There are 115 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

defense has regressed

Originally posted by susweel:
Originally posted by Method:
This year opposing teams are 5-5 in the red zone. Last year the 5th red zone td against us came in work 6. Regressed. (Per mike Sando).

And yet people would still like to talk about Alex smith.


Yes because asking a QB to carry a team ludicrous.

Yes because we played soooo many dominating defenses this year.

Completely ignore the fact that our Defense has played 2 of the better offenses in the NFL.


But yes, I think it is ludicrous to ask for our QB to improve upon an average year. But at the same time, all other offensive positions are expected to.


Guess our Defense must be record setting every year or they suck.
Originally posted by verb1der:
Packers and Lions offenses being "elite" this year is arguable, to me they're one dimensional...I'll agree they have elite "passing" though.

My concern is how 49ers defend more balanced offenses, like Vikings, Ravens, Giants, etc...come playoff time, those are the dangerous teams! And 49ers have recently lost to these type of teams.

We've actually defended these teams pretty well. Now it's true we are only 1-3 against those teams dating back to last year, but I blame those losses on the offense more than the defense.

Vikings game our D had some issues on 3rd down, but we kept Peterson under 4 yards-per-carry and Ponder under 6 yards-per-attempt. That's still stingy defense. The offense lost us this game. They could not sustain drives and committed 3 turnovers in the 4th quarter.

The loss against the Ravens was entirely on the offense. They gave up 9 sacks or something stupid like that. Didn't have anything going the entire game, and wasted a very good defensive effort.

The loss against the Giants in the NFCCG was clearly due to special teams blunders. 2 turnovers in our territory spotted the G-men 10 of their 20 points. The offense completely fizzled out other than 2 big pass plays from Vernon. Again, another solid defensive performance wasted.

Now having said that, I do see your point. Teams with more balanced attacks do give us more trouble, but I think it is due to our offense not being able to get into a rhythm after sitting on the bench for longer stretches. The offense is lost when they can't dominate time of possession. The D cannot always do the heavy lifting.
[ Edited by SofaKing on Sep 28, 2012 at 2:34 PM ]
Originally posted by SofaKing:
We've actually defended these teams pretty well. Now it's true we are only 1-3 against those teams dating back to last year, but I blame those losses on the offense more than the defense.

Vikings game our D had some issues on 3rd down, but we kept Peterson under 4 yards-per-carry and Ponder under 6 yards-per-attempt. That's still stingy defense. The offense lost us this game. They could not sustain drives and committed 3 turnovers in the 4th quarter.

The loss against the Ravens was entirely on the offense. They gave up 9 sacks or something stupid like that. Didn't have anything going the entire game, and wasted a very good defensive effort.

The loss against the Giants in the NFCCG was clearly due to special teams blunders. 2 turnovers in our territory spotted the G-men 10 of their 20 points. The offense completely fizzled out other than 2 big pass plays from Vernon. Again, another solid defensive performance wasted.

Now having said that, I do see your point. Teams with more balanced attacks do give us more trouble, but I think it is due to our offense not being able to get into a rhythm after sitting on the bench for longer stretches. The offense is lost when they can't dominate time of possession. The D cannot always do the heavy lifting.

But on the other hand the Vikings offense sustained some long drives. Our defense allowed Minnesota's offense to control the TOP which is why they deserve some blame.
Originally posted by SofaKing:
Originally posted by verb1der:
Packers and Lions offenses being "elite" this year is arguable, to me they're one dimensional...I'll agree they have elite "passing" though.

My concern is how 49ers defend more balanced offenses, like Vikings, Ravens, Giants, etc...come playoff time, those are the dangerous teams! And 49ers have recently lost to these type of teams.

We've actually defended these teams pretty well. Now it's true we are only 1-3 against those teams dating back to last year, but I blame those losses on the offense more than the defense.

Vikings game our D had some issues on 3rd down, but we kept Peterson under 4 yards-per-carry and Ponder under 6 yards-per-attempt. That's still stingy defense. The offense lost us this game. They could not sustain drives and committed 3 turnovers in the 4th quarter.

The loss against the Ravens was entirely on the offense. They gave up 9 sacks or something stupid like that. Didn't have anything going the entire game, and wasted a very good defensive effort.

The loss against the Giants in the NFCCG was clearly due to special teams blunders. 2 turnovers in our territory spotted the G-men 10 of their 20 points. The offense completely fizzled out other than 2 big pass plays from Vernon. Again, another solid defensive performance wasted.

Now having said that, I do see your point. Teams with more balanced attacks do give us more trouble, but I think it is due to our offense not being able to get into a rhythm after sitting on the bench for longer stretches. The offense is lost when they can't dominate time of possession. The D cannot always do the heavy lifting.

But but, GB was sacked double digits by SEA and they still won that game...


oh wait.
Originally posted by Method:
Ok. It's not an issue. Brush it off. Our defense is sooooo good in the redzone, this stat is lying to us
Its why I cant stand Homerism, I would like a thread called keeping it real and only football discussions can occur
Originally posted by qnnhan7:
I noticed that so far. Last year teams can move the ball on us between the 20's but when they get inside the redzone, the defense clamped down most of the time. But it's pretty early for this year. With 2 of the best offenses in the NFL playing against the D, I think they did pretty good. They didn't do as good against the Vikings, but not a concern at this point.

They didn't do well against the Vikings because they weren't prepared. No matter what any of them say, they went in thinking it would be an easy win and found out no game is easy. They can deny it all they want, but they are the better team with the better coaching staff, yet they left with the L.
Originally posted by SFrush:
Originally posted by SofaKing:
We've actually defended these teams pretty well. Now it's true we are only 1-3 against those teams dating back to last year, but I blame those losses on the offense more than the defense.

Vikings game our D had some issues on 3rd down, but we kept Peterson under 4 yards-per-carry and Ponder under 6 yards-per-attempt. That's still stingy defense. The offense lost us this game. They could not sustain drives and committed 3 turnovers in the 4th quarter.

The loss against the Ravens was entirely on the offense. They gave up 9 sacks or something stupid like that. Didn't have anything going the entire game, and wasted a very good defensive effort.

The loss against the Giants in the NFCCG was clearly due to special teams blunders. 2 turnovers in our territory spotted the G-men 10 of their 20 points. The offense completely fizzled out other than 2 big pass plays from Vernon. Again, another solid defensive performance wasted.

Now having said that, I do see your point. Teams with more balanced attacks do give us more trouble, but I think it is due to our offense not being able to get into a rhythm after sitting on the bench for longer stretches. The offense is lost when they can't dominate time of possession. The D cannot always do the heavy lifting.

But on the other hand the Vikings offense sustained some long drives. Our defense allowed Minnesota's offense to control the TOP which is why they deserve some blame.

I agree the defense deserves some blame. They allowed too many first downs against the Vikings, but they can't always be in shut-down mode. The offense was by far the weaker unit. Don't forget what the defense did in weeks 1 & 2. They are fine. There is going to be some games where the D isn't as sharp, and the offense has got to help them out by sustaining drives.
[ Edited by SofaKing on Sep 28, 2012 at 2:49 PM ]
I say we blow the whole thing up and start over.

Cut the dead weight like Willis and Justin. Then send a low ball offer to Bowman and see if Aldon will extend for the league minimum.
[ Edited by Oakland-Niner on Sep 28, 2012 at 2:58 PM ]
It feels like the whole team has regressed, including the coaching staff. It's very similar to what happened when Singletary was the coach once the boost from his motivational style wore off. You have to wonder if the team is starting to get tired of or perhaps just used to Harbaugh's blue collar motivational speeches. I thought Harbaugh had more substance as a coach than Singletary and would still be able to get the team to play hard after they got used to him, but now I'm not so sure.
Originally posted by TinyHandsBigHeart:
It feels like the whole team has regressed, including the coaching staff. It's very similar to what happened when Singletary was the coach once the boost from his motivational style wore off. You have to wonder if the team is starting to get tired of or perhaps just used to Harbaugh's blue collar motivational speeches. I thought Harbaugh had more substance as a coach than Singletary and would still be able to get the team to play hard after they got used to him, but now I'm not so sure.

I agree. Fire Jim too. We never lost a game when Walsh was coach and upsets were unheard of. I miss the dynasty days of 16-0 every year on our way to the Superbowl...
Originally posted by 80sbaby24:
To this point in the season, yes, the defense looks to have regressed a little bit. This is what EVERY analyst and reporter expected. Not because our defense isnt good....but because historically it is next to impossible to maintain such a high turnover ratio and what not.

Its just funny that in the offseason when myself and a few others made the claim "that our D will regress slightly and we need our offense (specifically Alex and the passing game) to improve" we were ridiculed by the Alex fan club.

Fast forward to present day, and what we were saying has come true (to this point). We need our offense and specifically the passing game to step up. That way we wouldnt lose to teams like the Vikings.

This is very true. Its nearly impossible to maintain such a high tunover ratio, back to back years, because of all the lucky factors( for a lack of a better term) that goes into them.

Its up to the offense to make up for the lack of turnovers, whether its through passing or running, if we want to make it to the big dance. they did do enough in the first two games, but failed to do so in the last game. And well, we saw how that turned out.
Originally posted by Oakland-Niner:
I agree. Fire Jim too. We never lost a game when Walsh was coach and upsets were unheard of. I miss the dynasty days of 16-0 every year on our way to the Superbowl...

Woah, nobody said he should be fired yet. He deserves time to turn things around.
[ Edited by TinyHandsBigHeart on Sep 28, 2012 at 3:08 PM ]
Originally posted by TinyHandsBigHeart:
It feels like the whole team has regressed, including the coaching staff. It's very similar to what happened when Singletary was the coach once the boost from his motivational style wore off. You have to wonder if the team is starting to get tired of or perhaps just used to Harbaugh's blue collar motivational speeches. I thought Harbaugh had more substance as a coach than Singletary and would still be able to get the team to play hard after they got used to him, but now I'm not so sure.

Really??

There was ZERO talk of this team regressing after the first 2 games. We played outstanding football. The loss against the Vikings was frustrating, but it was just ONE game. It happens. There is over a years worth of game film that proves we are a much better team than that. Please don't equate Harbaugh to Singletary ever again.
[ Edited by SofaKing on Sep 28, 2012 at 3:09 PM ]
Originally posted by SofaKing:
Really??

There was ZERO talk of this teaming regressing after the first 2 games. We lost ONE game. It happens. Please don't equate Harbaugh to Singletary ever again.

Yes, of course there wasn't, because we all thought that the Lions and Packers were good, play-off caliber teams at the time. Now that they're both looking rather mediocre it changes how those games should be evaluated. We have two close wins over 1-2 teams and were blown out by an average Minnesota team on the road and looked completely uninterested and unprepared in that game. Is that not cause for concern? Is that not a sign that we've regressed?
Originally posted by TinyHandsBigHeart:
Originally posted by SofaKing:
Really??

There was ZERO talk of this teaming regressing after the first 2 games. We lost ONE game. It happens. Please don't equate Harbaugh to Singletary ever again.

Yes, of course there wasn't, because we all thought that the Lions and Packers were good, play-off caliber teams at the time. Now that they're both looking rather mediocre it changes how those games should be evaluated. We have two close wins over 1-2 teams and were blown out by an average Minnesota team on the road and looked completely uninterested and unprepared in that game. Is that not cause for concern? Is that not a sign that we've regressed?

It's only been 3 games. Not nearly enough time to determine who has progressed/regressed. Especially when talking about GB, who have proved over the course of many years that they win consistently. 3 games is not enough to change that perception. At least wait later in the year when the playoff picture becomes clearer.
...