Given Barrows recent article about Fangio, it seems as though that the defenses under his guidance have regressed every single year. This begs the question, does Fangio really bring more to the table than Manusky?
If we kept Manusky, it would limit the turnover that the team as a whole is going to experience. Also, Manusky's main downfall has been the pass defense, but with an added cornerback through the draft, this facet could be tremendously improved.
I was thinking about that yesterday but at the end I would prefer ideally an ex head coach coordinator, a la mangini, nolan (don't kill me for that one but he is a hell of a coordinator), mora, someone who can help the coaching staff with his experience and that has a good track record as a coordinator...
if not a person like that, them I would prefer fangio, I love Manusky but that defense didn't look as advertised, we were 13 on total D which is not bad but there some call on crucial part of games that I really didn't like...
of course at the end I would like what ever Balkee and Harbaugh like they are day day in day out, they should pick the guy with the better "fit"...
The way I look at it is if Harbaugh thinks Fangio is better than Im all for it. Niners finally have a capable coach for the first time in years. Im confident he will make the right hires for his staff.
If they are considered interchangeable then Manuski is probably better. Fangio won't change the system but he will bring a steeper learning curve about the defensive personnel as well as the league and especially our annual matchups. Fangio has been gone from the NFL for a while now. I think this may be a mute point if Manuski gets a chance to be a HC.
Originally posted by verb1der: Manusky is clearly capable, I don't know why people would just say Manusky sucks without blaming the players that suck, outside of Willis/Spikes/Justin.
So for me Manusky vs Fangio, toss up.
All you have to do is watch the games. I can't tell you how many times we only rushed our 3 linemen, giving the opposing QB aaaaall day to pick apart our weak ass zone.
The only people on staff who should be retained are Tomsula and Schottenheimer, maybe Solari.
I believe we play a weak ass zone because our secondary sucks (nothing Manusky can do about that), with a lack of pass rush, Spencer, Goldson, Clements can easily be toasted.
Manusky adjusts by preventing the big play, and playing their game in the red zone with a goal to hold them to 3 points. Our corners are not skilled enough to play man-to-man on every down. So there is a reason to play a soft zone, or bend don't break. I personally don't like it either. But there's a logical reason for it, and you have to also hold players accountable.
This has been brought up by a few defensive players before.
This fan site is dedicated to the 49ers and their fans. It is in no way affiliated with the NFL or any of its teams. All teams and players mentioned on this site are registered trademarks of the NFL. The use of any team names, words, trademarks, logos or photos have been used for descriptive purposes only. The content and information from other sites is the property of their respective owners. Player and team photos used with permission from USA TODAY Sports Images.