There are 44 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Possible Replacements for FS

Originally posted by boast:
it's NOT gonna happen. i have no idea why so many posters are thinking this.

I dis-agree.

We cant keep these guys who are gettting paid twice their worth and expect to compete against the top teams. And I fully expect a rookie SS to be just as productive as Whitner was. Whitner and Culliver on the same side of the field is a disaster waiting to happen. Actually, a disaster DID happen in the playoffs.

The good teams like New England constantly shuffle their roster and get rid of aging, over-paid players all the time.
I don't know why the 49ers would even consider cutting Whitner. Just to save 4mil? While there's probably better long term options nobody is going to come in play better than Whitner would for next season. There's a learning curve to overcome with learning the system and getting comfortable with the players around them which Whitner already has. We have to overcome losing Goldson as it is. How could we suffer the loss of both safeties in the same offseason? I'm counting on the 49ers competing next season and the secondary is already the weakest link on our defense. I'm failing to see how saving 4 mil helps us improve the secondary.
Originally posted by SteveYoung:
I dis-agree.

We cant keep these guys who are gettting paid twice their worth and expect to compete against the top teams. And I fully expect a rookie SS to be just as productive as Whitner was. Whitner and Culliver on the same side of the field is a disaster waiting to happen. Actually, a disaster DID happen in the playoffs.

The good teams like New England constantly shuffle their roster and get rid of aging, over-paid players all the time.

Whitner's not that bad. The entire defense withered in the playoffs. Not just Whitner. I agree with you about over paying players but just because Whitner is gettin paid more than what you and I might think he's worth is not grounds alone to cut him. There has to be a suitable replacement and I disagree with you about a late round rookie being able to play as well considering the the learning curve and having to be conditioned for a 16 game schedule and still have something left for the playoffs. There's no way we can improve with two rookies.

Originally posted by SteveYoung:
I dis-agree.

We cant keep these guys who are gettting paid twice their worth and expect to compete against the top teams. And I fully expect a rookie SS to be just as productive as Whitner was. Whitner and Culliver on the same side of the field is a disaster waiting to happen. Actually, a disaster DID happen in the playoffs.

The good teams like New England constantly shuffle their roster and get rid of aging, over-paid players all the time.
Originally posted by NinerG94:
I don't know why the 49ers would even consider cutting Whitner. Just to save 4mil? While there's probably better long term options nobody is going to come in play better than Whitner would for next season. There's a learning curve to overcome with learning the system and getting comfortable with the players around them which Whitner already has. We have to overcome losing Goldson as it is. How could we suffer the loss of both safeties in the same offseason? I'm counting on the 49ers competing next season and the secondary is already the weakest link on our defense. I'm failing to see how saving 4 mil helps us improve the secondary.

Nobody is going to come in and play better than giving up 12 TD's, the most of any safety in the league? Really? I seem to remember that Carlton Williamson did pretty well at the position in his rookie year. Jeff Fuller did just fine in his rookie year. Lots of rookies step right in at safety in their rookie years and do just fine. Usually, during the course of their rookie season, they make a mistake or two, but giving up 12 TD's isn't really that high of a bar is it.
  • cciowa
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 27,019
Originally posted by NinerG94:
Whitner's not that bad. The entire defense withered in the playoffs. Not just Whitner. I agree with you about over paying players but just because Whitner is gettin paid more than what you and I might think he's worth is not grounds alone to cut him. There has to be a suitable replacement and I disagree with you about a late round rookie being able to play as well considering the the learning curve and having to be conditioned for a 16 game schedule and still have something left for the playoffs. There's no way we can improve with two rookies.

whitner is terrible. hits nice but what good does that do when you are a bumbling stumbling fool giving up touchdowns in pass coverage, please. we may be stuck with whitner this year esp if we let goldson go. you get a free agent on day two of free agency to replace goldson. you then get a rookie in the first three rounds. let him and whitner duke it out . It is not unrealistic to think a rookie can come in and play right away. it has been done before. even if he does not, deal with whitner one more year and then get rid of him. you can not defend whitner for the terrible way he played in pass coverage all year long and in the super bowl.. as bad as he played in my opinion, that spot should be wide open for competition, rookies included
Originally posted by GNielsen:
Nobody is going to come in and play better than giving up 12 TD's, the most of any safety in the league? Really? I seem to remember that Carlton Williamson did pretty well at the position in his rookie year. Jeff Fuller did just fine in his rookie year. Lots of rookies step right in at safety in their rookie years and do just fine. Usually, during the course of their rookie season, they make a mistake or two, but giving up 12 TD's isn't really that high of a bar is it.

I think that number reflects more on the trend of using bigger, faster TE to take advantage of the mismatch on a SS in the end zone. I remember a couple of times where Whitner had good coverage in the end zone but the TE just made a better catch. (i.e. Vikes game) They wouldn't be doing that between the 20's, the TE would get blown up.
[ Edited by qnnhan7 on Mar 8, 2013 at 10:53 AM ]
  • cciowa
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 27,019
Originally posted by GNielsen:
Nobody is going to come in and play better than giving up 12 TD's, the most of any safety in the league? Really? I seem to remember that Carlton Williamson did pretty well at the position in his rookie year. Jeff Fuller did just fine in his rookie year. Lots of rookies step right in at safety in their rookie years and do just fine. Usually, during the course of their rookie season, they make a mistake or two, but giving up 12 TD's isn't really that high of a bar is it.

of course this is the truth
Originally posted by qnnhan7:
I think that number reflects more on the trend of using bigger, faster TE to take advantage of the mismatch on a SS in the end zone. I remember a couple of times where Whitner had good coverage in the end zone but the TE just made a better catch. (i.e. Vikes game) They wouldn't be doing that between the 20's, the TE would get blown up.

Two things: if it worked last season, teams will continue to exploit the weakness, and secondly, I think we're going to see less and less of this "blowing up the receiver" kind of play and more and more pure coverage because the NFL is going to keep trying to cut down on head injuries. This trend might explain why the Niners are less than aggressive in trying to keep Goldson. His game is all about "blowing up" receivers.
Originally posted by GNielsen:
Nobody is going to come in and play better than giving up 12 TD's, the most of any safety in the league? Really? I seem to remember that Carlton Williamson did pretty well at the position in his rookie year. Jeff Fuller did just fine in his rookie year. Lots of rookies step right in at safety in their rookie years and do just fine. Usually, during the course of their rookie season, they make a mistake or two, but giving up 12 TD's isn't really that high of a bar is it.

Well Whitner isn't going anywhere because of dead money. We're simply not going to find a better cheaper player that's going come in and play for a contract that's so cheap it offsets Whitner's dead money and a starter's contract. It's interesting how Whitner's play corresponds to injuries to the DL. 49ers will spend their resources in the lines. Especially since in our defense FS and SS are interchangeable. This is why we don't value Goldson IMHO as much as other teams might.
Originally posted by NinerGM:
Well Whitner isn't going anywhere because of dead money. We're simply not going to find a better cheaper player that's going come in and play for a contract that's so cheap it offsets Whitner's dead money and a starter's contract. It's interesting how Whitner's play corresponds to injuries to the DL. 49ers will spend their resources in the lines. Especially since in our defense FS and SS are interchangeable. This is why we don't value Goldson IMHO as much as other teams might.

Adrian Wilson for two years? Bigger, taller, faster, hits just as hard, better coverage skills... recently released by the Cardinals.
  • cciowa
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 27,019
Originally posted by NinerGM:
Well Whitner isn't going anywhere because of dead money. We're simply not going to find a better cheaper player that's going come in and play for a contract that's so cheap it offsets Whitner's dead money and a starter's contract. It's interesting how Whitner's play corresponds to injuries to the DL. 49ers will spend their resources in the lines. Especially since in our defense FS and SS are interchangeable. This is why we don't value Goldson IMHO as much as other teams might.
the injuries on the d line , in my opinion, had zero to do with how poor whitner was in pass coverage. he just did not suck ass in the super bowl. he was like that all year long and in my opinion he does not or should not think he has that job locked up.. i think you get the guy from the cardinals, draft a rookie and you just got better in that area
Originally posted by cciowa:
Originally posted by NinerGM:
Well Whitner isn't going anywhere because of dead money. We're simply not going to find a better cheaper player that's going come in and play for a contract that's so cheap it offsets Whitner's dead money and a starter's contract. It's interesting how Whitner's play corresponds to injuries to the DL. 49ers will spend their resources in the lines. Especially since in our defense FS and SS are interchangeable. This is why we don't value Goldson IMHO as much as other teams might.
the injuries on the d line , in my opinion, had zero to do with how poor whitner was in pass coverage. he just did not suck ass in the super bowl. he was like that all year long and in my opinion he does not or should not think he has that job locked up.. i think you get the guy from the cardinals, draft a rookie and you just got better in that area

Hey cciowa! Long time no see man.

You're probably correct on the play. The problem still is dead money. Even if you draft a rook who plays as well, you still owe Whitner too much dead money. It almost guarantees him a roster spot.
Originally posted by GNielsen:
Originally posted by qnnhan7:
I think that number reflects more on the trend of using bigger, faster TE to take advantage of the mismatch on a SS in the end zone. I remember a couple of times where Whitner had good coverage in the end zone but the TE just made a better catch. (i.e. Vikes game) They wouldn't be doing that between the 20's, the TE would get blown up.

Two things: if it worked last season, teams will continue to exploit the weakness, and secondly, I think we're going to see less and less of this "blowing up the receiver" kind of play and more and more pure coverage because the NFL is going to keep trying to cut down on head injuries. This trend might explain why the Niners are less than aggressive in trying to keep Goldson. His game is all about "blowing up" receivers.

But it didn't work 2 seasons ago ... which tells me there has to be something to the DL issue. I'm not saying it fixes everything, but the entire secondary has played less effective. Picks were way down too.
Originally posted by GNielsen:
Originally posted by qnnhan7:
I think that number reflects more on the trend of using bigger, faster TE to take advantage of the mismatch on a SS in the end zone. I remember a couple of times where Whitner had good coverage in the end zone but the TE just made a better catch. (i.e. Vikes game) They wouldn't be doing that between the 20's, the TE would get blown up.

Two things: if it worked last season, teams will continue to exploit the weakness, and secondly, I think we're going to see less and less of this "blowing up the receiver" kind of play and more and more pure coverage because the NFL is going to keep trying to cut down on head injuries. This trend might explain why the Niners are less than aggressive in trying to keep Goldson. His game is all about "blowing up" receivers.

LB and the SS are the toughest positions on the defense because offense will always try to take advantage of the guys with the most responsibilities on the run and pass -- LB and SS. If we want to change the trend than we would have to find a bigger, faster and quicker SS Even then, it's not a sure thing because it's like --- read and react -- run or pass--- by the time you see pass it might just be too late, the guy is behind you.
[ Edited by qnnhan7 on Mar 8, 2013 at 11:15 AM ]
Since when is less than $1 million a huge cap hit?