Is Fangio really a better option than Manusky?

Doesn't really matter Manusky wont be back with the 49ers.

looks like manusky didn't get the Carolina job, now at least we'll have a choice in the matter.

http://www.rotoworld.com/content/playerpages/player_main.aspx?sport=NFL&id=2352

Originally posted by Jcool:
Doesn't really matter Manusky wont be back with the 49ers.

not really

timkawakami

The only way Stanford can keep Fangio from 49ers is to offer him HC job. But then OC Shaw and/or Asst-HC Roman might leave for 49ers.

Set aside the defensive line because a lot of that is Tomsula and in my opinion Smith. The linebackers play well against the run but apart from Willis most lack strong pass coverage. Then comes the secondary. Who play like rookies in high school.

People gushed over Manusky but I've never been a huge fan. He had the tools to cause some damage to teams and yet hardly made a dent.

Manusky is about as good as Sing

Originally posted by Envy:
Set aside the defensive line because a lot of that is Tomsula and in my opinion Smith. The linebackers play well against the run but apart from Willis most lack strong pass coverage. Then comes the secondary. Who play like rookies in high school.

People gushed over Manusky but I've never been a huge fan. He had the tools to cause some damage to teams and yet hardly made a dent.

I think Willis is the weaker pass defender between him, Spikes and Lawson. Willis is great at sprinting to the HB flat passes but he has been terrible at the square routes. Reggie Bush owned him and some teams get him a lot in misdirection.

Yes he is....much more experience and he knows Harbaugh will let him do his thing....this defense was overrated and Manusky is nothing special....watch when he's with the Chargers...they won't be #1....that for sure.

It's time for a change.

Originally posted by Joecool:

Originally posted by Envy:
Set aside the defensive line because a lot of that is Tomsula and in my opinion Smith. The linebackers play well against the run but apart from Willis most lack strong pass coverage. Then comes the secondary. Who play like rookies in high school.

People gushed over Manusky but I've never been a huge fan. He had the tools to cause some damage to teams and yet hardly made a dent.

I think Willis is the weaker pass defender between him, Spikes and Lawson. Willis is great at sprinting to the HB flat passes but he has been terrible at the square routes. Reggie Bush owned him and some teams get him a lot in misdirection.

Well I think Willis has the better instincts but again I think those were almost coached out of him. If you look at his college days he was more active in coverage. Perhaps it is his tackle anything that moves attitude that makes him vulnerable to this. To be fair though the Saints can scheme as well as anyone but you are right he did get burned.

that article today doesnt make fangio look too good in the nfl. all three of the teams he was on consistently got worse every year he was in charge. stanfords defense was great but i dont know about the pros for him.

Originally posted by YorkHater:
Manusky is about as good as Sing

Can you like, change your handle already. Don't you know the Jed saved the family?

The only defensive players I can remember from those Carolina teams were Kevin Greene and Sam Mills, who were both old by that time. In Houston they didn't have a defensive player until Mario Williams. They had a steady stream of busts. Travis Johnson comes to mind. And in Indianapolis, who can remember a defensive player before Dwight Freeney?

If Fangio has talent, he will get the job done, and at this point, we do have some talent on the defensive side of the ball and I think he would do a much better job than Manusky. On top of that, he actually does send some pressure with his LBs.

People need to stop looking at raw numbers alone and look at the scheme and also look at the talent a coach has before they judge.

Manusky is good, our secondary is just weak so he has to try and compensate. We need DB upgrades, Goldson flat out isn't getting it done.

Originally posted by TheG0RE49er:

Originally posted by Rizo:

Originally posted by Joecool:

Originally posted by Rizo:

Originally posted by TheG0RE49er:
For me this is a toss up...our DBs (besides Spencer) were terrible this year, and last year we played much better in coverage, which showed up in the stats (top 5 in many defensive categories). There was less blitzing this year than there was last year, but that had a lot to do with the needed extra help in coverage, and that included a LB a lot of times.

At least some teams have a true pass rusher to hide the fact that the secondary is weak, but we don't. Manusky did a good job with the lack of talent we had this year in the secondary, however, he could've been more "exotic" in his schemes. I don't know if some of that had to do with Singletary or not, but Manusky proved that he can coach a defense and make it good, if not great, like he did last year.

Spencer? really. Clemens atleast plays against the RUN better then most CB around. Spencer has NO positives. SPENCER has been the most overrated CB on the Niners since POPE. haha Agree on the Pass Rusher. We NEED ONE BAD! Not sure about Fangio, but I don know I'm tired of the D playing soft towards the end of the game.

I don't know, Spencer has been fairly solid. Everyone gets burned deep but when he's in position, the receivers rarely catch the ball on him unlike Nate who rarely wins even when he has solid position.

I'm no where saying that Nate is better in Coverage. haha But I think Nate can be a reliable RUN STOPPER. Spencer is just plain Horrible. We need a revamped SECONDARY.

Sorry, but if you think Spencer is "horrible", than I really don't think you watch the games, and if you do, you have no clue what you are talking about.

Really? I have been a 49ers fan since birth. I'm 29 now. I watch every game! I have NO CLUE WHAT I'M SAYING? Do you really think Spencer is GOOD? really? He sucks. I'm sorry, but I can't be the only person who is tired of seeing Spencer get burned. and he can't tackle. actually, besides Clemens, NO ONE in our secondary can tackle! haha but Clemens can't cover so that does'nt give him a gold star.

The thing about Manusky is I really don't know how good he is or could be. We all know he likes to run the god awful Quarters Coverage, thats the basic 4 deep zone vanilla defense that all of us b***h about. Everybody has seen it, when you see the CB bail off the LOS and scramble 15yds back right at the snap, you are seeing the quarters coverage. And yes, Manusky runs it ALOT.

My question is, does he play alot of quarters coverage because he likes it? OR does he run that because he has horrible coverage guys like Clements, Goldson, Reggie etc....and is forced to use that scheme out of fear of getting beat deep?

Does anyone have any insight? Maybe even quotes from Manusky himself?