Week 11 - 2014: Thoughts after rewatching the game...

Hey Marvin49...



I want to question for you.


Tell me. What do you think which is better defense by Borland and Wilhoite V.S. Bowman and Brooks?.. If you can explain it? Or you can't explains then I will explains.

Here is PFF's defensive summary. Just a defensive masterpiece from top to bottom. Virtually every player on defense played outstanding.

Originally posted by BuZzB28:
Hey Marvin49...



I want to question for you.


Tell me. What do you think which is better defense by Borland and Wilhoite V.S. Bowman and Brooks?.. If you can explain it? Or you can't explains then I will explains.

...I'm not sure I understand the question...or why it's relevant.

Are you asking who I'd like to see as the ILBs? Borland and Wilhoite V.S. Bowman and Brooks?

My answer is option 3, Borland and Bowman.

Brooks? Why would I play him over Borland? He's never even played ILB in SF and he was so good in Cincy they released him. I know he played there in college, but Borland has been a monster.

Not quite sure why this is a question. Perhaps I'm just misunderstanding the question.

Penalties! They have vastly improved and it's a good thing because it was really slowing down the game and momentum. This defense is borderline dominant

Originally posted by Disp:

Here is PFF's defensive summary. Just a defensive masterpiece from top to bottom. Virtually every player on defense played outstanding.

When I dahl out there for more than 1 snap i had a feeling a big play was gonna happen soon. Every damn time that guy gets in the O seems to score...But, that big offensive play never came. Surprisingly he even graded out positively.

roman call a game in rhythm we beat people by 30 points easy. that goes for any team in the nfl with the way this defense is setup.

Originally posted by Marvin49:

Originally posted by BuZzB28:

Hey Marvin49...



I want to question for you.


Tell me. What do you think which is better defense by Borland and Wilhoite V.S. Bowman and Brooks?.. If you can explain it? Or you can't explains then I will explains.

...I'm not sure I understand the question...or why it's relevant.

Are you asking who I'd like to see as the ILBs? Borland and Wilhoite V.S. Bowman and Brooks?

My answer is option 3, Borland and Bowman.

Brooks? Why would I play him over Borland? He's never even played ILB in SF and he was so good in Cincy they released him. I know he played there in college, but Borland has been a monster.

Not quite sure why this is a question. Perhaps I'm just misunderstanding the question.

I appreciate it when ure hard to understand what I saying it..


I am honestly with you.

I am very surprised about Wilhoite is almost same to Bowman but I am not huge fans of Bowman. I think, Wilhoite is better plays than Bowman because Wilhoite have a smart defense, good to read and good tackle and good coverage and plus good affect our defense. We are 2nd rank defense this year than last year and 2012, too. Boreland is impossible but he gave us too surprised and wow. Borland is very good his play develops too fast time than Bowman. Borland is best beasts tackle than Bowman. He can coverage and smart to read it. Bowman was playing in 2012 in 3 or 4 ranks defense and 2013 in 5th rank defense. Bowman played look ok.. I am honestly with you.

how did dial and tank do? with dobbs and the NT injuries, they are getting on the field.

Originally posted by BuZzB28:

Originally posted by Marvin49:

Originally posted by BuZzB28:
Hey Marvin49...



I want to question for you.


Tell me. What do you think which is better defense by Borland and Wilhoite V.S. Bowman and Brooks?.. If you can explain it? Or you can't explains then I will explains.

...I'm not sure I understand the question...or why it's relevant.

Are you asking who I'd like to see as the ILBs? Borland and Wilhoite V.S. Bowman and Brooks?

My answer is option 3, Borland and Bowman.

Brooks? Why would I play him over Borland? He's never even played ILB in SF and he was so good in Cincy they released him. I know he played there in college, but Borland has been a monster.

Not quite sure why this is a question. Perhaps I'm just misunderstanding the question.

I appreciate it when ure hard to understand what I saying it..


I am honestly with you.

I am very surprised about Wilhoite is almost same to Bowman but I am not huge fans of Bowman. I think, Wilhoite is better plays than Bowman because Wilhoite have a smart defense, good to read and good tackle and good coverage and plus good affect our defense. We are 2nd rank defense this year than last year and 2012, too. Boreland is impossible but he gave us too surprised and wow. Borland is very good his play develops too fast time than Bowman. Borland is best beasts tackle than Bowman. He can coverage and smart to read it. Bowman was playing in 2012 in 3 or 4 ranks defense and 2013 in 5th rank defense. Bowman played look ok.. I am honestly with you.

If I understand you correctly, then I TOTALLY disagree.

Wilhoite is better than Bowman? uh...no.

Bowman is one the best if not THE best ILB in the NFL. Wilhoite is a good BACKUP player that will probably leave when his contract is up and be an above average starter someplace else in the league.

Bowman and Wilhoite aren't in the same league.

There seems to be two criticisms that is going on here in the Zone, and sometimes, from the same posters that are rather contradictory of one another. On one hand, posters are saying the 49ers passing routes are too simplistic, on the other hand, you have posters (sometimes the very same posters) saying that the routes are too long in developing. I want these two sides to debate with one another while I grab the popcorn.

During the gameday thread, it was mentioned that the 49ers too often go spread with their formations. That this forces the WRs to beat their CB one on one without the help of complimentary/adjacent routes. First, it makes much less sense to go bunch formation when defenses are primarily playing zone coverage, which is what the 49ers face most of the time when defenses come with a 4 man rush. All that does is condense the area of the field that the zone defenders have to cover. The majority of the times they face man coverage is when the defense comes with a blitz. When facing zone, using a spread formation achieves a natural horizontal stretch due to formation. The downside is that the 49ers rarely ever run out of the spread formation so it's a huge tipoff to the defense that it's a pass play. This is a pet peeve of mine that I have expressed multiple times in the past - they simply don't run the ball enough out of passing formations. The one time this season that they actually focused on running out of a spread look I cut up every single one of those runs (STL game 1). But I digress.

Here are the reasons why the 49ers spread the field and run "simple" routes. I'm not implying it's the right thing to do, but this is why they do it.
- Get a horizontal stretch of the zone defense via formation
- Get their WRs, who are good route runners, out into space.
- Give Kap simpler reads. One vs one reads where he only has to read leverage of CB versus route of WR. As opposed to concept reads where he reads multiple defenders at once in a confined space.
- Since the OL has been shaky with pass pro, this allows for quick timing throws when Kap chooses to go with his first read. We see this a lot when Kap throws a simple Curl over the middle.
- When an OL is shaky, you help out the OL by running shorter developing routes and concepts. Dialing up double moves and intermediate/deep crossing routes is pushing the limits what this OL can do with regards to pass protection.

Originally posted by FourNine49:
Penalties! They have vastly improved and it's a good thing because it was really slowing down the game and momentum. This defense is borderline dominant

yep, so true

Originally posted by ninergold:
how did dial and tank do? with dobbs and the NT injuries, they are getting on the field.

Wasn't watching them specifically...but I think I caught a look at Tank getting pressure and almost a sack on one play (at least I think it was Tank...didn't rewatch play to confirm). Dunno how many snaps he played.

EDIT: Looking at the chart above and doesn't look like he was credited with a hurry. Might have mistaken someone else for him. Odd tho...was pretty sure it was him. I'll have to rewatch at home.

Originally posted by BuZzB28:

Originally posted by Marvin49:

Originally posted by BuZzB28:
Hey Marvin49...



I want to question for you.


Tell me. What do you think which is better defense by Borland and Wilhoite V.S. Bowman and Brooks?.. If you can explain it? Or you can't explains then I will explains.

...I'm not sure I understand the question...or why it's relevant.

Are you asking who I'd like to see as the ILBs? Borland and Wilhoite V.S. Bowman and Brooks?

My answer is option 3, Borland and Bowman.

Brooks? Why would I play him over Borland? He's never even played ILB in SF and he was so good in Cincy they released him. I know he played there in college, but Borland has been a monster.

Not quite sure why this is a question. Perhaps I'm just misunderstanding the question.

I appreciate it when ure hard to understand what I saying it..


I am honestly with you.

I am very surprised about Wilhoite is almost same to Bowman but I am not huge fans of Bowman. I think, Wilhoite is better plays than Bowman because Wilhoite have a smart defense, good to read and good tackle and good coverage and plus good affect our defense. We are 2nd rank defense this year than last year and 2012, too. Boreland is impossible but he gave us too surprised and wow. Borland is very good his play develops too fast time than Bowman. Borland is best beasts tackle than Bowman. He can coverage and smart to read it. Bowman was playing in 2012 in 3 or 4 ranks defense and 2013 in 5th rank defense. Bowman played look ok.. I am honestly with you.

Did you really say you think Wilhoite is better then Bowman?

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

"A kid with his physical limitations just shouldn't be producing like he is"

I think people way over-exaggerate his "limitations." Is he the ideal height for an ILB, no, but the guy is only an inch shorter than Bowman and people don't really bring up his height as an issue.

He's built like a tank, was one of the strongest at his position at the Combine. He doesn't have great length or tremendous straightline speed but has very good quickness which combined with his overall awareness, instincts and intelligence gets him to exactly where he needs to be on the field.

Agreed. The physical limitations thing is bs, what he lacks in arm length, size, and 40 time he compensates with other exceptional attributes. The way he made that 1st pick, he doesn't get unless he was short enough to slip under he receiver.

This guy has a low center of gravity, he's creating a lot of torque. Within 5 to 10 yards, he looks as fast or faster than anyone on the field. He's here to stay.

Originally posted by saj4423:

Originally posted by BuZzB28:

Originally posted by Marvin49:

Originally posted by BuZzB28:
Hey Marvin49...



I want to question for you.


Tell me. What do you think which is better defense by Borland and Wilhoite V.S. Bowman and Brooks?.. If you can explain it? Or you can't explains then I will explains.

...I'm not sure I understand the question...or why it's relevant.

Are you asking who I'd like to see as the ILBs? Borland and Wilhoite V.S. Bowman and Brooks?

My answer is option 3, Borland and Bowman.

Brooks? Why would I play him over Borland? He's never even played ILB in SF and he was so good in Cincy they released him. I know he played there in college, but Borland has been a monster.

Not quite sure why this is a question. Perhaps I'm just misunderstanding the question.

I appreciate it when ure hard to understand what I saying it..


I am honestly with you.

I am very surprised about Wilhoite is almost same to Bowman but I am not huge fans of Bowman. I think, Wilhoite is better plays than Bowman because Wilhoite have a smart defense, good to read and good tackle and good coverage and plus good affect our defense. We are 2nd rank defense this year than last year and 2012, too. Boreland is impossible but he gave us too surprised and wow. Borland is very good his play develops too fast time than Bowman. Borland is best beasts tackle than Bowman. He can coverage and smart to read it. Bowman was playing in 2012 in 3 or 4 ranks defense and 2013 in 5th rank defense. Bowman played look ok.. I am honestly with you.

Did you really say you think Wilhoite is better then Bowman?

Ya...kinda stunned me too.