Fangio vs. Manusky

Originally posted by DaveWilcox:
Hard to say how much latitude Manusky had in defensive schemes, his bosses were both defensive guys. I would like to seen the corners play more press man coverage, instead of the soft, off man coverages they played most of the time. He is gone now so now I am anxious to see what kind of havoc a Fangio defense can create.

110% agree... I liked him but maybe Singletary had too much input. Singletary was a bend don't break guy... unfortunately we usually broke by game's end. Also, didn't like the prevent we played. I know a lot of coaches do it but still....

#1 thing I am looking forward to is press coverage and having a little killer instinct... blitzing more as well

Originally posted by andes14:
Who would you rather have and why?

I like Manusky because he got the most he could out of his personnel. Never had a great pass rusher yet still found a way to manufacture a decent amount of sacks and was great at confusing qb's that not many can confuse. I wish Harbaugh gave him a shot but we'll see, maybe Fangio will do better now than in his previous stops, especially if we get a big time pass rusher.

Manusky was too passive when it counted. When the game was on the line, he was unaggressive and seemingly scared to dial up pressure.

Whether that was his doing or Singletary's (and Nolan before that), I don't know. But for that reason alone, I'd go with Fangio.

Originally posted by andes14:

Originally posted by Sjceruti:
I liked Manusky but it's difficult to answer this question without seeing Fangio's defense yet.

I hated that Manusky rarely blitzed tho so im happy thats no longer here.

Yes but I probably wouldn't have blitzed much either if I were him. Most of the time our OLB's were better in coverage/setting the edge in the run game type roles than in pinning their ears back and gettin after the qb. If we had a Cameron Wake or DeMarcus Ware or (draft a Von Miller), then I'm sure we would have been rushing those guys, but if a Manny Lawson would just be likely swallowed up by a left tackle, he's essentially been made null and void and it'd be like 11 on 10, but if he covered a tight end or back, his presence would be more effectively felt, especially because he's very good in coverage. I do think he can still wind up being a productive pass rusher though. He has brought heat from the inside though, with Willis and Spikes combining for 14 sacks in the last 2 years, which I'm sure is the highest of any inside linebacker tandem in that span.

First of all, Lawson would be getting gobbled up by the right tackle, not left, and having him cover a RB or TE doesn't do much good when the QB has enough time to wait for a deeper option to get open - which is exactly what happened fairly often last year and the year before.

Originally posted by 49erRider:

Originally posted by andes14:

Originally posted by Sjceruti:
I liked Manusky but it's difficult to answer this question without seeing Fangio's defense yet.

I hated that Manusky rarely blitzed tho so im happy thats no longer here.

Yes but I probably wouldn't have blitzed much either if I were him. Most of the time our OLB's were better in coverage/setting the edge in the run game type roles than in pinning their ears back and gettin after the qb. If we had a Cameron Wake or DeMarcus Ware or (draft a Von Miller), then I'm sure we would have been rushing those guys, but if a Manny Lawson would just be likely swallowed up by a left tackle, he's essentially been made null and void and it'd be like 11 on 10, but if he covered a tight end or back, his presence would be more effectively felt, especially because he's very good in coverage. I do think he can still wind up being a productive pass rusher though. He has brought heat from the inside though, with Willis and Spikes combining for 14 sacks in the last 2 years, which I'm sure is the highest of any inside linebacker tandem in that span.

First of all, Lawson would be getting gobbled up by the right tackle, not left, and having him cover a RB or TE doesn't do much good when the QB has enough time to wait for a deeper option to get open - which is exactly what happened fairly often last year and the year before.

Actually Lawson created a lot of pressure on the QB's. The problem was that all the QB has to do to escape an outside rush is step up in the pocket. Who was there to get the QB then? Usually nobody and the QB ran for 15-20 yards right up the middle.

Fangio, we did not win with Manusky i don't care how good we were statistically we did not win. Fangio has the chance to be a winning coach so I will side with him.

Without an elite pass rusher it's difficult to be an agressive D. The team needed to blitz more but were consistently burned when they did...bad timing or lack of ability?

Manusky was agressive in his first year with the 9ers--under Nolan? But seemed to be bend-don't-break the last few years.

Fangio is an unknown at this moment because we don't know if he has the guys he needs for his system to work. I hope he will use Willis, Spikes, Bowman more effectively in blitzes as well as the CBs and Safeties. Clements would have been better in a more agressive D, Willis and J Smith are great in any D, Mays might be very effective in an agressive role, and then the OLBs would be more effective as the teams wouldn't be able to key on them as the only pass rushers.

Oddly, Nolan's dad invented the bend-don't-break D when he coached in SF during the 70s. Drove people nuts as the opponents moved down the field consistently and then the D would get more agressive in the red zone. He always had a decent offense and they were just good enough to get to the playoffs but not win after that.

Edit: It is a testament to J Smith that he has been so good in this 3/4 with no OLB help to speak of.

Manusky was just ok DC. Way too vanilla. As for Fangio it's a wait and see game.

Fangio has mad experience over Manusky...and, he's a DC Harbaugh has total confidence in. I believe we'll see a more aggressive defense now...and some position upgrades (LDE, NT, OLB) to give VF more tools in his shed (so to speak). I think Fangio will be able to move the defense from an "almost" category to one that can better dictate what the opposing offense can do. BL, though is you can't really compare the two 'til Fangio has a few seasons in SF under his belt.

Originally posted by CorvaNinerFan:
Fangio has mad experience over Manusky...and, he's a DC Harbaugh has total confidence in. I believe we'll see a more aggressive defense now...and some position upgrades (LDE, NT, OLB) to give VF more tools in his shed (so to speak). I think Fangio will be able to move the defense from an "almost" category to one that can better dictate what the opposing offense can do. BL, though is you can't really compare the two 'til Fangio has a few seasons in SF under his belt.

Jimmy Raye had "mad experience" too. Unfortunately, VFs track record is garbage. If we gave Manusky the same tools we plan to give VF, we would be dominate. People dont remember, but Manusky use to blitz a lot, until we started getting burned early in the season by the screen pass. In addition, our rushers couldn't get to the QB so usually when that happens a good QB will burn you. In all, Manusky wasn't great, but his record is much better than VFs. Three diffrent teams, three diffrent examples of a defense getting progressively worst. Coincidence, maybe?

I'll give you my opinion at seasons end.

Originally posted by Oakland-Niner:

Originally posted by CorvaNinerFan:
Fangio has mad experience over Manusky...and, he's a DC Harbaugh has total confidence in. I believe we'll see a more aggressive defense now...and some position upgrades (LDE, NT, OLB) to give VF more tools in his shed (so to speak). I think Fangio will be able to move the defense from an "almost" category to one that can better dictate what the opposing offense can do. BL, though is you can't really compare the two 'til Fangio has a few seasons in SF under his belt.

Jimmy Raye had "mad experience" too. Unfortunately, VFs track record is garbage. If we gave Manusky the same tools we plan to give VF, we would be dominate. People dont remember, but Manusky use to blitz a lot, until we started getting burned early in the season by the screen pass. In addition, our rushers couldn't get to the QB so usually when that happens a good QB will burn you. In all, Manusky wasn't great, but his record is much better than VFs. Three diffrent teams, three diffrent examples of a defense getting progressively worst. Coincidence, maybe?

He was the LB coach in NO when the team was quite good and the LBs were the heart of the defense. Had some very good records.

Then he followed Capers to Carolina where they started out 7-9 the first year and went 12-4 the next. Then two down years and they were fired.

Followed Capers to Houston in 2002 and did not have a winning record even though they had David Carr as their QB...imagine!

So, I don't think his record stinks but he did coach some very mediocre teams by hitching himself to Dom Capers.

Baltimore speaks for itself! Good D and he was assistant to HC for D & LBs 2006-9.

Not bad at Standford.

Originally posted by dtg_9er:

Originally posted by Oakland-Niner:

Originally posted by CorvaNinerFan:
Fangio has mad experience over Manusky...and, he's a DC Harbaugh has total confidence in. I believe we'll see a more aggressive defense now...and some position upgrades (LDE, NT, OLB) to give VF more tools in his shed (so to speak). I think Fangio will be able to move the defense from an "almost" category to one that can better dictate what the opposing offense can do. BL, though is you can't really compare the two 'til Fangio has a few seasons in SF under his belt.

Jimmy Raye had "mad experience" too. Unfortunately, VFs track record is garbage. If we gave Manusky the same tools we plan to give VF, we would be dominate. People dont remember, but Manusky use to blitz a lot, until we started getting burned early in the season by the screen pass. In addition, our rushers couldn't get to the QB so usually when that happens a good QB will burn you. In all, Manusky wasn't great, but his record is much better than VFs. Three diffrent teams, three diffrent examples of a defense getting progressively worst. Coincidence, maybe?

He was the LB coach in NO when the team was quite good and the LBs were the heart of the defense. Had some very good records.

Then he followed Capers to Carolina where they started out 7-9 the first year and went 12-4 the next. Then two down years and they were fired.

Followed Capers to Houston in 2002 and did not have a winning record even though they had David Carr as their QB...imagine!

So, I don't think his record stinks but he did coach some very mediocre teams by hitching himself to Dom Capers.

Baltimore speaks for itself! Good D and he was assistant to HC for D & LBs 2006-9.

Not bad at Standford.

Not to interested in win loss record as winning and losing is a team effort. However, someone posted stats that showed his defenses getting statistcally worst every year he was there. Not impreessed by college d when you have an O that blows people out.

This is premature

That's what she said

Originally posted by backontop:

Originally posted by 49erRider:

Originally posted by andes14:

Originally posted by Sjceruti:
I liked Manusky but it's difficult to answer this question without seeing Fangio's defense yet.

I hated that Manusky rarely blitzed tho so im happy thats no longer here.

Yes but I probably wouldn't have blitzed much either if I were him. Most of the time our OLB's were better in coverage/setting the edge in the run game type roles than in pinning their ears back and gettin after the qb. If we had a Cameron Wake or DeMarcus Ware or (draft a Von Miller), then I'm sure we would have been rushing those guys, but if a Manny Lawson would just be likely swallowed up by a left tackle, he's essentially been made null and void and it'd be like 11 on 10, but if he covered a tight end or back, his presence would be more effectively felt, especially because he's very good in coverage. I do think he can still wind up being a productive pass rusher though. He has brought heat from the inside though, with Willis and Spikes combining for 14 sacks in the last 2 years, which I'm sure is the highest of any inside linebacker tandem in that span.

First of all, Lawson would be getting gobbled up by the right tackle, not left, and having him cover a RB or TE doesn't do much good when the QB has enough time to wait for a deeper option to get open - which is exactly what happened fairly often last year and the year before.

Actually Lawson created a lot of pressure on the QB's. The problem was that all the QB has to do to escape an outside rush is step up in the pocket. Who was there to get the QB then? Usually nobody and the QB ran for 15-20 yards right up the middle.

If all the QB has to do is step up, then he isn't applying much pressure. Good pass rushers like Ware and Matthews don't get taken completely out of a play when the QB simply steps up in the pocket. I don't know what you've been watching, but QBs didn't rip off many 15-20 yard runs on us. What they did do was find targets 15-20 yards or more downfield who wound up wide open because the QB had enough time to watch Titanic and Blood In Blood Out before he had to throw the football. Where was Manny Lawson on many of those plays? Covering a short route.

Originally posted by Oakland-Niner:

Originally posted by dtg_9er:

Originally posted by Oakland-Niner:

Originally posted by CorvaNinerFan:
Fangio has mad experience over Manusky...and, he's a DC Harbaugh has total confidence in. I believe we'll see a more aggressive defense now...and some position upgrades (LDE, NT, OLB) to give VF more tools in his shed (so to speak). I think Fangio will be able to move the defense from an "almost" category to one that can better dictate what the opposing offense can do. BL, though is you can't really compare the two 'til Fangio has a few seasons in SF under his belt.

Jimmy Raye had "mad experience" too. Unfortunately, VFs track record is garbage. If we gave Manusky the same tools we plan to give VF, we would be dominate. People dont remember, but Manusky use to blitz a lot, until we started getting burned early in the season by the screen pass. In addition, our rushers couldn't get to the QB so usually when that happens a good QB will burn you. In all, Manusky wasn't great, but his record is much better than VFs. Three diffrent teams, three diffrent examples of a defense getting progressively worst. Coincidence, maybe?

He was the LB coach in NO when the team was quite good and the LBs were the heart of the defense. Had some very good records.

Then he followed Capers to Carolina where they started out 7-9 the first year and went 12-4 the next. Then two down years and they were fired.

Followed Capers to Houston in 2002 and did not have a winning record even though they had David Carr as their QB...imagine!

So, I don't think his record stinks but he did coach some very mediocre teams by hitching himself to Dom Capers.

Baltimore speaks for itself! Good D and he was assistant to HC for D & LBs 2006-9.

Not bad at Standford.

Not to interested in win loss record as winning and losing is a team effort. However, someone posted stats that showed his defenses getting statistcally worst every year he was there. Not impreessed by college d when you have an O that blows people out.

So, he gets no credit at Stanford because the O blows everyone out and he gets no credit in Houston because he had no offense. At no time was he in charge of the draft, FA, or any other aspect of management of the team, so you judge him on what was that again? Team getting worse? But you disregard NO and Carolina when the team did much better?

OK!