winning team had TOP advantages of approximately 3.5, 23, 7 and 8 minutes. The 23 minute advantage was against the Jags last year in Indy which was essentially just like the Miami game this year except the Colts had the ball for all of 18 minutes instead of 15 minutes and the Jags won while the Dolphins lost. In the playoff game last year that the Charges won against the Colts it was hardly a "shootout". It was 23-17 in OT and the Chargers ran for 167 yards even with LT only having 5 carries and 25 yards.
Originally posted by nickbradley:
Exhibit A - Miami vs. Indy. 45 min. of possession and more yards than Indy...yet still lost.

Manning excels in hurry-up situations because he calls his own plays from the line of scrimmage. Forcing Manning into a no-huddle situation will only get you burned.

The best strategy, from what I've seen, is to try and match them while hoping for a mistake by the Colts offense.

Everybody falls for the theory that you must run against the Colts to keep Manning off the field. Here are the problems with that:

1. Manning is better in the hurry offense than in the normal offense.
2. The Colts defense is MUCH better when they have 8 men in the box -- Bob Sanders gets to play the run instead of the pass (Sanders is amazing vs. the run, so-so vs. the pass)

So, by running on them, you play right into their hands. The only team that DOESN'T take a run-first approach to the Colts is San Diego, and they're been pretty successful vs. Indy. The Steelers aren't afraid to get into a shoot-out w/ Manning Either.

Thoughts?

Let's Air it out!

It doesn't matter if you run or pass the key is ball control and limiting the mistakes. Thats why the Pats and even the Chargers played them so well. The Phins lost with Peyton only having the ball for a quarter but look at their DB's compared to ours. It helps to have experienced guys in the secondary against the colts.

Hopefully I'm wrong but our biggest problem dealing with them will probably be our Vanilla defense on 3rd down. We have to mix it up on D if we are gonna win. Maybe bringing the "magic" look a few more times this game could force a couple key turnovers