There are 75 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

What do the 49ers need to be a better team?

What do the 49ers need to be a better team?

Originally posted by NCommand:
Honestly, I'd love them to implement a FT spread offense for CK. When we go pro-style spread with 4 and 5 receiving options and he's in shotgun and is allowed to just scan and pick the best player open, he's golden...PLUS, with that formation and the added attention to the receivers, he'd be a nightmare scrambling as well. It suits his strengths. And like Manning said (paraphrase), the secret to a great offense is 5 receivers running full speed routes b/c they KNOW there is a real chance they'll get the ball. That fits our receivers well also.

On defense, I'd get the more physical CB's in Brock and Culliver and play Seattle-style (which is their strength). Force the refs to throw 1 in 10 flags for "holding" only. If not, at least play more physical press (and I mean IN THEIR FACE) on 3rd downs...make these receivers earn every single yard...no more clean and free releases. And I'd teach my S's that when they play Seattle and Wilson scrambles, GET YOUR ASS AS DEEP AS POSSIBLE AND MARK THE DEEPEST RECEIVER. So sad...also, I'd add some more creative blitzes with our 4 LB's who have the potential to be better than the Dome Patrol...but aren't used that way. Less coverage for Willis/Bowman.

I would love to see that spread next season. It's hard to imagine Harbaugh doing it a lot, but at least 8 or 9 times a game would be something. And ditto on everything you said about defense.
- We have a power rushing offensive line
- I want us to keep our physical smash mouth identity

I know we will see evolution as players leave and are replaced but I don't want to see Kaepernick throwing more than 25 passes a game. (26 this season). I'm not in favor of completely changing our style just because it's more effective against one single opponent. Our tactics and talent win us atleast 1/4 of our schedule.
Originally posted by kronik:
Originally posted by brodiebluebanaszak:
Originally posted by SanDiego49er:
We haven't even faced them with Harvin much and his speed. He was a killer in the Super Bowl. They beat us all the time without him. With him it will be even tougher.

Stop taking peyote dude. It makes you paranoid. The sky is falling! The sky is falling! Please, don't ever watch a movie in a crowded theater. Ha ha.

Our record against Seattle over the last two years is 2-3. What do you mean they beat us all the time? Harvin is a nice addition for them, but he's not a cure all. You will find his impact to be primarily against bad defensive teams.

Seattle is still in need of impact skill position players. They don't have a lot at TE. Not a lot at WR. Not a lot behind Lynch at RB. (I like turbin though. he's a good back up).

In fact, one of the things that makes me very angry is to think that we have Crabs, Davis, Gore, Boldin, Miller. Any of these guys would be instantly in the Seattle rotation. They would kill to have players like that. They know they are not going to the super bowl again with having a mini-me fran tarkenton running around like a crazy person improv'ing passes because the whole world is keying on marshawn lynch. Didn't really fly this year, won't fly next year either.

In fact, they are a lot like us on offense -- kind of desperate to make things right. Their defense hides a lot of inadequacies and we saw that at Candlestick.

Just like us, the answer isn't one simple thing -- one flashy free agent signing.

Plus, I see them losing staff too.

However, you will be pleased to know that they will continue to have the edge against us if we can't find a way to get their frickin linebackers off the line of scrimmage. That might entail something like a short passing game being developed in San Fran, which I think isn't likely to happen.

He's being cowardly again.. as usual. According to him, the niners are the worst team in the history of the NFL and Seattle the greatest thing since sliced bread. Obviously too young to have watched a real dynasty back in the 80's. Dude's a fan from another city, don't take him too seriously. He's been whining and b***hin since the site has been created.

I doubt SD believes half of the things he says. He literally spews the same BS over and over again just to rile people up and get a response. And people feed him every time smh.
Originally posted by NeonNiner:
I doubt SD believes half of the things he says. He literally spews the same BS over and over again just to rile people up and get a response. And people feed him every time smh.

For just one example, "they beat us all the time without him." Uh, dude, the Niners split with Seattle this year. Were you asleep during that second game? And when Harvin played for the Vikings, the Niners held him to 9 catches for 89 yards and no TD's. So, calm down.
Originally posted by 9er2k:
I mean thats true it was obvious they got to not make it so obvious.The way to beat Seattle is to get a running game going.We should have used Kendall Hunter way more down the stretch to spell Gore(in the late season and playoffs).You have to run at them get Kam and Thomas to respect the run and then you can attack Sherman and Maxwell.I've said it a million times Sherman is good but he is so good because those two are always there to clean up his mess with a leveling hit or excellent help in coverage.You can't let them roam the backfield or your not going to pass for anything.They are that good.After a couple of hits receivers run there routes hearing footsteps ask the Bronco's receivers and Vernon Davis.

Those guys can roam the field because Sherman is so good they don't have to worry about his man. The "messes" they have to clean up are not his. That is a main reason Seattle can play Cover 3 so effectively - safeties don't have to worry about Sherman's side of the field. He isn't Deion Sanders but he is close enough to allow the defense to play the same way the 49ers did when Deion was here.
  • titan
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 2,668
I think our Defense can hold up vs anyone. I think our Defense play well together. IMHO we have to many inconsistency on offense for the amount of talent we have. If I have to make changes it would have to be on offense. Just the fact that we got in the redbone so many times and just got FG.
More speed on offense.
1. Open up the offense



Any other answer is simply misguided. The 49ers were far too predictable on offense, consistently running into loaded boxes again and again, the NFC Championship was a perfect microcosm of the season. On almost every first down, Frank Gore runs up the middle, gets stuffed for no gain or loses yardage. Now you have 2nd and 11, 2nd and 12, 2nd and 13.............here you go Colin, get 'ir done. Meanwhile you look at what Seattle is doing and Wilson often had 2nd and 6, 2nd and 7, 2nd and 5....etc. That makes A HUGE DIFFERENCE in how an offense can proceed from that point on. Ineffective running was killer, the amount of times that they played right into a defense's hands.


I want to see them spread defenses out more, give them more looks, when teams are bringing that much pressure, run a bootleg or a playaction on 1st down, stop giving away your playcalling by bringing in these ridiculous Jumbo formations where even if you try to pass out of it, you only really have one viable receiver.


Before even talking about the QB situation, look at improving the running situation, cut down on the gimmick plays, the outside tosses to Dixon, some of the goofier stuff that basically never worked. Go back to the basics, figure out how to get the running game going consistently and how to respond appropriately when teams load up the box, don't go Singletary mode and keep running into that box for meager gains when you could be picking up bigger chunks of yardage elsewhere.
Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:
1. Open up the offense



Any other answer is simply misguided. The 49ers were far too predictable on offense, consistently running into loaded boxes again and again, the NFC Championship was a perfect microcosm of the season. On almost every first down, Frank Gore runs up the middle, gets stuffed for no gain or loses yardage. Now you have 2nd and 11, 2nd and 12, 2nd and 13.............here you go Colin, get 'ir done. Meanwhile you look at what Seattle is doing and Wilson often had 2nd and 6, 2nd and 7, 2nd and 5....etc. That makes A HUGE DIFFERENCE in how an offense can proceed from that point on. Ineffective running was killer, the amount of times that they played right into a defense's hands.


I want to see them spread defenses out more, give them more looks, when teams are bringing that much pressure, run a bootleg or a playaction on 1st down, stop giving away your playcalling by bringing in these ridiculous Jumbo formations where even if you try to pass out of it, you only really have one viable receiver.


Before even talking about the QB situation, look at improving the running situation, cut down on the gimmick plays, the outside tosses to Dixon, some of the goofier stuff that basically never worked. Go back to the basics, figure out how to get the running game going consistently and how to respond appropriately when teams load up the box, don't go Singletary mode and keep running into that box for meager gains when you could be picking up bigger chunks of yardage elsewhere.

I'm hoping for more of this re: the passing game. Who saw on NFL Network, 'A Football Life: The Forward Pass'? Towards the end, there was a pretty big part dedicated to the 49ers during Walsh's time, with what he brought to the league that really changed the game at the time with his philosophy about the forward pass. Using, "the pass to set up the run"...the creativity he brought in this area and his offense overall, which people started calling the West Coast Offense. I'm not saying the Niners should do exactly this as we're in a new day and age of football, but how about some more such creativity on offense where the pass can set up the run more and keep opposing Ds off balance and from stacking the box vs. the run, etc.?
I would never argue with someone asking for more creativity, but I think it's important to remember that Walsh's new offense in it's day, while not entirely an offense of his own making, was very revolutionary in context. Walsh was taking advantage of the fact that inside linebackers were built to stop the run. Before the mid to late 80's, inside linebackers were extremely slow by today's standards. There was much more to it, but one of the main deals was occupying defensive backs with receivers so the only players left to cover anyone else would be those linebackers and they simply could not stay with Walsh's running backs, especially when plays froze them with play action and they had to keep their eyes in the middle for the runner. In those first few seasons, you would often see running backs catching passes out of the backfield with nobody within 15 yards of them. Part of the reason defenses have gotten so fast and more athletic in the last 25 years is in reaction to offenses like the one Walsh built. So it's not surprising that the older ideas from the West Coast offense don't work as effectively today as they did back in the 80's.
Originally posted by crake49:
I would never argue with someone asking for more creativity, but I think it's important to remember that Walsh's new offense in it's day, while not entirely an offense of his own making, was very revolutionary in context. Walsh was taking advantage of the fact that inside linebackers were built to stop the run. Before the mid to late 80's, inside linebackers were extremely slow by today's standards. There was much more to it, but one of the main deals was occupying defensive backs with receivers so the only players left to cover anyone else would be those linebackers and they simply could not stay with Walsh's running backs, especially when plays froze them with play action and they had to keep their eyes in the middle for the runner. In those first few seasons, you would often see running backs catching passes out of the backfield with nobody within 15 yards of them. Part of the reason defenses have gotten so fast and more athletic in the last 25 years is in reaction to offenses like the one Walsh built. So it's not surprising that the older ideas from the West Coast offense don't work as effectively today as they did back in the 80's.

Right, which is why I said, "I'm not saying the Niners should do exactly this as we're in a new day and age..." Just getting back to the creativity, and in the Niners case, creativity with the passing game to help out the O overall and especially the running game. The talent is there to do it, especially if Boldin returns...Boldin, Crabtree (+ Patton or a draftee?), TE Davis (& hopefully McDonald?)...our RBs also can definitely play more of a role here, too, as we know Gore, Miller, and Hunter can catch and make plays in the passing game. I don't entirely agree with beat writer Maiocco that our OL is not built for athletic-type passing plays such as the screen pass...3/5 of the OL is athletic enough (Staley, Davis, and Boone) - Iupati and Goodwin are more challenged here, it seems. Changes are probably going to happen before long at C. I just think you can/should have both in today's NFL - a talented, power-blocking OL that can also be athletic enough for screen plays, etc., where they need to be on the move. It makes the O that much more versatile and allows for more creativity, keeping opposing Ds off balance.
Originally posted by LottDMontanaO:
Originally posted by crake49:
I would never argue with someone asking for more creativity, but I think it's important to remember that Walsh's new offense in it's day, while not entirely an offense of his own making, was very revolutionary in context. Walsh was taking advantage of the fact that inside linebackers were built to stop the run. Before the mid to late 80's, inside linebackers were extremely slow by today's standards. There was much more to it, but one of the main deals was occupying defensive backs with receivers so the only players left to cover anyone else would be those linebackers and they simply could not stay with Walsh's running backs, especially when plays froze them with play action and they had to keep their eyes in the middle for the runner. In those first few seasons, you would often see running backs catching passes out of the backfield with nobody within 15 yards of them. Part of the reason defenses have gotten so fast and more athletic in the last 25 years is in reaction to offenses like the one Walsh built. So it's not surprising that the older ideas from the West Coast offense don't work as effectively today as they did back in the 80's.

Right, which is why I said, "I'm not saying the Niners should do exactly this as we're in a new day and age..." Just getting back to the creativity, and in the Niners case, creativity with the passing game to help out the O overall and especially the running game. The talent is there to do it, especially if Boldin returns...Boldin, Crabtree (+ Patton or a draftee?), TE Davis (& hopefully McDonald?)...our RBs also can definitely play more of a role here, too, as we know Gore, Miller, and Hunter can catch and make plays in the passing game. I don't entirely agree with beat writer Maiocco that our OL is not built for athletic-type passing plays such as the screen pass...3/5 of the OL is athletic enough (Staley, Davis, and Boone) - Iupati and Goodwin are more challenged here, it seems. Changes are probably going to happen before long at C. I just think you can/should have both in today's NFL - a talented, power-blocking OL that can also be athletic enough for screen plays, etc., where they need to be on the move. It makes the O that much more versatile and allows for more creativity, keeping opposing Ds off balance.

Great points brought up by you two. LottDMontanaO, I think there is some validity to MM's claim that the Oline isn't built for screen plays. This was actually touched on, on the WZ, before MM wrote about it. Some have claimed that since the OGs can pull and lead block, that they can surely execute blocks for screen passes. However, these two types of plays are very different. When pulling for a run play, the OGuard can explode out of his three point stance and get moving. When blocking for a screen pass, the OG is starting from a stand still, since he has to fake the pass block, then quickly start moving to get to the edge. This is where the 49ers' Oline gets into trouble. Asking massive guys like Boone, Iupati, and ADavis to get going from a standing position is a tough order for them. They have to beat out LBs to the edge in order to get in front of the RB catching the ball. There was a thread about screen passes this season, in NT, and there were many GIFs of the 49ers failing to get to the edge to block for the RB on screen passes.

Another point some poster here brought up is that the more a team passes the ball, the more effective the screen pass is. This is an excellent point and one that does not favor the 49ers since they are known as a run first team. If Dlinemen are pinning their ears back and getting after the QB, that plays right into the hands of a screen pass. This is the case for GB, NE, NO, and DEN, but not for SF.

Regarding the underlined, I totally agree, but easier said than done. As Kap's arm becomes the featured weapon in the offense, I would like to see more balance in terms of Olinemen that can effectively run and pass block. I am willing to give up some strength on the run blocking aspect to gain more on the pass blocking aspect. Not sure how the team goes about this, whether it's a shift in emphasis or personnel changes.
Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:
1. Open up the offense



Any other answer is simply misguided. The 49ers were far too predictable on offense, consistently running into loaded boxes again and again, the NFC Championship was a perfect microcosm of the season. On almost every first down, Frank Gore runs up the middle, gets stuffed for no gain or loses yardage. Now you have 2nd and 11, 2nd and 12, 2nd and 13.............here you go Colin, get 'ir done. Meanwhile you look at what Seattle is doing and Wilson often had 2nd and 6, 2nd and 7, 2nd and 5....etc. That makes A HUGE DIFFERENCE in how an offense can proceed from that point on. Ineffective running was killer, the amount of times that they played right into a defense's hands.


I want to see them spread defenses out more, give them more looks, when teams are bringing that much pressure, run a bootleg or a playaction on 1st down, stop giving away your playcalling by bringing in these ridiculous Jumbo formations where even if you try to pass out of it, you only really have one viable receiver.


Before even talking about the QB situation, look at improving the running situation, cut down on the gimmick plays, the outside tosses to Dixon, some of the goofier stuff that basically never worked. Go back to the basics, figure out how to get the running game going consistently and how to respond appropriately when teams load up the box, don't go Singletary mode and keep running into that box for meager gains when you could be picking up bigger chunks of yardage elsewhere.

You want to complicate the playbook and give more responsibility to an already overwhelmed Quarterback? You will end up with Kaepernick throwing the football 35 times a game, the turnovers will increase. We need to keep things simple for Colin

Your first paragraph argues "more creativity" but your last paragraph argues "less gimmick plays". Huh?
[ Edited by Forty_Niners on Feb 6, 2014 at 11:50 AM ]
Originally posted by thl408:
Originally posted by LottDMontanaO:
Originally posted by crake49:
I would never argue with someone asking for more creativity, but I think it's important to remember that Walsh's new offense in it's day, while not entirely an offense of his own making, was very revolutionary in context. Walsh was taking advantage of the fact that inside linebackers were built to stop the run. Before the mid to late 80's, inside linebackers were extremely slow by today's standards. There was much more to it, but one of the main deals was occupying defensive backs with receivers so the only players left to cover anyone else would be those linebackers and they simply could not stay with Walsh's running backs, especially when plays froze them with play action and they had to keep their eyes in the middle for the runner. In those first few seasons, you would often see running backs catching passes out of the backfield with nobody within 15 yards of them. Part of the reason defenses have gotten so fast and more athletic in the last 25 years is in reaction to offenses like the one Walsh built. So it's not surprising that the older ideas from the West Coast offense don't work as effectively today as they did back in the 80's.

Right, which is why I said, "I'm not saying the Niners should do exactly this as we're in a new day and age..." Just getting back to the creativity, and in the Niners case, creativity with the passing game to help out the O overall and especially the running game. The talent is there to do it, especially if Boldin returns...Boldin, Crabtree (+ Patton or a draftee?), TE Davis (& hopefully McDonald?)...our RBs also can definitely play more of a role here, too, as we know Gore, Miller, and Hunter can catch and make plays in the passing game. I don't entirely agree with beat writer Maiocco that our OL is not built for athletic-type passing plays such as the screen pass...3/5 of the OL is athletic enough (Staley, Davis, and Boone) - Iupati and Goodwin are more challenged here, it seems. Changes are probably going to happen before long at C. I just think you can/should have both in today's NFL - a talented, power-blocking OL that can also be athletic enough for screen plays, etc., where they need to be on the move. It makes the O that much more versatile and allows for more creativity, keeping opposing Ds off balance.

Great points brought up by you two. LottDMontanaO, I think there is some validity to MM's claim that the Oline isn't built for screen plays. This was actually touched on, on the WZ, before MM wrote about it. Some have claimed that since the OGs can pull and lead block, that they can surely execute blocks for screen passes. However, these two types of plays are very different. When pulling for a run play, the OGuard can explode out of his three point stance and get moving. When blocking for a screen pass, the OG is starting from a stand still, since he has to fake the pass block, then quickly start moving to get to the edge. This is where the 49ers' Oline gets into trouble. Asking massive guys like Boone, Iupati, and ADavis to get going from a standing position is a tough order for them. They have to beat out LBs to the edge in order to get in front of the RB catching the ball. There was a thread about screen passes this season, in NT, and there were many GIFs of the 49ers failing to get to the edge to block for the RB on screen passes.

Another point some poster here brought up is that the more a team passes the ball, the more effective the screen pass is. This is an excellent point and one that does not favor the 49ers since they are known as a run first team. If Dlinemen are pinning their ears back and getting after the QB, that plays right into the hands of a screen pass. This is the case for GB, NE, NO, and DEN, but not for SF.

Regarding the underlined, I totally agree, but easier said than done. As Kap's arm becomes the featured weapon in the offense, I would like to see more balance in terms of Olinemen that can effectively run and pass block. I am willing to give up some strength on the run blocking aspect to gain more on the pass blocking aspect. Not sure how the team goes about this, whether it's a shift in emphasis or personnel changes.

Why not a change? We have Kilgore and I'm sure we'll add additional OL this year. Personally I'd love Staley and Boone at the T spots (more natural-athletic positions). Kilgore inside? Slim down Iupati (he's fairly athletic already as our "pulling guard." Davis can pinch inside to RG and slim down...work on stamina/agility/blocking in space. Bring in competition. The bottom line is even WITH these power OL and jumbo packages, we're not very successful esp. when the DC knows to stack the boxes esp. on 1st downs. At this juncture, as long as the DC knows our play calls on first downs or telegraphed with our personnel packages, we're constantly at a disadvantage. So get more balanced in the skill sets of our OL and ultimately, in the run and pass game and keep DC's guessing. We need to be as effective in pass blocking as we are in run blocking and our OC and philosophy can go a longs ways to help reach that goal.

Would anyone say Seattle's OL is stellar? Of course not...but what did they do well? They stayed with their blocks for 9 seconds, blocked on the run for Lynch, ran great screens and quick passes, were down field blocking, cut blocks (sorry!), well-coached, ran fly-sweeps off them, etc...they mixed things up. Was our DC stacking 9 guys in the box against them on first downs?
[ Edited by NCommand on Feb 6, 2014 at 1:02 PM ]
Besides the lacking speed, our RBs seem to lack speed in particular. Only LMJ seem to have the quickness to run over the edges constistently but he isn't involved in the running game at all.

If we are not satisfied with LMJ, we have to go for a change-of-pace RB in the later rounds as well, imo. Let the defense guess, who will run the ball and how. 2RB, 2WR, 1TE is very disguising in this case.
1xRB for change of pace or blocking
1xRB for downhill run or blocking
1xWR for possession or blocking
1WR for speed or blocking
1xTE for everything.