NY Jets HC-Robert Saleh

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by WolfTotem:

Disappointed we didn't draft any pass rushers, but hopefully the lack of Dontae Johnson should see our sack numbers improve.
Last season it didn't really matter how quick the pass rush got there, all the QB had to do was throw it in Johnson's direction for an auto-completion.

He allowed 56 receptions on 86 targets, allowing 781 yards, 150 of which came after the catch. He had one interception, allowed five touchdowns, and an opposing quarterback rating of 108.7 when thrown at.

And if Sherman or Witherspoon go down on paper, we should have much more depth with Ward, McFadden, and Moore.

Those numbers also don't include how many penalties Johnson had either.

Originally posted by jonnydel:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by WolfTotem:

Disappointed we didn't draft any pass rushers, but hopefully the lack of Dontae Johnson should see our sack numbers improve.
Last season it didn't really matter how quick the pass rush got there, all the QB had to do was throw it in Johnson's direction for an auto-completion.

He allowed 56 receptions on 86 targets, allowing 781 yards, 150 of which came after the catch. He had one interception, allowed five touchdowns, and an opposing quarterback rating of 108.7 when thrown at.

And if Sherman or Witherspoon go down on paper, we should have much more depth with Ward, McFadden, and Moore.

Those numbers also don't include how many penalties Johnson had either.

Yeah, "liability" isn't even strong enough. We had Rashard Robinson too who was an equal to DJ. It was ugly.

Originally posted by Furlow:

Originally posted by jonnydel:

Originally posted by SmokeCrabtrees:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by 21SandersMoss84:

I guess Saleh is fine with Brock Coyle as the current MLB

He's a dog.

Foster, Malcolm, Warner, Toomer,Coyle,Elijah Lee is a SOLID all around LB group imo.

Coyle should be the 5th LBer to get on the field....considering he wasn't god awful last year that's a good thing. We should be better in the secondary and LB levels this year. I could see us being 20th or so in defense. You can get somewhere with that if you're offense is pretty good.

So you don't think the defense performing at a top 10 level once Jimmy G came aboard will carry over into this season?

I think we'll play some higher power offenses throughout the year than who we did play. We gave up 30+ to the Jags and I wouldn't call Chicago, Houston on their 3rd QB, or the Rams' back up guys high powered offenses.

Don't get me wrong, we'll be improved but I think that defensive stat wasn't just Jimmy. It was also the quality of opponent.

Originally posted by NinerGM:

I'm just gonna say this ... I 'm not a huge Jimmy Raye fan, BUT he did run the offense Mike Singletary asked him to run. He was the scapegoat and interesting the team then forces Martz on him and that was not a happy marriage.

Haha...those were good times!

Groundbreaking.

But If you look at playoff teams, they get significantly more sacks than non-playoff teams. Sacks do in fact correlate with success.

https://www.ninersnation.com/2018/4/30/17305298/dont-bore-yourself-by-reading-this-fanpost-on-the-importance-of-sacks

Originally posted by NCommand:
Groundbreaking.

But If you look at playoff teams, they get significantly more sacks than non-playoff teams. Sacks do in fact correlate with success.

https://www.ninersnation.com/2018/4/30/17305298/dont-bore-yourself-by-reading-this-fanpost-on-the-importance-of-sacks

Maybe because playoff teams usually have good QB's vs non-playoff teams?

Originally posted by Giedi:

Maybe because playoff teams usually have good QB's vs non-playoff teams?

Then it should be harder to get to them ala the Jimmy G-effect.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Giedi:
Maybe because playoff teams usually have good QB's vs non-playoff teams?

Then it should be harder to get to them ala the Jimmy G-effect.

Not necessarily. Say between two good QB's of equal skill. First of all, you need a good QB to make it into the playoffs anyway. Having said that, if one QB has the better pass rush, then that team should have an advantage over the other team with the lesser pass rush. That's all I'm saying. Sacks can cause turnovers, and turnovers are much more directly correlated to success than even sack's are. Example, Tom turns the ball over on a Philly sack in the super bowl.

Originally posted by Giedi:

Not necessarily. Say between two good QB's of equal skill. First of all, you need a good QB to make it into the playoffs anyway. Having said that, if one QB has the better pass rush, then that team should have an advantage over the other team with the lesser pass rush. That's all I'm saying. Sacks can cause turnovers, and turnovers are much more directly correlated to success than even sack's are. Example, Tom turns the ball over on a Philly sack in the super bowl.

I like the way you think!

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Giedi:

Not necessarily. Say between two good QB's of equal skill. First of all, you need a good QB to make it into the playoffs anyway. Having said that, if one QB has the better pass rush, then that team should have an advantage over the other team with the lesser pass rush. That's all I'm saying. Sacks can cause turnovers, and turnovers are much more directly correlated to success than even sack's are. Example, Tom turns the ball over on a Philly sack in the super bowl.

I like the way you think!

Usually a better QB means more points and playing with more leads.. Thus being able to play more nickel and dime with the edge rushers ready to take off with their ears pinned back.

Originally posted by SmokeCrabtrees:
Usually a better QB means more points and playing with more leads.. Thus being able to play more nickel and dime with the edge rushers ready to take off with their ears pinned back.

This was the point I wanted to make as I read this thread. If you are usually down by more than 1 score your D is going to see a lot of running plays and not have much chance to rush the passer. Add to that that if your offense is bad your D is going to be on the field more total snaps which means they are going to be more tired. Football is the most team oriented sport of the major sports ... special teams makes the offense and defense better, the defense makes the offense better, and the offense makes the defense better.

This is the 49ers 2nd year in their offensive and defensive schemes so independent of talent changes they should get better overall if the coordinators are any good. Add to that that the talent is better now than last year things should improve considerably.

Originally posted by Scoots:

Originally posted by SmokeCrabtrees:

Usually a better QB means more points and playing with more leads.. Thus being able to play more nickel and dime with the edge rushers ready to take off with their ears pinned back.

This was the point I wanted to make as I read this thread. If you are usually down by more than 1 score your D is going to see a lot of running plays and not have much chance to rush the passer. Add to that that if your offense is bad your D is going to be on the field more total snaps which means they are going to be more tired. Football is the most team oriented sport of the major sports ... special teams makes the offense and defense better, the defense makes the offense better, and the offense makes the defense better.

This is the 49ers 2nd year in their offensive and defensive schemes so independent of talent changes they should get better overall if the coordinators are any good. Add to that that the talent is better now than last year things should improve considerably.

Yessir! Chain reaction.. But back on point, here's a cheers to playing with leads for once,letting Shanny do his thing and thus able to play Max nickle to try and get some sacks as the opposing offense is playing from behind instead of us

Originally posted by SmokeCrabtrees:
Yessir! Chain reaction.. But back on point, here's a cheers to playing with leads for once,letting Shanny do his thing and thus able to play Max nickle to try and get some sacks as the opposing offense is playing from behind instead of us

From your mouth to Walsh's ears in heaven. The 49ers finally have another great offensive mind in charge.

Originally posted by SmokeCrabtrees:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Giedi:

Not necessarily. Say between two good QB's of equal skill. First of all, you need a good QB to make it into the playoffs anyway. Having said that, if one QB has the better pass rush, then that team should have an advantage over the other team with the lesser pass rush. That's all I'm saying. Sacks can cause turnovers, and turnovers are much more directly correlated to success than even sack's are. Example, Tom turns the ball over on a Philly sack in the super bowl.

I like the way you think!

Usually a better QB means more points and playing with more leads.. Thus being able to play more nickel and dime with the edge rushers ready to take off with their ears pinned back.

Disagree. Montana had a shootout with Dan Fouts, and Joe Lost. Even though we had the better QB, we had no pass rush and we lost the game. Between two good QB'S - it's the pass rush that makes a difference.

People seem to think that pass rush is simply a factor brought on by talent and to be studied in a vacuum. It is not. It is the result of a multitude of factors:

- A strong secondary makes the QB hold the ball longer, takes attention away from the pocket, and makes QB "gun shy".
- Stopping the run makes a team one dimensional and predictable.
- An experienced coordinator can exploit weaknesses with the right defensive call.
- Players who have experience together can often use their teammates more efficiently.

So many people on this forum believe that just drafting Harold Landry or Josh Sweat was going to increase our sack numbers. Baloney. Fix the secondary, bolster the LBs and DTs to stop the run, and trust that Saleh and his players will grow in year two. "They didn't do anything to improve the pass rush" is a myopic statement. Yes, talented pass rushers can improve a team's ability to get to the QB, but that is not the only way to do it.