Is Manny Lawson Onboard with the 49ers New Culture?

Originally posted by Gavintech:

Originally posted by lamontb:
But Brooks replaces Manny when he does come in the game so how are they gonna be a good pair?

Did that happen every time Brooks came in the game last year? Nope. They can rotate however they want and will do so however they see fit for the time. I see Brooks taking a lot of Parys' snaps.

I would think so myself, but for the most part he took manny's spot on 3rd downs. either way i don't expect Manny to be back next year b/c i think another team will pay more than the Niners are willing to. The thing is I'm not sure Brooks has showed that he can be anything more than a pass rushing OLB. not sure how he does against the run and dropping back into coverage at times. i agree I think Parys is the worst out of the 3 but he seems to get more of the playing time.

Damn I like Manny Lawson, not stoked on his agent saying "no comment" to a simple question like why isn't Manny participating in OTA's? I would of been fine with " he is on his own program with his personnel Trainer" kinda makes u wonder.... but cant get ahead of myself he is still a Niner and I wish him the best this year.

Originally posted by hubbyt:
I think the article was full of ish lol .. somehow the convo digressed into Manny's value to the team so people went wild including myself .. I feel Manny is alright nothing to brag about in terms of his play. Could we use an upgrade, YES. Is he the worst or first person we need to replace, NO. People make the argument he does so many things well (many of which dont really show up in the stat sheet) but I guess some of us figure the things he does well can be accomplished by a 3rd or 4th round draft choice not someone you picked in the 1st round. At the end of the day if your saying he sets the edge well against the run and thats the best thing he does I'd be looking to replace him if I were his coach. He led the team with 7 sacks ok but Tully fat boy Banta Cain had 10 last year shouldnt we expect more from Manny? Maybe its the scheme

It seems Manny's stats are judged a little harshly considering he gets taken off the field. He is a sort of jack-of-all-trades, master of none, but he still has the tools to bring more to the table. We'll see how he does this season. If he doesn't bring his performance to a higher level, we might see his replacement next year's draft (if not this one).

Originally posted by OKC49erFan:

Originally posted by hubbyt:
I think the article was full of ish lol .. somehow the convo digressed into Manny's value to the team so people went wild including myself .. I feel Manny is alright nothing to brag about in terms of his play. Could we use an upgrade, YES. Is he the worst or first person we need to replace, NO. People make the argument he does so many things well (many of which dont really show up in the stat sheet) but I guess some of us figure the things he does well can be accomplished by a 3rd or 4th round draft choice not someone you picked in the 1st round. At the end of the day if your saying he sets the edge well against the run and thats the best thing he does I'd be looking to replace him if I were his coach. He led the team with 7 sacks ok but Tully fat boy Banta Cain had 10 last year shouldnt we expect more from Manny? Maybe its the scheme

It seems Manny's stats are judged a little harshly considering he gets taken off the field. He is a sort of jack-of-all-trades, master of none, but he still has the tools to bring more to the table. We'll see how he does this season. If he doesn't bring his performance to a higher level, we might see his replacement next year's draft (if not this one).

We need a Jack-of-all-trades, if we don't re-sign Manny it would be a mistake.. unless he is asking for ridiculous money. Manny is an asset to this team, and his only knock is that people want him to be Demarcus Ware but in the end he is more of a Ted Johnson, or Mike Vrabel. I could see a year where Manny puts up ridiculous sacks but it wont be consistent, he is still young and his game is still evolving.

Originally posted by NinerGM:

Originally posted by WINiner:

Originally posted by NinerGM:

Originally posted by Wodwo:

Originally posted by NinerGM:

I'm trying to be unbiased about this and you just don't hear this assessment around the league. Great players show up in big games and my recollection, particularly last season, it was Willis who showed up much more than Lawson.

Willis shows up more than anyone on the team. What's your point?

The reason that you aren't seeing much from Lawson might be that the thing he does well is prevent explosive plays. He covers well for a linebacker, causing the QB to look elsewhere, and also causing you to look elsewhere. He also does a good job against the run, sealing the edge so that the RB can't turn the corner, but perhaps allowing another player (Willis) to make the tackle.

In a 3-4 defense the blind side OLB is usually the flashier of the two OLBs... at least in my observations.

?? I guess I missed the Atlanta and Tenesse game. My point is that if Willis doesn't do it, then it's Spikes that tends to come up with the play that helps Willis the most, not Lawson. Again, there's a reason why the 49ers have not approached Lawson and extended him already if he's been that valuable ala Shawnte Spencer. You guys are trying to turn this into an either/or argument and I'm not saying that at all.

- I'm not asking Lawson to make 10.5 sacks a season
- I'm not saying he's no good

I'm just saying he's OK. There's nothing wrong with OK - however, there's also nothing wrong with the word upgrade. Anyone here who thinks Lawson is the best this team can do, IMHO, is a homer.

Lawson is not the BEST (but better than the "ok" you used to describe him) we could do , but you don't need the BEST at every position, and he's not one of the first guys we should worry about upgradin. I would rather see upgrades over guys like Mike Lewis, Ice, Bass, Snyder, Haralson, Moran Norris, Brandon Jones....

Because I want better than okay does that mean I want the BEST at every position? Oh course not. Willis a HOF lock barring injury? I think that's a bit premature.

I didn't phrase my response correctly and I don't mean to compare Lawson to Willis - a better word would be COMPLIMENT. Does Lawson compliment Willis like Adelius Thomas complimented Ray Lewis? The answer is no. No, Lawson is not better than OK because if he were again, you wouldn't just hear it here but you would hear it in other NFL circles - which you don't.

I agree we can upgrade other players like Lewis, Baas, Soapoaga, Snyder, Noris and Jones. Those players IMHO aren't that much different from Lawson although Baas and Snyder I think are not OK, but bench players at best. However, since this thread is about Lawson, I addressed him specifically. I agree with you about the other players however.

Lawson's agent saying "no comment" about whether Lawson who's under contract should be at OTAs is interesting in itself. Lawson thinking he should get an extension? Hmmm. Well I don't think his play has earned him a high-dollar extension.

Just because Lawson doesn't praise Willis for his play like Thomas did for Lewis, doesn't make him a bad player.



-9fA

Originally posted by NinerGM:
I didn't phrase my response correctly and I don't mean to compare Lawson to Willis - a better word would be COMPLIMENT. Does Lawson compliment Willis like Adelius Thomas complimented Ray Lewis? The answer is no. No, Lawson is not better than OK because if he were again, you wouldn't just hear it here but you would hear it in other NFL circles - which you don't.

Do you not watch the national broadcasts? He gets praise by the Fox broadcasters damn near every time you hear his name.

Originally posted by NinerGM:

Originally posted by Gavintech:

Originally posted by NinerGM:
I didn't phrase my response correctly and I don't mean to compare Lawson to Willis - a better word would be COMPLIMENT. Does Lawson compliment Willis like Adelius Thomas complimented Ray Lewis? The answer is no. No, Lawson is not better than OK because if he were again, you wouldn't just hear it here but you would hear it in other NFL circles - which you don't.

Do you not watch the national broadcasts? He gets praise by the Fox broadcasters damn near every time you hear his name.

Link?

You want a link to a broadcast of an NFL football game?

Do you also want me to watch it and tell you exactly how many seconds into the broadcast the mentions are? I don't know that I can find a link that will allow you to watch games and hear the Fox broadcast but even if I could, I really don't care that much what your opinion of Lawson is to actually do anything like that.

So it sort of comes down to a few different camps...

On Manny's game:
Coverage is excellent (only two old examples stated supporting for) to way overrated
Above average/excellent at setting the edge to good at setting the edge except against speedy edge backs (evidence of whole team poor in screen pass defense and TE's and RB's out in the flats and pulled on 3rd downs)
Serviceable in QB pressures (lead team in sacks at 6.5 but Brooks had 6 in 1/2 the pass rush snaps and on predictable pass rush situations)
Very good in football IQ (rarely out of position, good tackles for loss, solid tackler) to average (still looks lost and runs around like a chicken with his head cut off at times and still runs himself out of plays esp. on screens)
Good team player (very likeable guy) to questionable team player (threw fit when pulled for Brooks on sideline, played his best game when called out and now the OTA absence)
Above average overall game (called the "most complete LB") to more one dimensional (Pulled for pass rush downs and situations and way over-rated in pass coverage but sets the edge well consistently)

Situations he can't control - body type, scheme (how he's used and 3-4 vs. 4-3), etc.

Looking at the posts it appears most think he's a solid player, nothing flashy, does some consistent things that may not show up in the stat sheet, is best suited for the 4-3 but solid for a 3-4 OLB in the 3-4.

IMHO, the problem is that we play a 3-4 defense and having an OLB who can rush the passer consistently and effectively is the #1 priority of skills and if he can set the edge well while doing it AND drop back in passing lanes from time to time, he'd never need to come off the field and that element is HUGE for a true deceptive, 3-4 scheme. It's like with any good 3-4 defense...all four of your LB's need to be pas rushers and be able to bring it at any time from any angle.

Right now, we pull Manny and insert Brooks to pass rush and that move telegraphs what our defense is going to do. This is the same concept with many of Jimmy Raye's formations on offense which telegraphed to defenders what we were going to do even before the snap. This DEFEATS the purpose of a 3-4 defense.

I'm curious how fans can justify that. This topic should roll right into a Haralson topic as well as a Manusky scheme. When I posted throughout last year, that mass majority of 3-4 pressures came from the OLB's...currently, our came from everyone else and we justified it as being "well balanced."

I think what fans want are players that fit the scheme so that we can have a dominant Will & Sam AND continue to bring team defensive pressure from other areas of the field (safety and CB blitzes, middle LB blitzes, d-line, etc.).

Thoughts?

Originally posted by NinerGM:

Originally posted by Gavintech:

Originally posted by NinerGM:

Originally posted by Gavintech:

Originally posted by NinerGM:
I didn't phrase my response correctly and I don't mean to compare Lawson to Willis - a better word would be COMPLIMENT. Does Lawson compliment Willis like Adelius Thomas complimented Ray Lewis? The answer is no. No, Lawson is not better than OK because if he were again, you wouldn't just hear it here but you would hear it in other NFL circles - which you don't.

Do you not watch the national broadcasts? He gets praise by the Fox broadcasters damn near every time you hear his name.

Link?

You want a link to a broadcast of an NFL football game?

Do you also want me to watch it and tell you exactly how many seconds into the broadcast the mentions are? I don't know that I can find a link that will allow you to watch games and hear the Fox broadcast but even if I could, I really don't care that much what your opinion of Lawson is to actually do anything like that.

No if he's referenced every week then there should be something written about him right? Reasonable expectation. If you don't care what my opinion is than don't respond to my posts right? That's how it works - if you care then you hit the little quote button which implies that you do. I'm not upset or pissed - we're talking about a player... in a game.... dude. I know Lawson will be on the team next year. Chill. I'm just saying he's OK and you're saying he's better based on all the things you've heard. Well if that's true the only way to prove that he's as you claim is a link. I can find plenty of stuff that says he's OK.

Really? I'm getting attacked because I think we can do better than Many Lawson? When was it a crime to want better (NOT THE BEST) players for this team? Have we come to expect so much less since times past?

No, nothing about my opinion of Manny's play has anything to do with what I've heard. I only asked you/pointed out that they talk glowingly about him on TV. It was you that told us that part of your opinion of him is based on your perception that he isn't talked about. Please don't convey your method of analysis onto me, I don't work that way.

As far as how much I care what you think about Manny, this is a discussion forum. We talk about things. Often times quotes of other members. That's what this is for. Just because I don't care enough to start Googling and combing through blogs and articles to find someone possibly quoting a Fox broadcaster's opinion of one NFL OLB doesn't mean I can't take part in the conversation. And no, just because he's referenced on a television broadcast doesn't mean it's written about somewhere that anyone can magically find.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Thoughts?

Good post. Covers the entire discussion very well.

It is reasonable to assume that Lawson was drafted to play ROLB and pressure the QB. That is the position he started in his rookie year. After playing there for a while (can't recall exactly how long) he was moved to LOLB and his role in the defense changed.

Now, from what I've observed around the league, teams that run the 3-4 defense usually only have one dominant pass rushing OLB. That player is almost always on the right side of the defense. It follows the general rule that you want your pressure coming from the QB's blind side.

I believe that the role of the LOLB is different. Not to say that they aren't expected to display good pass rush skills, but as with a LDE in a 4-3, they are counted on to play better against the run because that is traditionally the power side of the run game. Also, the LOLB is counted on more in coverage because that is the traditional spot for the TE.

In my opinion, the position we are really talking about needing an upgrade is the ROLB. That is, if you are in the camp that believes Lawson does a good job in those other LOLB roles I mentioned. You mention that Lawson is better suited to play in a 4-3 with his skill set, but I don't see the disparity being quite as large as that of the ROLB.

Lawson has been disappointing because most fans expected him to be that pass rushing ROLB. His current role is one that many feel can be filled by a prospect drafted much later than Lawson was. I agree with this.... However, looking at him for what he is, I feel that it would be a mistake to not at least try to extend his contract. His demands should not be that high considering he does not have the production to warrant it. If he can be signed for high end back-up type money, it makes sense to do so because the team does not have much depth at the position and he is familiar with the defense. If an opportunity comes to upgrade, then it should be taken. However, as I said before, I think the upgrade people are clamoring for will have to be made at ROLB first. It's not as though anyone else on the roster has been consistently dominant rushing the passer. So, if we acquire a dominant pass rusher, he would likely play opposite Manny anyway.

I wrote way too much to make that point. It is moot if you believe he isn't good in his roles against the run and pass coverage. From what I have seen, he is good... not great or flashy or impossible to upgrade, but worth keeping around.

Make or break season for Manny. I've been one of the biggest fans of his potential coming out of the draft. I'm hoping he proves us wrong.

Manusky needs to use Manny more as a pass rusher, his stats arent so overwhelming because he is used in pass coverage quiet a bit, but I agree this is his make or break year, hopefully we get a 10+sack season from Manny

Originally posted by NeeJ49er:
Manusky needs to use Manny more as a pass rusher, his stats arent so overwhelming because he is used in pass coverage quiet a bit, but I agree this is his make or break year, hopefully we get a 10+sack season from Manny

Actually this wasn't true last year at all...in fact, quite the opposite. Manny's role changed last year to focus almost exclusively on the pass rush from Day 1 which is why some fans were predicting big numbers from him (and b/c he was fully healthy).

PFF noted that Lawson pass rushed 369 times last year and was only in coverage on 156 plays. To put that into perspective, Haralson dropped back in zone coverage 142 times. Both were pretty even on run-defense plays. Haralson did play 130 more plays then Manny last year but that was b/c he was replaced by Brooks who put up the same sack numbers as Manny but in half the pass rushing snaps and on much more predicatble downs.

I agree with the poster above though that the WILL spot should be reviewed very closely as that typically is your more dominant pass rusher of the two in 3-4 defenses but not always. But what is true about successful 3-4's is that BOTH the SAM & WILL tend to be able to get after it when called upon and together, make up the majority of the sacks and QB pressures for the team.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by NeeJ49er:
Manusky needs to use Manny more as a pass rusher, his stats arent so overwhelming because he is used in pass coverage quiet a bit, but I agree this is his make or break year, hopefully we get a 10+sack season from Manny

Actually this wasn't true last year at all...in fact, quite the opposite. Manny's role changed last year to focus almost exclusively on the pass rush from Day 1 which is why some fans were predicting big numbers from him (and b/c he was fully healthy).

PFF noted that Lawson pass rushed 369 times last year and was only in coverage on 156 plays. To put that into perspective, Haralson dropped back in zone coverage 142 times. Both were pretty even on run-defense plays. Haralson did play 130 more plays then Manny last year but that was b/c he was replaced by Brooks who put up the same sack numbers as Manny but in half the pass rushing snaps and on much more predicatble downs.

I agree with the poster above though that the WILL spot should be reviewed very closely as that typically is your more dominant pass rusher of the two in 3-4 defenses but not always. But what is true about successful 3-4's is that BOTH the SAM & WILL tend to be able to get after it when called upon and together, make up the majority of the sacks and QB pressures for the team.

To me it's kinda like Manusky is sorta stuck with tipping his hand. Manny and Parys can't get it done in the pass rushing department. Which forces the team to basically play a lot of vanilla fronts. Rarely do you see blitzes coming from different places. It used to boggle my mind why he doesn't blitz from various spots out of the 3=4, but I really don't think these guy's can get it done. I'm glad Manny and Parys are good against the run though Parys gets to the outside a lot. But this 3-4 needs a real pass rusher that teams have to plan for on every down. I would like to see them send Willis and Spikes on more A gap bltizes. Since Brooks isn't an every down linebacker it really does tip off the offense when he enters the game. Another reason teams go to screen plays or quick hits to the TE's b/c they know he's not dropping back into any passing lanes or even looking for screens. i think Manusky does a good job for what he has but we need to remember that he was a linebackers coach under Wade Phillips who is a pretty skillful coach when it comes to the 3-4. this is his 1st real run at being a coordinator so it is a learning curve for him also. Just seems that Manusky isn't as aggressive but i think that has to do with personnel also.

Originally posted by Wodwo:
Good post. Covers the entire discussion very well.

Thank you! And quite a range of opinions on not just Manny's skillset but how that skillset fits into our current scheme.

Originally posted by Wodwo:
It is reasonable to assume that Lawson was drafted to play ROLB and pressure the QB. That is the position he started in his rookie year. After playing there for a while (can't recall exactly how long) he was moved to LOLB and his role in the defense changed.

I'm impressed you noted this! Yes, that was very true...he was drafted to be our dominant pass rusher b/c when they watched tape of Mario Williams, they kept seeing Manny on the other side making plays. So we started him at the WILL spot and ran him almost exclusivley in pass rush mode and...well, he got destroyed. In fact Nolan sat him down for a couple of games to rest and catch up to himself and then moved him permanently to SAM (ala Julian Peterson) to take advantage of his athleticism in coverage and help defend against the run.

Originally posted by Wodwo:
Now, from what I've observed around the league, teams that run the 3-4 defense usually only have one dominant pass rushing OLB. That player is almost always on the right side of the defense. It follows the general rule that you want your pressure coming from the QB's blind side.

While there tends to be a "more" dominant pass rusher between the WILL & SAM (usually the WILL), the SAM is often times just as effective if not more and combined tend to account for most of their team's sacks, QB pressures and hits by design; just like our defense is designed to free Willis up to put up HOF numbers.

But what most great 3-4 defenses to is move and switch back and forth between the SAM & WILL. Ware may play the SAM and then switch over to the WILL if a weakness is found. Merriman is the "free man" in San Diego's defense and pften times, you can see him standing up, walking back and forth just behind the LOS looking for a gap to shoot or to get that extra step and momentum to get under a tackle and drive him back to the QB or bull rush right over him and make the sack.

Some of this is scheme and a reason why I feel Manusky needs to watch more tape of the Jets, Steelers, etc. and other teams that generate consistent pressure esp. from all four LB's and dictate offenses. Manusky added a few more wrinkles last year but I feel he still plays a pretty vanilla scheme focusing more on "manufacturing QB pressure." But perhaps, that's b/c we don't have ONE dominant SAM or WILL yet and must rely on guys such as Haralson, Green & now Brooks to come in off the bench and garner pressure.

OLB's in the 3-4/Sack Stats

Originally posted by Wodwo:
I believe that the role of the LOLB is different. Not to say that they aren't expected to display good pass rush skills, but as with a LDE in a 4-3, they are counted on to play better against the run because that is traditionally the power side of the run game. Also, the LOLB is counted on more in coverage because that is the traditional spot for the TE.

This is typically true in our scheme and even more so when we ran a hybrid but I do not agree with this scheme in a true 3-4 defense as really, both the SAM & WILL should be free to rush the passer on any down. And really, your safety or DB's should be covering the TE's anyhow and not the SAM linebacker. In fact, IMHO, both the SAM & WILL should only drop back and cover a zone (not a player) i.e. a passing lane only to help to be deceptive which is the heart and soul of a 3-4 (deception). Is he going to rush the QB or drop back in zone?

Originally posted by Wodwo:
In my opinion, the position we are really talking about needing an upgrade is the ROLB. That is, if you are in the camp that believes Lawson does a good job in those other LOLB roles I mentioned. You mention that Lawson is better suited to play in a 4-3 with his skill set, but I don't see the disparity being quite as large as that of the ROLB.

No question about this one! They both needed to be upgraded without a doubt IMO.

Originally posted by Wodwo:
Lawson has been disappointing because most fans expected him to be that pass rushing ROLB. His current role is one that many feel can be filled by a prospect drafted much later than Lawson was. I agree with this.... However, looking at him for what he is, I feel that it would be a mistake to not at least try to extend his contract. His demands should not be that high considering he does not have the production to warrant it. If he can be signed for high end back-up type money, it makes sense to do so because the team does not have much depth at the position and he is familiar with the defense. If an opportunity comes to upgrade, then it should be taken. However, as I said before, I think the upgrade people are clamoring for will have to be made at ROLB first. It's not as though anyone else on the roster has been consistently dominant rushing the passer. So, if we acquire a dominant pass rusher, he would likely play opposite Manny anyway.

He'd be a solid backup but for personal reasons, I'd let him go to a 4-3 defense b/c he's just better suited for it and I'd like to see him succeed. He would make an excellent backup though and I'd like to see him remain with us b/c he does have good athleticism and can be used in many defensive sets and he's gotten much better against the run esp. this past year where he was second in stops.

Originally posted by Wodwo:
I wrote way too much to make that point. It is moot if you believe he isn't good in his roles against the run and pass coverage. From what I have seen, he is good... not great or flashy or impossible to upgrade, but worth keeping around.

I agree and I think most on this board would agree with this statement. Both the SAM & WILL spots needs to be upgraded and Manusky will need to continue to grow and become more elaborate in his blitz schemes if this defense is ever going to take the next step and become a dominant and dictating 3-4 defense...one that gets off the field quickly, causes turnovers and generally, gives the ball back to the offense.

Nice post!