Is Manny Lawson Onboard with the 49ers New Culture?

Originally posted by lamontb:

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.

I absolutely agree...it's sort of both for me:
1. Manusky is still new and learning about exotic blitz schemes emplyed by other teams such as the Jets, Steelers, Chargers, Pats, Ravens, etc.
2. But we don't have one dominant SAM or WILL and therefore, Manusky is forced to "manufacture" sacks instead which most came from the d-line, inside LB's and safeties mixed in with a few CB blitzes which always seem effective.

If we can get at least ONE dominant SAM or WILL who does NOT need to come out of the game, this defense becomes deceptive and Manusky will be in a better position to grow and generate a pass rush from the SAM or WILL "AND" from all the aforementioned positions as well. Then you lead the league in sacks, QB hits and pressures every year and usually lead the league in defense like we used to do back in the day and what the Steelers do just about every year.

Originally posted by NinerGM:

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.

You rock NComm - sweet post!

Thanks for the props!

Originally posted by NCommand:

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!

It would certainly be ideal to have two OLBs who can bring consistent pressure.

It makes me wonder just what would happen with this defense, even if we only acquire one dominant rusher, considering what Manusky has accomplished with his schemed pressure alone. Ranked high in sacks and turnovers....

Real consistent pressure sure would make this defense exciting.

Originally posted by Wodwo:

Originally posted by NCommand:

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!

It would certainly be ideal to have two OLBs who can bring consistent pressure.

It makes me wonder just what would happen with this defense, even if we only acquire one dominant rusher, considering what Manusky has accomplished with his schemed pressure alone. Ranked high in sacks and turnovers....

Real consistent pressure sure would make this defense exciting.

For sure! The good ones got 'em. Merriman used to be the man but Phillips was just as effective at the SAM.

My conspiracy theory of the day is that Brooks is the best pure pass rusher of the three. So wouldn't he be worked in at the WILL spot for Haralson esp. given Haralson played 130 more plays then Lawson? Instead, the took out Lawson for Brooks. Given that Brooks just signed a two year contract, that may be a hint that working him in at the SAM may be by design. They may want to work him in FT this year or by next year when Manny's contract is up. Either way, this year Brooks may create his own destiny depending on how he plays esp. if given more opportunities. So why is this significant? B/c that may mean we have had our eye on Brandon Graham to take over at the WILL slowly working him in and then moving Haralson back to where he was most successful - off the bench in Brooks current role.

If you have two athletic dominant pass rushers who can drop back in zone from time to time and play the run well and set the edge, Manusky would have endless opportunities to dialing up the blitz and transform this defense into a true 3-4 defense and hover among the top defenses in the league, year-in, year-out!

Just my conspiracy theory of the day. Haha

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Wodwo:

Originally posted by NCommand:

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!

It would certainly be ideal to have two OLBs who can bring consistent pressure.

It makes me wonder just what would happen with this defense, even if we only acquire one dominant rusher, considering what Manusky has accomplished with his schemed pressure alone. Ranked high in sacks and turnovers....

Real consistent pressure sure would make this defense exciting.

For sure! The good ones got 'em. Merriman used to be the man but Phillips was just as effective at the SAM.

My conspiracy theory of the day is that Brooks is the best pure pass rusher of the three. So wouldn't he be worked in at the WILL spot for Haralson esp. given Haralson played 130 more plays then Lawson? Instead, the took out Lawson for Brooks. Given that Brooks just signed a two year contract, that may be a hint that working him in at the SAM may be by design. They may want to work him in FT this year or by next year when Manny's contract is up. Either way, this year Brooks may create his own destiny depending on how he plays esp. if given more opportunities. So why is this significant? B/c that may mean we have had our eye on Brandon Graham to take over at the WILL slowly working him in and then moving Haralson back to where he was most successful - off the bench in Brooks current role.

If you have two athletic dominant pass rushers who can drop back in zone from time to time and play the run well and set the edge, Manusky would have endless opportunities to dialing up the blitz and transform this defense into a true 3-4 defense and hover among the top defenses in the league, year-in, year-out!

Just my conspiracy theory of the day. Haha

Merriman was really good, until they made him quit taking steroids. I agree though, you can never have too many pass rushers. I think we will be okay even if we stand pat with what we have.

Originally posted by Memphis9er:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Wodwo:

Originally posted by NCommand:

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!

It would certainly be ideal to have two OLBs who can bring consistent pressure.

It makes me wonder just what would happen with this defense, even if we only acquire one dominant rusher, considering what Manusky has accomplished with his schemed pressure alone. Ranked high in sacks and turnovers....

Real consistent pressure sure would make this defense exciting.

For sure! The good ones got 'em. Merriman used to be the man but Phillips was just as effective at the SAM.

My conspiracy theory of the day is that Brooks is the best pure pass rusher of the three. So wouldn't he be worked in at the WILL spot for Haralson esp. given Haralson played 130 more plays then Lawson? Instead, the took out Lawson for Brooks. Given that Brooks just signed a two year contract, that may be a hint that working him in at the SAM may be by design. They may want to work him in FT this year or by next year when Manny's contract is up. Either way, this year Brooks may create his own destiny depending on how he plays esp. if given more opportunities. So why is this significant? B/c that may mean we have had our eye on Brandon Graham to take over at the WILL slowly working him in and then moving Haralson back to where he was most successful - off the bench in Brooks current role.

If you have two athletic dominant pass rushers who can drop back in zone from time to time and play the run well and set the edge, Manusky would have endless opportunities to dialing up the blitz and transform this defense into a true 3-4 defense and hover among the top defenses in the league, year-in, year-out!

Just my conspiracy theory of the day. Haha

Merriman was really good, until they made him quit taking steroids. I agree though, you can never have too many pass rushers. I think we will be okay even if we stand pat with what we have.

Hahaha. I'm sure...then the injuries...then Jamal Williams getting hurt, etc. Without a dominant NT, you can't have dominant pass rushers. They did start to gel late last year though and started to come on again with all the new personnel and health issues dissipating. But yeah, I'm sure the juice helped some! LMAO

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Wodwo:

Originally posted by NCommand:

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!

It would certainly be ideal to have two OLBs who can bring consistent pressure.

It makes me wonder just what would happen with this defense, even if we only acquire one dominant rusher, considering what Manusky has accomplished with his schemed pressure alone. Ranked high in sacks and turnovers....

Real consistent pressure sure would make this defense exciting.

For sure! The good ones got 'em. Merriman used to be the man but Phillips was just as effective at the SAM.

My conspiracy theory of the day is that Brooks is the best pure pass rusher of the three. So wouldn't he be worked in at the WILL spot for Haralson esp. given Haralson played 130 more plays then Lawson? Instead, the took out Lawson for Brooks. Given that Brooks just signed a two year contract, that may be a hint that working him in at the SAM may be by design. They may want to work him in FT this year or by next year when Manny's contract is up. Either way, this year Brooks may create his own destiny depending on how he plays esp. if given more opportunities. So why is this significant? B/c that may mean we have had our eye on Brandon Graham to take over at the WILL slowly working him in and then moving Haralson back to where he was most successful - off the bench in Brooks current role.

If you have two athletic dominant pass rushers who can drop back in zone from time to time and play the run well and set the edge, Manusky would have endless opportunities to dialing up the blitz and transform this defense into a true 3-4 defense and hover among the top defenses in the league, year-in, year-out!

Just my conspiracy theory of the day. Haha

I am 100% for having Haralson come off the bench to give Brooks a breather. Manny is such a strong run defender that he is vital on 1st and 2nd downs. He starting coming through much stronger all around later in the year. If we do get Graham, then he would probably be a 3rd down only guy considering he's a rookie where Manny will be doing the dirty work on 1st and 2nd until Graham shows he's an every down guy.

Either way, our OLBs are set. I'm more concerned about the ILB depth. Takeo proved he was a huge factor in our defense as we did not play very well when he was out. I'm not confident at all with who we have behind Spikes and Willis. There is no depth here and we will really be hurting if either one gets injured which can happen any time of the year.

It doesn't matter what Manny thinks about the new culture, this will be his last season with the team. The future at OLB is with Brooks/Haralson or Brooks/Someone else.

Delete

Originally posted by JR80Forever:
It doesn't matter what Manny thinks about the new culture, this will be his last season with the team. The future at OLB is with Brooks/Haralson or Brooks/Someone else.

An admin should start a stickied thread where we can post these all-knowing guru's proclamations for posterity. It would be very interesting to track how many of them are accurate.

Originally posted by Joecool:
I am 100% for having Haralson come off the bench to give Brooks a breather. Manny is such a strong run defender that he is vital on 1st and 2nd downs. He starting coming through much stronger all around later in the year. If we do get Graham, then he would probably be a 3rd down only guy considering he's a rookie where Manny will be doing the dirty work on 1st and 2nd until Graham shows he's an every down guy.

Here's an interesting find from FO's re: our defensive fronts including Manny at the SAM and Haralson at the WILL and how our defense ranked: Defensive ranks over the o-lines:

Right End (9) Right Tackle (9) Mid/Guard (10) Left Tackle (1) Left End (13)

The strong side, usually the side where the TE lines up (usually over RT) is Sopoaga and Lawson's side of the defense, ranked 9th against the run both sides of the Right Tackle.

You could see that when we moved Franklin to a one-gap, he dominant in the gap between the left tackle and guard (along with Smith's help) but struggled more one-on-one with the better centers of the game as well as a combination of the center and right guard (with help from Sopoaga). This meant Smith helped out a lot to the inside with Franklin. This is an area where Sopoaga did a nice job too on the other side but could stand to improve some as well as Franklin getting stronger in this gap as well.

But interesting enough, Haralson, had 130 more snaps then Manny last year and he ranked 13th in the NFL against the run outside the Left Tackle. This means Smith needs to help more on the outside but all in all, did a good job on his own for his first year as a starter with no subs.

Manny was second on the team in stops at 40 (behind Willis @ 66) but Haralson had 30 stops himself.

So the real question is, is Manny so crucial on 1st and 2nd downs that we need to keep him in there and bring Brooks in to pass rush on 3rd downs and telegraph our defensive game plan? Can Haralson be moved to the SAM for run support and move Brooks to the WILL full time? Or keep Haralson at WILL and start Brooks at SAM and spell him with Manny to keep the OLB's fresh?

This is all assuming we don't pick up a better OLB in FA or a rising draftee such as Graham who more then looks the part with his skill-set.

Originally posted by Joecool:
Either way, our OLBs are set. I'm more concerned about the ILB depth. Takeo proved he was a huge factor in our defense as we did not play very well when he was out. I'm not confident at all with who we have behind Spikes and Willis. There is no depth here and we will really be hurting if either one gets injured which can happen any time of the year.

I certainly don't feel our OLB's are anywhere close to being set yet although I do agree that I don't feel comfortable with our backups on the inside (or how our starters are used) and I was never a fan of McKillop (aka Derek Smith II).

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.

This argument ended soon as you questioned Willis. It's now obvious that you are arguing for the sake of arguing.

Willis has started his NFL career better than ANY modern NFL MLB, INCLUDING Ray Lewis, who is undoubtfuly a HOF candidate. Like I said, barring injury, Willis is a HOF lock and anyone who disagrees is a fool.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Joecool:


Manny was second on the team in stops at 40 (behind Willis @ 66) but Haralson had 30 stops himself.

Elaborate on what is considered a stop? Are you talking about tackles in general? Tackles for loss? Tackles on plays that resulted in less than a certain # of yards (for example less than 2 yards). I'm curious.

For the record Manny was 5th on the team in overall tackles so I'm just wondering what being 2nd in stops actually means?

Thanks

Elaborate on what is considered a stop? Are you talking about tackles in general? Tackles for loss? Tackles on plays that resulted in less than a certain # of yards (for example less than 2 yards). I'm curious.

For the record Manny was 5th on the team in overall tackles so I'm just wondering what being 2nd in stops actually means?

Thanks

Originally posted by NCommand:

But interesting enough, Haralson, had 130 more snaps then Manny last year and he ranked 13th in the NFL against the run outside the Left Tackle. This means Smith needs to help more on the outside but all in all, did a good job on his own for his first year as a starter with no subs.

Manny was second on the team in stops at 40 (behind Willis @ 66) but Haralson had 30 stops himself.

This data would seem to imply that Lawson was much more effective against the run considering his higher production with less snaps and higher run defense ranking on his side. Obviously there are other factors, but I think you're making a case that Lawson should stay at SAM as a two down player.

Also, I think most would agree that Smith is just better than Sopoaga in all aspects of the game. Meaning, Haralson has more help on his side.

Plus, let's not forget that Lawson had more sacks than Haralson with less snaps.

Why do you want to replace Lawson, again?