Out-Coached! = Why did Seattle dominate both our O-line and our D-line?

Originally posted by wailers15:
That run has nothing to do with coaching. bad form on Reid, Brock let alone.

it was 1 run. he overran it they scored. its exactly what we did to them the last time we played them it happens.

take away that run and lynch didn't do anything. the run was huge for them.

however the front 7 and back 4 played excellent except for 2 plays.

but it shouldn't come down to that
if our offensive line could create any type of running lane for gore or anyone to run through
or
if roman doesn't abandon the run.

seattle always sticks with it
and we always abandon it in seattle
vernon always plays cared
and the wr's don't get the calls as they're held

its the same formula every time
only this time kap actually came to play and almost carried us by his damn self to the super bowl

Originally posted by jonesadrian:

Originally posted by wailers15:
That run has nothing to do with coaching. bad form on Reid, Brock let alone.

it was 1 run. he overran it they scored. its exactly what we did to them the last time we played them it happens.

take away that run and lynch didn't do anything. the run was huge for them.

however the front 7 and back 4 played excellent except for 2 plays.

but it shouldn't come down to that
if our offensive line could create any type of running lane for gore or anyone to run through
or
if roman doesn't abandon the run.

seattle always sticks with it
and we always abandon it in seattle
vernon always plays cared
and the wr's don't get the calls as they're held

its the same formula every time
only this time kap actually came to play and almost carried us by his damn self to the super bowl

Don't twist this, because I do think overall the defense played a very good game. But you're wrong that it was just the 40-yd run...on multiple drives in the second half, Lynch was 4+ ypc. Again, that's not saying that he ran roughshod over them, but there was a marked difference between what he could do between 1st and 2nd half.

As I've said, to me it didn't appear the Seahawks changed much between halves...it was bring in #78 as an eligible extra TE, and except for 1 or 2 exceptions, #78=running play. In the past when Hawks would be in 12 personnel, 49ers go nickel which would usually mean Carlos Rogers as one of your 6 or 7 in the box...I wasn't able to pay much attn to what defense the 49ers were in on most plays, so can't say if that's what happened this game.

Though he obviously made some mistakes, I absolutely agree that CK was practically a one-man show, and it is beyond me the slings & arrows he suffers from some here.

Niners O-line was supposed to be all revamped by this poit. I mean theres alot of first round picks and money on that O-line, yet they seem to have really fallen short.Colin looked like Alex Smith with the pis-poor line play.

Originally posted by DelCed2486:
Don't twist this, because I do think overall the defense played a very good game. But you're wrong that it was just the 40-yd run...on multiple drives in the second half, Lynch was 4+ ypc. Again, that's not saying that he ran roughshod over them, but there was a marked difference between what he could do between 1st and 2nd half.

As I've said, to me it didn't appear the Seahawks changed much between halves...it was bring in #78 as an eligible extra TE, and except for 1 or 2 exceptions, #78=running play. In the past when Hawks would be in 12 personnel, 49ers go nickel which would usually mean Carlos Rogers as one of your 6 or 7 in the box...I wasn't able to pay much attn to what defense the 49ers were in on most plays, so can't say if that's what happened this game.

Though he obviously made some mistakes, I absolutely agree that CK was practically a one-man show, and it is beyond me the slings & arrows he suffers from some here.

It's not twisting it. he got more yards because they stuck with the run which is the larger point. we stuck with it and broke it at the end. they stuck with it and broke them later. its the same plan.
playing rogers was the biggest mistake. over the season he became what you don't need in a db.. passive.
cox was playing with attitude. brown and brock play with attitude. even eric wright plays with attitude. rogers is always trailing and not being aggressive. that's a huge problem and it hurt us. cox knocks that 4th down td away.. cleanly and easily. so does all the rest of our db's he didn't throw it to the guy rogers was covering on accident.

and ck was the reason we were in the game at all
3 turnovers harp on them all you want. if he didn't carry us in through the 1st 3 offensively it would have been a blowout.

Originally posted by jonesadrian:

Originally posted by DelCed2486:
Don't twist this, because I do think overall the defense played a very good game. But you're wrong that it was just the 40-yd run...on multiple drives in the second half, Lynch was 4+ ypc. Again, that's not saying that he ran roughshod over them, but there was a marked difference between what he could do between 1st and 2nd half.

As I've said, to me it didn't appear the Seahawks changed much between halves...it was bring in #78 as an eligible extra TE, and except for 1 or 2 exceptions, #78=running play. In the past when Hawks would be in 12 personnel, 49ers go nickel which would usually mean Carlos Rogers as one of your 6 or 7 in the box...I wasn't able to pay much attn to what defense the 49ers were in on most plays, so can't say if that's what happened this game.

Though he obviously made some mistakes, I absolutely agree that CK was practically a one-man show, and it is beyond me the slings & arrows he suffers from some here.

It's not twisting it. he got more yards because they stuck with the run which is the larger point. we stuck with it and broke it at the end. they stuck with it and broke them later. its the same plan.
playing rogers was the biggest mistake. over the season he became what you don't need in a db.. passive.
cox was playing with attitude. brown and brock play with attitude. even eric wright plays with attitude. rogers is always trailing and not being aggressive. that's a huge problem and it hurt us. cox knocks that 4th down td away.. cleanly and easily. so does all the rest of our db's he didn't throw it to the guy rogers was covering on accident.

and ck was the reason we were in the game at all
3 turnovers harp on them all you want. if he didn't carry us in through the 1st 3 offensively it would have been a blowout.

Yes, they stuck with the run and had much better success in the second half, i.e. saying the 49ers shut it down except for one long run isn't accurate.

My only real issue with the defense is all the cushion the db's give up. It's just mind boggling to me especially with this pass rush.

Originally posted by theduke85:

Originally posted by fryet:
I totally disagree with this OP.

OL: They are playing a silent snap count, so it gives the defensive line an advantage. Also, I personally blame Frank Gore for the lack of production. He is too slow to get to the hole, and is no threat to bounce outside, so he is easy for defenses to stop.
DL: You did see all the pressure they were getting on Russell Wilson? I thought they played a fantastic game. They stopped Seattle's running except for that 1 drive. In the analysis thread, it was discussed that the reason why the corners play off on the receivers is to confuse the QB - they cant determine what type of defense they are facing before the snap. So it forces the QB to hold the ball longer, which gives the DL more time to sack the QB.

Great post.

Like fryet said, you can't blame the offensive line for playing poorly -- that's part of playing in Seattle. With the silent count, the defensive line gets the same jump as our lineman do. Of course they're going to look worse.

Fryet, that's also an interesting perspective on Gore that I've never thought of before. You're right -- him not having the speed/quickness to get outside anymore is an issue. At first I was hesitant to blame him because there simply weren't any holes for him to run through, but sometimes it takes improvisation to make things happen. His vision and patience tandem is as good as anyone's, but he is sort of limited. That said, I think he will still be a valuable contributor next year.

Also, the defensive line did get penetration. Outside of his long run, Marshawn Lynch had 21 carries for 69 yards -- 3.29 YPC. I know you can't just remove that long run and pretend it didn't happen, but it's not like they consistently pounded it down our throats all night. They played really well, especially in the Red Zone.

Agreed. I read his bit about Gore and thought something needs to change here. Not to say Frank isn't a great player but he is certainly predictable at this stage of his career. U don't need to hold the edge too often just jam the AB gaps and he's going nowhere unless Iupati is blowing guys over.

Originally posted by JimA49ers:

Originally posted by T-9ers:

You guys want a Super Bowl but we got like the 10th best QB in the league. Can't tell me we ain't got a Super caliber team elsewhere, we do. Seahawks stacked the box, dared Kaep to throw, he couldn't get it done. There's been almost 50 Super Bowls played and a running QB has won none of them, so you can keepall that running stuff. I'll take 300 yds. and 3 td's passing anyday. Just look at Montana's comments from about a week ago about Kaep, you think he just made that stuff up? Kaep has to stay in the pocket and make clutch throws under pressure, beating teams with his brain. I'd like to ask Pete Carroll about that last play, I bet he'll take that match-up and situation a 100 times out of a 100.

10th??? Really? I would love to hear your list. Also, no running QB ever won a SB? Ever hear of the name Steve Young?

steve young was not a running qb. youre talking about the highest rated passer ever. how old are u?

Keep in mind the seahawks know us very well and the noise certainly helps the seahawks defense get of the line quickly. our pass pro was excellent against Carolina

Steve Young wasnt exactly good until 89. Had similar problems to Kaepernick and then he figured it out. I have no doubt Kaepernick will improve and get us a ring or two before he's done.

Originally posted by thl408:

The checkdown routes to Kap is like option #5. I hope that as Kap learns to just take what's being given on a single play, throws to the RBs will get a slight uptick. I do not think that throwing to RBs will have the same success as it did back in the Walsh days. LBs nowadays run faster than many RBs. This was not the case back in the 80's when many LBs were big plodding run stoppers. Now the LBs are the most athletic players on the field it seems and they can track down RBs and reduce RAC, which is what Craig and Watters thrived on.

I mostly agree, but the pass to the RB doesn't have to be option #5. That's why my compliant is with the coaching (not Kap). . . . with Walsh frequently the #1 option was a quick pass to the RB (or TE), designed to get RAC but also to loosen up the defense and open up the running game. It's true that LB's are faster today, but in 2013 there were still ~30 TE & RB's with 50 or more catches (13 were RB's). There were 5 RB's with over 70 catches in 2013, so you can still do it. And it has the added advantage of opening up the running game so that Gore isn't running into a wall of giants waiting for him at the LOS.

Originally posted by maxsmart:

Originally posted by thl408:
The checkdown routes to Kap is like option #5. I hope that as Kap learns to just take what's being given on a single play, throws to the RBs will get a slight uptick. I do not think that throwing to RBs will have the same success as it did back in the Walsh days. LBs nowadays run faster than many RBs. This was not the case back in the 80's when many LBs were big plodding run stoppers. Now the LBs are the most athletic players on the field it seems and they can track down RBs and reduce RAC, which is what Craig and Watters thrived on.

I mostly agree, but the pass to the RB doesn't have to be option #5. That's why my compliant is with the coaching (not Kap). . . . with Walsh frequently the #1 option was a quick pass to the RB (or TE), designed to get RAC but also to loosen up the defense and open up the running game. It's true that LB's are faster today, but in 2013 there were still ~30 TE & RB's with 50 or more catches (13 were RB's). There were 5 RB's with over 70 catches in 2013, so you can still do it. And it has the added advantage of opening up the running game so that Gore isn't running into a wall of giants waiting for him at the LOS.

that's not with coaching. alex smith had the same coaches and was adept at it. people need to face the music around here and realize that kaepernick is a gifted athlete. he's amazing when he's on, getting chunks of yardage. however, he's just not a very efficient, accurate quaterback. even at halftime, the seahawks had the longer TOP. THAT's the reason why the niners were giving up 3,4 yards here and there that they werent getting in the first half. the reason why we didn't run the ball in the second half was because seahawks were selling out to stop the run no matter what; similar to what the ravens did in the super bowl in the red zone last year.

Originally posted by kray28:

Our OL is seriously overrated. I think Staley and Boone are great....the rest were basically mediocre to poor this year.

I agree, but it's also scheme. They allowed the Seahawks to stack 8 guys at the LOS and just attack the QB and running game without making them pay by throwing quick passes just beyond the LOS to the RB, etc.

I think our Oline is better than Seattle's Oline, yet Seattle was able to run (Lynch had holes) and Gore had zero holes. Why? I think it's our offensive scheme and/or coaching unable to adjust. Rather than run into a stacked defense at the LOS it would be better to fake run and throw quick pass to RB's, etc. then when they jump those routes, then go DEEP!

Originally posted by kap2crab:

This is dumb. If either Andy Lee gets the correct call or Kap puts the ball a couple inches further at the end on pass to Crab, we win. Then is the narrative that we got dominated at the line of scrimmage??

Thanks for the genius input!
I'll simplify my point for you: Our offense scheme and play-calling was poor.
We were unable to run AT ALL. We were barely able to pass. Without some great plays by Kap we would have been nearly shut out. That means that our offense did poorly. Why is that? I think we have very good players, better than Seattle. Therefore I think the problem is OFFENSIVE SCHEME AND PLAY CALLING. We have great coaches almost everywhere else except the offense coordinator, therefore we need a new OC. Offense is like art, you can't just make a great OC. Roman has ZERO history of being a great offensive mind. He was coaching at high school when Harbaugh hired him! I suggest not letting this great team and great staff be ruined by mediocre OC.

Originally posted by TheGoldMineSF:

Steve Young wasnt exactly good until 89. Had similar problems to Kaepernick and then he figured it out. I have no doubt Kaepernick will improve and get us a ring or two before he's done.

I hope so, I believe in Kaep's talent, but he needs to be ice cold in the pocket, start beating teams with his head and not his feet. We've went back and forth about that last play on Sunday, but they don't call this a game of inches for no reason. It took Steve awhile too, those games against the Cowboys when our own guy Haley was a wreaking havoc.