There are 61 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Return to the mean

Originally posted by CRUD:
Originally posted by KegBert:
Not saying there is no room for improvement, there always is, But towards the end of the season it was our defense that was strugaling. In the playoffs our D, on average, gave up around thirty points a game. The argument could be easily made that our offense in fact did the bailing out of the defense and our abysmal ST's.

The Green Bay game ya, offense broke out but it was mostly Kaep running. The Patriots game was great as well but our offense was too hit or miss in the long run (in other games). I know we can't score 40 points a game but I'd like to see it happen I'm a spoiled fan from the 80's and 90's, yes, but I can't help but feel our passing plays are sub par. I think Roman has most of the work to do. Kaep will be alright if we can design some better plays. Gore is going to tear it up so for me the ball is in Romans court so to speak.


Disagree.

Kaep ran for a bunch of yards vs Green Bay, but he did more damage with his arm. 180+ rushing, but 260+ passing.

This offense is never going to look like the ones in the 80's and 90's. Thats simply not the design. Roman/Harbaugh run one of the most complicated and revolutonary offenses in the NFL. Theyrun just about every running play you have ever seen from formations that have never been seen. They will run 4 or 5 different running plays as well as several passing plays that all look identical at the snap.

They will run a dizzying array of personel packages and defenses simply can't keep up.

Bottom line tho, this team is going to continue to run the hell out of the ball. Thats what they did with Stanford with Toby Gerhart and Andrew Luck and its what they will continue to do here.

Those runs and more importantly Kaep THREAT to run is what gets you TEs running wide open 20 or 30 yards downfield.

The passing plays are NOT subpar...the offense is just diffferent than the ones you've seen before. All of what I've said above BTW doesn't even take the Pistol or the Read-Option into account.
I always find it a little amusing the way time changes the perception of what it was like in the 80's and 90's. The San Francisco 49ers have never scored 40 points a game. Never. Not even close. The highest scoring Super Bowl winner was the '94 team which averaged about 26 points a game. The 84 and 89 teams, which many think were among the best in NFL history for any team, scored about 25 or less points per game. Over and over I find myself pointing out that all successful Niner Super Bowl teams have been characterized by smothering, powerful defenses. I know that's not the way the sports media likes to paint the picture, but it happens to be reality. Look it up.
Originally posted by GNielsen:
I always find it a little amusing the way time changes the perception of what it was like in the 80's and 90's. The San Francisco 49ers have never scored 40 points a game. Never. Not even close. The highest scoring Super Bowl winner was the '94 team which averaged about 26 points a game. The 84 and 89 teams, which many think were among the best in NFL history for any team, scored about 25 or less points per game. Over and over I find myself pointing out that all successful Niner Super Bowl teams have been characterized by smothering, powerful defenses. I know that's not the way the sports media likes to paint the picture, but it happens to be reality. Look it up.

Correction -- The '94 team averaged just under 32 points/game, but I see your point.

The four highest scoring teams in league history ('07 Patriots, '12 Patriots, '98 Vikings, '83 Redskins) failed to win the Super Bowl. The 49ers teams of the past definitely had great offenses, and they got all the glory, but the defenses also had all-pro players from top to bottom. That often goes unnoticed.
@SofaKing

Good catch. I was dividing 505 points by 19 games, not 16 as I should have. And, that team did average 43 points a game in their three playoff games, so I can certainly see where the impression comes from. That was a very high-powered offense. Strangely, that team also gave up the most points in the playoffs of any championship Niner team. The 89 team allowed a grand total of 26 points in 3 playoff games (!) The 88 team allowed just 28 points in 3 playoff games. And the 84 team gave up just a total of 26 against three playoff teams. Those were unbelievable defenses - really some of the best ever - but all most people remember was the offense.

But, this is why I'm so glad that Harbaalke leaned so hard on defense during this off season. This team allowed 89 points in the playoffs and that just can't happen again.
  • CRUD
  • Member
  • Posts: 79
Originally posted by Marvin49:
Disagree.

Kaep ran for a bunch of yards vs Green Bay, but he did more damage with his arm. 180+ rushing, but 260+ passing.

This offense is never going to look like the ones in the 80's and 90's. Thats simply not the design. Roman/Harbaugh run one of the most complicated and revolutonary offenses in the NFL. Theyrun just about every running play you have ever seen from formations that have never been seen. They will run 4 or 5 different running plays as well as several passing plays that all look identical at the snap.

They will run a dizzying array of personel packages and defenses simply can't keep up.

Bottom line tho, this team is going to continue to run the hell out of the ball. Thats what they did with Stanford with Toby Gerhart and Andrew Luck and its what they will continue to do here.

Those runs and more importantly Kaep THREAT to run is what gets you TEs running wide open 20 or 30 yards downfield.

The passing plays are NOT subpar...the offense is just diffferent than the ones you've seen before. All of what I've said above BTW doesn't even take the Pistol or the Read-Option into account.

Already a thread on it I guess.

http://www.49erswebzone.com/forum/niners/169837-49ers-rudimentary-pass-offense/

I'll meet you in there if you want to discuss it. I'd rather talk about my unpopular opinions in areas of the site where people might agree
seattle should return to their mean by being mediocre.
Originally posted by KegBert:
Wethere or not he will be used like that is yet to be seen but don't sell our coaching staff short. They have shown the ability to use players in some very creative ways, first thing that comes to mind is converting a college DE and turning him into our starting FB. I assure you that if Vance shows any propensity to come down with jump balls in the red zone this coaching staff will take advantage of it.

So your logic on the subject is: Because the niners converted DE to FB you can support any argument that has no previous example.

Your right I'm convinced they will send Vance on lots of Jump balls in the endzone.
Originally posted by Need4Speed:
Originally posted by KegBert:
Wethere or not he will be used like that is yet to be seen but don't sell our coaching staff short. They have shown the ability to use players in some very creative ways, first thing that comes to mind is converting a college DE and turning him into our starting FB. I assure you that if Vance shows any propensity to come down with jump balls in the red zone this coaching staff will take advantage of it.

So your logic on the subject is: Because the niners converted DE to FB you can support any argument that has no previous example.

Your right I'm convinced they will send Vance on lots of Jump balls in the endzone.

Is that really what you pulled from what I said? If so please reread that exchange because you are completely misrepresenting my argument.

Lets break this down. The OP said he thought we addressed the RZ issues by drafting Quinton and Vance. You disagreed, stating Vance was never used in such a manner at Rice so it would be unlikely that he would be used as such in our offense

I countered by saying our coaching staff could care less how a certain player was used in college and will cater to their skillet. To support this i offered one example of them using a player outside of his college system and you latched onto that. Note that I never said the he would for sure be used in such a manner but if he "shows any propensity", our staff wouldn't hesitate to capitalize. Considering his long arms and big body, this isn't a gigantic stretch by any means.
Originally posted by KegBert:
Is that really what you pulled from what I said? If so please reread that exchange because you are completely misrepresenting my argument.

Lets break this down. The OP said he thought we addressed the RZ issues by drafting Quinton and Vance. You disagreed, stating Vance was never used in such a manner at Rice so it would be unlikely that he would be used as such in our offense

I countered by saying our coaching staff could care less how a certain player was used in college and will cater to their skillet. To support this i offered one example of them using a player outside of his college system and you latched onto that. Note that I never said the he would for sure be used in such a manner but if he "shows any propensity", our staff wouldn't hesitate to capitalize. Considering his long arms and big body, this isn't a gigantic stretch by any means.

So you are basically saying nothing... If michael jordan decides to walk on and show s propensity for jump balls in the endzone. The staff will use him that way. hmmmm..... I go by what I've seen but if there is even a spec of truth in your argument or well non argument it is that the niners do some odd things. Could vance become a redzone monster. Possibly? I don't see it on film I leave it for the dreams and superstition category. I bet that big foot could block at TE maybe we will sign em.... I could only hope. (I hope no on takes me too seriously I play more than anything else here )
Originally posted by Need4Speed:
Originally posted by KegBert:
Is that really what you pulled from what I said? If so please reread that exchange because you are completely misrepresenting my argument.

Lets break this down. The OP said he thought we addressed the RZ issues by drafting Quinton and Vance. You disagreed, stating Vance was never used in such a manner at Rice so it would be unlikely that he would be used as such in our offense

I countered by saying our coaching staff could care less how a certain player was used in college and will cater to their skillet. To support this i offered one example of them using a player outside of his college system and you latched onto that. Note that I never said the he would for sure be used in such a manner but if he "shows any propensity", our staff wouldn't hesitate to capitalize. Considering his long arms and big body, this isn't a gigantic stretch by any means.

So you are basically saying nothing... If michael jordan decides to walk on and show s propensity for jump balls in the endzone. The staff will use him that way. hmmmm..... I go by what I've seen but if there is even a spec of truth in your argument or well non argument it is that the niners do some odd things. Could vance become a redzone monster. Possibly? I don't see it on film I leave it for the dreams and superstition category. I bet that big foot could block at TE maybe we will sign em.... I could only hope. (I hope no on takes me too seriously I play more than anything else here )

Apparently something is getting lost here. Let me further simplify this since you continue to completely confuse my point.

Op said Vance helps RZ O with ability to catch jump balls. You disagreed, specifically citing his lack of this in the college ranks.

I then pointed out that our coaching staff has demonstrated an ability to get more out of their players above and beyond what they where capable of in college. Again never did I once say Vance would become some RZ monster. I merely pointed out that it is short sighted to rule RZ production out just because he didnt do it in college.

You then went on to make a straw man argument out of my Bruce reference and somehow managed to bring in MJ and Bigfoot into the conversation. Am I missing anything?
Originally posted by pdizo916:
seattle should return to their mean by being mediocre.

I think this is a solid prediction. Their road schedule is a lot tougher coming up this year and last year, they lucked out in quite a few ways. I know a lot of fans around here are sure that the Seahawks are going to roll this year, but I won't be surprised if they fade a little.
I believe Vance McDonald had the best vertical leap and the second longest arms of any TE in the draft. He's also very tall and strong to begin with. So, with Niner coaching and a full off-season of work, I don't know why anyone thinks it's a stretch to say they might try to fashion him into a player they can count on to go up for passes in the end zone.

It's always a lazier and easier task in the NFL to predict failure. My prediction is that most rookies drafted this year will not crack the starting lineup! Pretty bold prediction, eh?
  • Jcool
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 12,843
Originally posted by SofaKing:
Correction -- The '94 team averaged just under 32 points/game, but I see your point.

The four highest scoring teams in league history ('07 Patriots, '12 Patriots, '98 Vikings, '83 Redskins) failed to win the Super Bowl. The 49ers teams of the past definitely had great offenses, and they got all the glory, but the defenses also had all-pro players from top to bottom. That often goes unnoticed.

Correction:

POINTS
Most Points, Season
589 New England, 2007
560 Green Bay, 2011
557 New England, 2012
556 Minnesota, 1998
547 New Orleans, 2011
541 Washington, 1983
Return to the mean = they got lucky. watch out they'll suck next year...
Originally posted by GNielsen:
Originally posted by pdizo916:
seattle should return to their mean by being mediocre.

I think this is a solid prediction. Their road schedule is a lot tougher coming up this year and last year, they lucked out in quite a few ways. I know a lot of fans around here are sure that the Seahawks are going to roll this year, but I won't be surprised if they fade a little.

@ Carolina
@ Houston
@ Indy
@ Atlanta
@ NYG

(all 10am games)