Originally posted by British9er:
I agree totally with the premise that the FO believes it has the NT in the 3-4 this season already on the roster in Williams and Dorsey. A thought that has occurred to me (albeit one that it perhaps biased) is that the FO have realised that last year Soap's play fell off a lot and even despite this the opposition chose not to run against the 49ers that much. The Defence spent most of the season in the nickel and therefore there were many games when Soap wouldn't get on the field that much at all.
Therefore perhaps the 49ers are happy to 'give a little' at NT and load up abit more with pass rushers - Tank, Leomnier and Dial (untapped rush potential according to Fangio) and add in Reid and Asmoguha to the secondary. I think our dline wore down during the season as a result of playing so much in the nickel. If teams decided to try and run more on the 49ers defence would it be such a crime? Personally I'm delighted when teams hand the ball off and try and run into that line.
My other linked thought is that the 2013 49ers offence should score more pts per game than the 2012 version. Kaep is a more dynamic QB than Alex Smith and with him under centre in 2013 having prepared all off-season to be the starter I expect the 49ers to score mroe pts and to score more quickly. The other offensive players will also have had a full off-season to practice the offence we will run under Kaep. I can therefore forsee that opponents will be playing catch-up more often and may abandon the run earlier in games to throw more to stay in the game. When this happens how often would a "heifer" get onto the field to play NT??
I think that the FO is quite happy with what its got already and is willing to go with a more athletic DL/NT rather than a one dimensional "heifer"
Hey, that's a pretty good argument. It made me look again at my initital reaction and try to understand it better.
First, getting "better" up front is totally, DEFCON4 critical. Do we agree there? I think the D production in the last 8 weeks dropped dramatically due to lack of presence up front. Not just with regards to pass rush production but impact tackles as well. You know, smashmouth hits. Why? Everyone was gimpy, not just the Smiths. And, we rely on front 7 domination to support our coverage d.
Prior to the draft, the lineup we have on hand that will go into 2013 is in worse shape than they were going into 2012. JSMith, coming off major surgery/rehab. ASmith, coming off major surgery/rehab. McDonald a year older. Dorsey, history of injuries light on NT experience. Reliable backup RJF gone.
So I am thinking that all these guys will need to be spelled much more than 2012. Why not plan that the SMiths will need to play 65-80 percent of snaps? Dorsey, McDonald will only make 60% of snaps? say 700 - 850 total snaps, not 1100. SOmething like that.
I like the observation that we won't really be running an NT that much anyway, because our opponents will be much more in passing mode for 2013 due to our offensive ability.
But I think that even though there will be more situational sub of the NT than last year, the most important thing to avoid is total ineffectiveness at any DLine position due to the general beat down effect. Doesn't matter if Dorsey/Williams get in that state week 8, 10, 14, whatever. Same with the Smiths. The best antidote to that is fresh meat and we need to find the best quality we can in the draft. For every spot that we play up front.
So I thought that we would really try to maximize the quality of those individuals-- draft real three down candidates, plus add some real competition/size to the Dorsey/Williams equation.
I also get that maybe, we just didn't feel that there were any real candidates there in round 2/3, so we went with other positions where there was a better quality yield.
Maybe. I just think that 2 rookies adding up to say 600 - 700 snaps on any of the three positions up front would make a real difference to our dinged guys. I think that we should have made it a huge priority to get those two guys. I feel like we came away with maybe 1 guy, depending. The others could work out too, but it's farther out there.
I am not even thinking here about #2 TE. Not a factor in any way to winning a super bowl. We have Vernon. If we can't go with that, shame on us.
Plus let me turn around the we're-in-the-lead argument. Isn't that the time to give Justin a break for one or two series? When we are up 3 scores late in second quarter? Maybe we can put in someone for a series and maintain. That might just keep JS/AS playing 95% into February. But, of course, the person you put in has to acquit themselves somewhat.
I am pretty happy with Reid. Carradine might help out. Other guys can work out too. We'll see. I am still thinking a weak B, for not 100% addressing what cost us the super bowl.
[ Edited by brodiebluebanaszak on Apr 28, 2013 at 6:28 AM ]