There are 100 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Manusky's D

  • sfout
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 6,193
I've always heard Manusky's secondary scheme classified as "shell coverage" does it fall under a larger classification like Tampa 2 or something else? I've never really been clear on this issue. If it is something totally different, what defensive scheme should we switch to? I'm tired of our "Bend but don't break" type attitude, I think we need an aggressive approach on the defensive side of the ball. What is everyone's opinion on our defense? In all likelihood Manusky could be out with the new HC ushering in a completely new staff. So who would be a good fit for our current core personnel and what scheme would we really want to change to?


[ Edited by TheGoldenState on Dec 31, 2010 at 22:35:50 ]
[img=]
manusky runs alot of zone coverage the problem though is that we dont get enough pass rush for zone to work. He has to protect our secondary because it sucks by playing our corners and safety way off the ball thus giving up all the short passes, and since our secondary is also slow we get burned deep. I would like to see what he could do with a proper secondary and a proper pass rush.
  • cools
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 1,312
Im pretty sure a "shell" is zone coverage with the DB's making sure
the player in their area is in front of them, Kind of a bend but dont break style

I think Manusky is done, I like the guy
but, any coach who insists Haralson is a good player and should be starting has a screw loose

There is a good chance Fangio or Lewis take over our D'
I'll be happy with either of those scenarios
Soon he will be running the "unemployed" coverage
Originally posted by philosoraptor:
manusky runs alot of zone coverage the problem though is that we dont get enough pass rush for zone to work. He has to protect our secondary because it sucks by playing our corners and safety way off the ball thus giving up all the short passes, and since our secondary is also slow we get burned deep. I would like to see what he could do with a proper secondary and a proper pass rush.

This. No corners+ no pass rush= bend don't break or worse defense. Manusky haas done a good job.
Bye Manusky... hello Marvin Lewis.
Originally posted by boriken_9er:
Soon he will be running the "unemployed" coverage

Oh he'll get picked up quicker than you'd believe. There are teams that could use him.
  • GORO
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 1,802
Manusky is a good DC. But I always wonder why we plays so far off the reciever. 3rd and 3 we would give a 10 yd cushion. Yeah maybe Clements sucks in man coverage but still we should challenge these short thrid down scenarios.
but he has the "Magic Package"
Originally posted by GORO:
Manusky is a good DC. But I always wonder why we plays so far off the reciever. 3rd and 3 we would give a 10 yd cushion. Yeah maybe Clements sucks in man coverage but still we should challenge these short thrid down scenarios.

no doubt, clements does some things well and its clear having him off 10-15 yards doesnt work, his only fighting chance is to be physical at the line and get a jam regardless of down and distance
Clements wants to play an aggressive D but the 9ers just can't mix in blitzes well enough to keep the play short in duration. My only criticism of Manusky is that he did not use Willis and DBs enough on blitzes. A higher risk D would work with our LBs being as fast as they are. Give up a little but beat the heck out of the QB. In the end that would make an impact.
Originally posted by NC49erfan82:
but he has the "Magic Package"

Or the Ninja defense as another poster said where the lineman are standing up.....................His defense was hiding in the shadows and afraid to come out.
Originally posted by NC49erfan82:
but he has the "Magic Package"

haha, the magic package, where like 6 blitz and magically none make it to the qb