There are 65 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Week 3: Thoughts after rewatching the game...

  • GORO
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 1,802
Marvin two things that bothered me, when down two scores the 49ers had no sense of urgency on offense. I blame Roman for this the other thing that worries me is Joe Staley has really had a poor start to the season.
Originally posted by Marvin49:
Originally posted by StOnEy333:
Originally posted by Marvin49:


Do you really want to be right on this one?

Uhhh........yeah, he does.




LOL.

LOL, Im just tired of the same old Alex I think its time the team moves on.
Originally posted by GORO:
Marvin two things that bothered me, when down two scores the 49ers had no sense of urgency on offense. I blame Roman for this the other thing that worries me is Joe Staley has really had a poor start to the season.

I kinda disagree with you on the first one.

When most teams get behind by a few scores they get one dimensional and just start throwing the ball on every down. The Niners don't do that. They never stiop running it. The beat came back from three scores down to Philly last year and never stopped running the ball. They never lose their balance. That can LOOK like no urgency when in fact it's just a strategy I happen to like.

As for Staley...I think he was fine yesterday. He held on of the best pass rushers in the game yesterday to nothing until the very end of the game. He could play better, but I don't think he's as bad as some on this board have said he is.
Originally posted by susweel:
Originally posted by Marvin49:
Originally posted by StOnEy333:
Originally posted by Marvin49:


Do you really want to be right on this one?

Uhhh........yeah, he does.




LOL.

LOL, Im just tired of the same old Alex I think its time the team moves on.

Thats the thing tho. It ISN'T the "same old Alex". He just had a bad game. All QBs have bad games. Hell, Peyton Manning threw three INTs in the FIRST QUARTER last week. Alex had an 81 rating yesterday and has a 102 rating for the season.

Lets just have some perspective.
Smith didn't have a bad game. He hit all of his throws except for 4-5 of them.. And 4 of those 5 only came towards the middle and late of the 4th. He didn't do enough. That I agree with. But he didn't have a bad game.
[ Edited by qnnhan7 on Sep 24, 2012 at 3:01 PM ]
  • Jcool
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 12,880
Originally posted by Marvin49:
I kinda disagree with you on the first one.

When most teams get behind by a few scores they get one dimensional and just start throwing the ball on every down. The Niners don't do that. They never stiop running it. The beat came back from three scores down to Philly last year and never stopped running the ball. They never lose their balance. That can LOOK like no urgency when in fact it's just a strategy I happen to like.

As for Staley...I think he was fine yesterday. He held on of the best pass rushers in the game yesterday to nothing until the very end of the game. He could play better, but I don't think he's as bad as some on this board have said he is.

Its fine to keep running the ball in the first half being down its another thing to have Kendall Hunter run the ball on 1st and 2nd down in the 4th quarter down 11.
Sorry if this has already been posted here or in another thread...did anyone see this article on NFL.com that was just posted a couple of hours ago? Here it is - interesting take on how the Vikings were preparing for the Niners (link to article: http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000065796/article/how-the-minnesota-vikings-overtook-the-san-francisco-49ers?module=HP11_content_stream):

A Vikings source explained why the team's offense was able to keep the 49ers off balance

"We studied them a lot this offseason, and we felt that some of their players felt it was all about getting sacks," the team source said. "Then they open the season with Green Bay and Detroit, who don't do anything but throw it, and they further buy into getting sacks. We decided we were going to run at them, and they didn't like it. After awhile, we feel like we broke them.

The plan early in the game was to "wham" block the 49ers' defensive linemen, especially All-Pro end Justin Smith, the source said. Since Smith tends to aggressively rush up the field, even against the run, the Vikings would send a trap blocker to level an unsuspecting Smith on a block that usually landed on his side. After awhile, the source said, Smith -- and other players -- started looking for the "wham" when it wasn't coming and receiving the block when he wasn't counting on it.

"We caught them off guard," the source said. "They didn't like that."
Originally posted by Jcool:
Originally posted by Marvin49:
I kinda disagree with you on the first one.

When most teams get behind by a few scores they get one dimensional and just start throwing the ball on every down. The Niners don't do that. They never stiop running it. The beat came back from three scores down to Philly last year and never stopped running the ball. They never lose their balance. That can LOOK like no urgency when in fact it's just a strategy I happen to like.

As for Staley...I think he was fine yesterday. He held on of the best pass rushers in the game yesterday to nothing until the very end of the game. He could play better, but I don't think he's as bad as some on this board have said he is.

Its fine to keep running the ball in the first half being down its another thing to have Kendall Hunter run the ball on 1st and 2nd down in the 4th quarter down 11.

Still disagree. If you think you have the right look to hit the right play then I have no problem with it. The plays not working doesn't mean "no sense of urgency". It means the plays didn't work. I remember Hunter getting run calls on third and long last year where Hunter converted them. If Alex drops back and throws 2 incompletions they are in the exact same hole.

The beauty of this offense (when it works better than it did yesterday) is that they are completely balanced so you never really know what they are gonna do.

I'd much rather they kept that philosophy than just started chucking it 20 or 30 times in a half because peeps say thats what they are supposed to do.

It was a bad game. Period. Why do we have to make more of it than it was?
Originally posted by qnnhan7:
Smith didn't have a bad game. He hit all of his throws except for 4-5 of them.. And 4 of those 5 only came towards the middle and late of the 4th. He didn't do enough. That I agree with. But he didn't have a bad game.

When an offense is able to run the ball effectively yet only scores 13 points against a below average defense your QB had a bad game.
Originally posted by LottDMontanaO:
Sorry if this has already been posted here or in another thread...did anyone see this article on NFL.com that was just posted a couple of hours ago? Here it is - interesting take on how the Vikings were preparing for the Niners (link to article: http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000065796/article/how-the-minnesota-vikings-overtook-the-san-francisco-49ers?module=HP11_content_stream):

A Vikings source explained why the team's offense was able to keep the 49ers off balance

"We studied them a lot this offseason, and we felt that some of their players felt it was all about getting sacks," the team source said. "Then they open the season with Green Bay and Detroit, who don't do anything but throw it, and they further buy into getting sacks. We decided we were going to run at them, and they didn't like it. After awhile, we feel like we broke them.

The plan early in the game was to "wham" block the 49ers' defensive linemen, especially All-Pro end Justin Smith, the source said. Since Smith tends to aggressively rush up the field, even against the run, the Vikings would send a trap blocker to level an unsuspecting Smith on a block that usually landed on his side. After awhile, the source said, Smith -- and other players -- started looking for the "wham" when it wasn't coming and receiving the block when he wasn't counting on it.

"We caught them off guard," the source said. "They didn't like that."

Maybe that's their perspective out of the game, but they didn't broke the defense because of the runs. It's true that the Vikes is the first team this year that can run the ball. The defense handled the runs. It was the scrambling of Ponder and the lack of continued coverage when he did scramble. He was able to find open receivers. This defense played against some to the best running team last year and took out the running game and won. So the Vikings offered nothing new that the defense hadn't seen before. The defense actually to it together a little in the second half. But the Viking got help on a bogus unnecessary roughness call on Goldson that got them inside the redzone.
  • GORO
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 1,802
Originally posted by Jcool:
Its fine to keep running the ball in the first half being down its another thing to have Kendall Hunter run the ball on 1st and 2nd down in the 4th quarter down 11.



Originally posted by Marvin49:
I kinda disagree with you on the first one.

When most teams get behind by a few scores they get one dimensional and just start throwing the ball on every down. The Niners don't do that. They never stiop running it. The beat came back from three scores down to Philly last year and never stopped running the ball. They never lose their balance. That can LOOK like no urgency when in fact it's just a strategy I happen to like.

As for Staley...I think he was fine yesterday. He held on of the best pass rushers in the game yesterday to nothing until the very end of the game. He could play better, but I don't think he's as bad as some on this board have said he is.
Running the ball while behind against Detroit and Philadelphia was excellent play calling by the coaches, since both teams are aggressive on the front and run the ends in the wide 9 stance, but Alex in previous years has done well in the shotgun with multiple reciever sets. As far as Staley he gave up 2.5 sacks to Matthews and then when the team was in scoring position he gave up a huge sack to stall that last effort for a comeback. He made the probowl last year, Anthony Davis is already having a better year than him.
Originally posted by DirtyP:
Originally posted by qnnhan7:
Smith didn't have a bad game. He hit all of his throws except for 4-5 of them.. And 4 of those 5 only came towards the middle and late of the 4th. He didn't do enough. That I agree with. But he didn't have a bad game.

When an offense is able to run the ball effectively yet only scores 13 points against a below average defense your QB had a bad game.

False premise. Only effective on some drive. How about the 2 consecutive run call after the Williams kickoff returns that got us about 6 yards. And we were in a lot of 3rd& 6-8 that Smith actually converted. You don't run effectively that's why they were in those 3rd and long.
Originally posted by GORO:
Originally posted by Jcool:
Its fine to keep running the ball in the first half being down its another thing to have Kendall Hunter run the ball on 1st and 2nd down in the 4th quarter down 11.



Originally posted by Marvin49:
I kinda disagree with you on the first one.

When most teams get behind by a few scores they get one dimensional and just start throwing the ball on every down. The Niners don't do that. They never stiop running it. The beat came back from three scores down to Philly last year and never stopped running the ball. They never lose their balance. That can LOOK like no urgency when in fact it's just a strategy I happen to like.

As for Staley...I think he was fine yesterday. He held on of the best pass rushers in the game yesterday to nothing until the very end of the game. He could play better, but I don't think he's as bad as some on this board have said he is.
Running the ball while behind against Detroit and Philadelphia was excellent play calling by the coaches, since both teams are aggressive on the front and run the ends in the wide 9 stance, but Alex in previous years has done well in the shotgun with multiple reciever sets. As far as Staley he gave up 2.5 sacks to Matthews and then when the team was in scoring position he gave up a huge sack to stall that last effort for a comeback. He made the probowl last year, Anthony Davis is already having a better year than him.

Yeah but the difference was that those teams fell for us running and we caught them on Play Action. MIN accepted being gashed by a 7 yard run here and there but they refused to fall pray to the setup of those plays and bite on the play action.

Great disciplined defense. THAT is when our guys on offense MUST make some sort of play outside the scope.
Was one of the worst games Harbaugh has had since he came here.
Originally posted by Marvin49:
Thats the thing tho. It ISN'T the "same old Alex". He just had a bad game. All QBs have bad games. Hell, Peyton Manning threw three INTs in the FIRST QUARTER last week. Alex had an 81 rating yesterday and has a 102 rating for the season.

Lets just have some perspective.

PM is on a new team with new players and took a year off because of a severe injury. So that comparison doesnt work.

Only reason he has a decent rating is because he constantly checks the ball down. He passed 204 yards on 34 attempts and that 5.82 yards per attempt which is not good, so that qb rating really doesn't mean much. the fact is he only led the offense to 10 points and thats even with Franky averaging over 6 yards per carry. The first two games was against awful defenses, just look at what 2nd year player Jake Locker did to the Lions 29/42 378 yards 2tds....numbers alex hasn't even come close to.