There are 81 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Greg Roman, is he really good?

Here we go boys...to our "theory."

Dilfer: "If you're a skill position guy for the Niners, you're only getting the ball if the play was designed to get you the ball. They don't have the type of offensive structure and Colin isn't the type of quarterback that there are five eligible receivers and anyone can get the ball."

Does someone want to call B.S. on my theory now? Dilfer essentially went one level deeper (where I'm at) from calling CK a "remedial" QB if the first read isn't there to what I have been highlighting with the AR (team designed) passing game.

Read more at http://www.49erswebzone.com/forum/niners/176180-analysis-tampa-bay-coaches-film/page11/#iDOJjlLygqpbWWhQ.99
[ Edited by NCommand on Dec 18, 2013 at 12:33 PM ]
Originally posted by NCommand:
Here we go boys...to our "theory."

Dilfer: "If you're a skill position guy for the Niners, you're only getting the ball if the play was designed to get you the ball. They don't have the type of offensive structure and Colin isn't the type of quarterback that there are five eligible receivers and anyone can get the ball."

Does someone want to call B.S. on my theory now? Dilfer essentially went one level deeper (where I'm at) from calling CK a "remedial" QB if the first read isn't there to what I have been highlighting with the AR (team designed) passing game.

Read more at http://www.49erswebzone.com/forum/niners/176180-analysis-tampa-bay-coaches-film/page11/#iDOJjlLygqpbWWhQ.99

Dilfer needs to make up his mind. Either its CK or it's Roman

I know and we know it's Roman
so he should shut up with the type of qb Colin is.
Colin is the type of qb that does what they ask him

if this offense was designed for him to have all of the eligible wr's on a play he would flourish in it.
Originally posted by jonesadrian:
Originally posted by NCommand:
Here we go boys...to our "theory."

Dilfer: "If you're a skill position guy for the Niners, you're only getting the ball if the play was designed to get you the ball. They don't have the type of offensive structure and Colin isn't the type of quarterback that there are five eligible receivers and anyone can get the ball."

Does someone want to call B.S. on my theory now? Dilfer essentially went one level deeper (where I'm at) from calling CK a "remedial" QB if the first read isn't there to what I have been highlighting with the AR (team designed) passing game.

Read more at http://www.49erswebzone.com/forum/niners/176180-analysis-tampa-bay-coaches-film/page11/#iDOJjlLygqpbWWhQ.99

Dilfer needs to make up his mind. Either its CK or it's Roman

I know and we know it's Roman
so he should shut up with the type of qb Colin is.
Colin is the type of qb that does what they ask him

if this offense was designed for him to have all of the eligible wr's on a play he would flourish in it.

Agreed...I think he looked on the surface at CK and naturally, saw all the "one reads" and then him running for his life. I think after watching the pattern long enough, you start to see just what you said...that CK is merely executing the plays called in.
[ Edited by NCommand on Dec 18, 2013 at 12:56 PM ]
Originally posted by NCommand:
Agreed...I think he looked on the surface at CK and naturally, saw all the "one reads" and then him running for his life. I think after watching the pattern long enough, you start to see just what you said...that CK is merely executing the plays called in.

Hopefully we've just been trolled
and he starts to set things loose. and does everything we've been asking.

this is supposed to be the year they put it together.
1st year defense
last year offense carried us in the playoffs
this year flawless.
Originally posted by NCommand:
Originally posted by jonesadrian:
Originally posted by NCommand:
Here we go boys...to our "theory."

Dilfer: "If you're a skill position guy for the Niners, you're only getting the ball if the play was designed to get you the ball. They don't have the type of offensive structure and Colin isn't the type of quarterback that there are five eligible receivers and anyone can get the ball."

Does someone want to call B.S. on my theory now? Dilfer essentially went one level deeper (where I'm at) from calling CK a "remedial" QB if the first read isn't there to what I have been highlighting with the AR (team designed) passing game.

Read more at http://www.49erswebzone.com/forum/niners/176180-analysis-tampa-bay-coaches-film/page11/#iDOJjlLygqpbWWhQ.99

Dilfer needs to make up his mind. Either its CK or it's Roman

I know and we know it's Roman
so he should shut up with the type of qb Colin is.
Colin is the type of qb that does what they ask him

if this offense was designed for him to have all of the eligible wr's on a play he would flourish in it.

Agreed...I think he looked on the surface at CK and naturally, saw all the "one reads" and then him running for his life. I think after watching the pattern long enough, you start to see just what you said...that CK is merely executing the plays called in.

It's a running game execution philosophy applied to the passing game. That shouldn't shock given you have a running game specialist as your OC.
Jonnydel's breakdowns have been incredibly helpful, and I am in the process of re-estimating roman...still, he has plenty of faults but damn, some of his plays, once broken down are things of beauty. Sitting crabs and boldin on the same play,however, is a puzzlement...so roman isn't there yet...and same goes for that damn play clock. in Russia they would shoot you for that.
Originally posted by pasodoc9er:
Jonnydel's breakdowns have been incredibly helpful, and I am in the process of re-estimating roman...still, he has plenty of faults but damn, some of his plays, once broken down are things of beauty. Sitting crabs and boldin on the same play,however, is a puzzlement...so roman isn't there yet...and same goes for that damn play clock. in Russia they would shoot you for that.

he's not horrible when he uses sense.

he just abandons it inexplicably at times and there's really no excuse for it. that's what spawned this thread.

that and a lot of people just have a different idea of how we would be best on offense.

My gripe has been using the talent we have.. use all of it or try to use all of it I'll shut up.

But when an offense struggles and has talent on the bench untapped.. frustration happens
  • buck
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 11,339
I may not be as knowledgeable as you all are, but I tend to believe that the easy answers are just that--too easy.

In my limited mind, the problems we have cannot be attributed to one person. That is just too simplistic.

I am not defending Roman, but if you think that Roman is the problem, I think you are wrong.


The problems that we have stem from, and if we are going to be honest we have to understand that the problems almost certainly stem from a variety of sources--from the head coach and general manager through the coaching staff and down to the players.

The good news is that despite the existent problems we are in the hunt.
[ Edited by buck on Dec 18, 2013 at 11:27 PM ]
Originally posted by buck:
I may not be as knowledgeable as you all are, but I tend to believe that the easy answers are just that--too easy.

In my limited mind, the problems we have cannot be attributed to one person. That is just too simplistic.

I am not defending Roman, but if you think that Roman is the problem, I think you are wrong.


The problems that we have stem from, and if we are going to be honest we have to understand that the problems almost certainly stem from a variety of sources--from the head coach and general manager through the coaching staff and down to the players.

The good news is that despite the existent problems we are in the hunt.

I don't think one person IS the problem...it's the offensive philosophy (mostly the passing game). IMHO of course.
Originally posted by NCommand:
Originally posted by buck:
I may not be as knowledgeable as you all are, but I tend to believe that the easy answers are just that--too easy.

In my limited mind, the problems we have cannot be attributed to one person. That is just too simplistic.

I am not defending Roman, but if you think that Roman is the problem, I think you are wrong.


The problems that we have stem from, and if we are going to be honest we have to understand that the problems almost certainly stem from a variety of sources--from the head coach and general manager through the coaching staff and down to the players.

The good news is that despite the existent problems we are in the hunt.

I don't think one person IS the problem...it's the offensive philosophy (mostly the passing game). IMHO of course.

Agree with both of you! I've given up pining for a return to the WCO and will hope the Schembechler offense can take us to a championship! We have stockpiled RBs so at least they were able to accomplish that...now if they can add a vertical receiving threat that makes this system go...! VD can't do it alone.
If the 9ers and Seahawks play a playoff game in Seattle in this postseason, that surely will be a huge test for Roman. If the 9ers get totally skunked there again due to the offense not being able to get anything going, fair or not, the blame would fall heavily on Roman's shoulders. If they lose, but are "in the game" the whole way and they lose by 10 points or less, then the criticism may not be too great. If they beat Seattle in Seattle in the playoffs, you will not hear me questioning Roman for the whole rest of this year.
Originally posted by pasodoc9er:
Jonnydel's breakdowns have been incredibly helpful, and I am in the process of re-estimating roman...still, he has plenty of faults but damn, some of his plays, once broken down are things of beauty. Sitting crabs and boldin on the same play,however, is a puzzlement...so roman isn't there yet...and same goes for that damn play clock. in Russia they would shoot you for that.

Pasodoc,

Consider this... it's easy to see some success with the offense now that Crabtree is back. Again, this philosophy is like a "running game" philosophy applied to the passing game - everyone is doing their part to ensure that one person is open/free. And when that person or possibly 2 people aren't open, it's adlib time. That being said, this type of offense requires the existence of viable decoys, the defense has to believe that X receiver is going to get the ball. If not, then the play is DOA. Crabtree, Davis and Boldin are can all be ARs and thus effective decoys for each other. However, my primary issue is that this approach to offense severely slows the development of new(er) players and almost requires blue-chip, top notch talent be at the AR/decoy positions. So a player like Victor Cruz, a UDFA, would have difficultly breaking the starting lineup because there would be so few opportunities for him to display his talents. This offense essentially "locks" the 49ers into a mold which will problematic for a team that drafts BPA. Instead of tweaking the offense to adjust for the loss of its FB, the 49ers sign their old DT who played FB and considered Owen Macric. All of this seems pretty desperate for a deeply talented team.

And again I ask the question, if FB is the key cog in the offense, then we should have carried at least one more on the roster. It's HarRo's job to communicate importance of position/personnel to the GM. However I'm thinking Baalke didn't put too much stock into that because he's seeing his players drafted eventually get cut/leave the team because there really isn't much development going on. Offensively, the 49ers are the same team they were before Harbaugh arrived - the only difference is the coaching is a bit better, but the offense uses the same personnel - no surprise. I think the question we all want answered is ...

Where's the evolution? And don't tell me it's just Kap running around making adlib plays.
Originally posted by 49erphan:
If the 9ers and Seahawks play a playoff game in Seattle in this postseason, that surely will be a huge test for Roman. If the 9ers get totally skunked there again due to the offense not being able to get anything going, fair or not, the blame would fall heavily on Roman's shoulders. If they lose, but are "in the game" the whole way and they lose by 10 points or less, then the criticism may not be too great. If they beat Seattle in Seattle in the playoffs, you will not hear me questioning Roman for the whole rest of this year.

You are spot on IMO here. That is if we make it to Seattle first. I have a feeling how we fare in these playoffs will have a domino effect.
  • cciowa
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 26,866
Originally posted by NCommand:
Originally posted by 49erphan:
If the 9ers and Seahawks play a playoff game in Seattle in this postseason, that surely will be a huge test for Roman. If the 9ers get totally skunked there again due to the offense not being able to get anything going, fair or not, the blame would fall heavily on Roman's shoulders. If they lose, but are "in the game" the whole way and they lose by 10 points or less, then the criticism may not be too great. If they beat Seattle in Seattle in the playoffs, you will not hear me questioning Roman for the whole rest of this year.

You are spot on IMO here. That is if we make it to Seattle first. I have a feeling how we fare in these playoffs will have a domino effect.
on the other hand if we lose monday. why are so many people so eager to praise roman for calling one or two good games,, the way he should be calling every single game?? he f**ked up vs the colts but then vs bad teams, he called a good game plan. So now people say he got his head out of his ass. then comes the panthers fiasco. then we win a few games and people think he is "back on track".. is it going to take a loss monday night for some people to wake up to him
Originally posted by cciowa:
on the other hand if we lose monday. why are so many people so eager to praise roman for calling one or two good games,, the way he should be calling every single game?? he f**ked up vs the colts but then vs bad teams, he called a good game plan. So now people say he got his head out of his ass. then comes the panthers fiasco. then we win a few games and people think he is "back on track".. is it going to take a loss monday night for some people to wake up to him

Precisely, Roman calls a couple good games and people are hailing him a good OC? If Harbaugh and Roman actually tailored the offense to fit the players skill sets we have it might be a lot more productive. Instead, they try and fit square pegs into round holes. They have their system and try to fit people into it, most good coaches would do the opposite I would think. Why they hardly ever go hard play action when they are near the goal line befuddles me. The red zone production would be a lot more effective if they did it more often. When they call those action plays inside the 5 yard line it's usually an easy lay up TD for Vernon or whoever leaks out.
...