Is Manny Lawson Onboard with the 49ers New Culture?

Originally posted by Wodwo:

Originally posted by NCommand:


I thought you said you wanted to agree to disagree? N/p! Which post did you want me to respond too?

As to this question, hard to say b/c Manusky uses the SAM & WILL differently compared to most 3-4 coordinators. He tends to use them more as pseudo DE's in a more vanilla scheme up at the LOS. Most experienced 3-4 coordinators rotate their SAM and WILL's often to create confusion and attack weaknesses along the o-line. The Steelers should be our benchmark (both in execution and scheme ala Jets) b/c those two OLB's do exactly what their position calls for which allows them also to attack from other positions; this is why they generally lead the league in total sacks and total defense each year (or top 5). The Chargers and Pats used to do this as well when they were running on all cylinders, Ravens in their 3-4 (and Hybrid)...even the Cowboys move Ware all over the place. Merriman was constantly standing up, moving back and forth behind the LOS shooting gaps and Phillips was dominant.

We have "starters" now that are decent. Now we need upgrades at BOTH positions. You and I are in perfect agreement about Haralson and the WILL position but to be an elite defense, IMHO, both the SAM and WILL need to be dominant and every down players and do what the 3-4 defense is designed to do and attack and attack with disguise (hence why they drop back in zone coverage here and there). And right now, this thread is about Manny. I'd be more then happy to talk about anyone else in the front 7 if you'd like.

Don't get me wrong, having one guy such as Dumerveil at the WILL spot dominate would really open things up for all of our defense but having both the SAM and WILL dominate and produce consistently (big issue with us in pass rushing) creates an endless number of schemes Manusky can use. Having both Lawson and Haralson may have dumbed-down his blitzing scheme (or he's still growing into his own role - hard to say - perhaps a combination of both?).

Keep in mind, I'm merely focusing on what is ideal and required of these two positions in order for us to have a top 5 defense. If this was a 4-3 defense, I'd be saying the same thing about the two DE's. THIS is where the pressure is supposed to come from and come from often. Right now, our 15th ranked defense goes as they both go - average!

Ok, you just did a great job of avoiding answering my question.

I already agreed that the ideal would be to have dominant pass rush on both sides. I wanted you to show an example of this outside the Steelers. The only SAM you mentioned is Phillips and, I'm sorry, but I fail to see how you can consider him being dominant through his career. He's only surpassed 10 sacks once in his career and every other year he's had comparable numbers to Lawson last season.

My point is that, while having what the Steelers have is ideal, it isn't essential, and that replacing Lawson shouldn't be the priority. Getting a dominant WILL should be. The players you mention that get moved around are dominant pass rushing WILL linebackers.

Lastly, your point that in order to be an elite defense, we must have two dominant pass rushing OLBs is just bogus. Jets had no elite pass rushers. They ranked 18th in the league in sacks. They have the best corner in the league and aggressive schemed blitzes. Also, the Steeler's defense may be ranked 5th overall, but they were 3rd against the run and 16th against the pass. We're talking a difference of around 200 yards over the season between our pass defense and theirs. A total difference of about 20 yards a game both run and pass. However, we ranked 4th overall in points per game, while the Steelers were 12th. A difference of a field goal per game. The Jets had the top PPG on defense and the best pass defense and the best total yardage defense... without even one dominant pass rusher at OLB.

I completely agree that Manny is the least of our worries. IMO the much larger issue here is the lack of anything from Haralson. It should be he that is replaced on passing downs. The guy just disappoints consistently.

In theory it would be great to have 2 dominant guys on the ends, but it's not at all realistic. No more than it is to expect to have 2 studs on the ends of a 4-3. Most want it, few ever achieve it, and if they do it's not for long as they can't afford to keep 2 PR studs.

I would be happy with replacing Haralson with a freak stud, which would help increase Lawsons production.

Originally posted by NinerGM:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Wodwo:
Ok, you just did a great job of avoiding answering my question.

I already agreed that the ideal would be to have dominant pass rush on both sides. I wanted you to show an example of this outside the Steelers. The only SAM you mentioned is Phillips and, I'm sorry, but I fail to see how you can consider him being dominant through his career. He's only surpassed 10 sacks once in his career and every other year he's had comparable numbers to Lawson last season.

My point is that, while having what the Steelers have is ideal, it isn't essential, and that replacing Lawson shouldn't be the priority. Getting a dominant WILL should be. The players you mention that get moved around are dominant pass rushing WILL linebackers.

Lastly, your point that in order to be an elite defense, we must have two dominant pass rushing OLBs is just bogus. Jets had no elite pass rushers. They ranked 18th in the league in sacks. They have the best corner in the league and aggressive schemed blitzes. Also, the Steeler's defense may be ranked 5th overall, but they were 3rd against the run and 16th against the pass. We're talking a difference of around 200 yards over the season between our pass defense and theirs. A total difference of about 20 yards a game both run and pass. However, we ranked 4th overall in points per game, while the Steelers were 12th. A difference of a field goal per game. The Jets had the top PPG on defense and the best pass defense and the best total yardage defense... without even one dominant pass rusher at OLB.

Hey Wodwo - sorry it took me so long to get back to you. Here should be some interesting things for you...(and good points BTW)

OLB sacks (including specialists), accounts for injuries, relative to total team sacks and percentages.

Per official websites depth charts & official stats via NFL.com

Overall Defensive Ranking - Through week 17 2009 (Final Update)

#11 - Patriots:
Pierre Woods/Adalius Thomas (3)
Derrick Burgess (5)/Tully Banta-Cain (10)/Rob Ninkovich (1) = 19 of their 31 sacks (61%)

#22 - Dolphins:
Jason Taylor/Joey Porter (16)
Cameron Wake (5.5)/Quentin Moses(1)/Charlie Anderson (2)/Erik Walden (0) = 24.5 of their 44 sacks (56%)

#7 - Broncos:
Mario Haggan/Elvis Dumervil (18)
Darrell Reid (4)/Robert Ayers (0) = 22 of their 39 sacks (56%)

#5 - Steelers:
LaMarr Woodley/James Harrison (23.5)
Andre Frazier (0)/Patrick Bailey (0) = 23.5 of their 47 sacks (50%)

#2 - Packers:
Aaron Kampman/Brady Poppinga (4.5)
Jeremy Thompson (0)/Clay Matthews (10)/Brad Jones (4) = 18.5 of their 37 sacks (50%)

#30 - Chiefs:
Mike Vrabel/Tamba Hali (10.5)
Andy Studebaker (0)/Pierre Walters (0) = 10.5 of their 22 sacks (48%)

#16 - Chargers: Jamal Williams out all season
Shawne Merriman/Shaun Phillips = (11)
Marques Harris (2)/Larry English (2)/Jyles Tucker (0) = 15 of their 35 sacks (43%)

#9 - Cowboys:
DeMarcus Ware/Anthony Spencer (15)
Curtis Johnson (0)/Steve Octavien (0)/Victor Butler (3) = 18 of their 42 sacks (43%)

#3 - Ravens (Hybrid):
Terrell Suggs/Jarret Johnson (10.5)
Antwan Barnes (3)/Paul Kruger (0) = 13.5 of their 32 sacks (42%)

#20 - Cardinals:
Chike Okeafor/Clark Haggans (9.5)
Will Davis (2)/Bertrand Berry (6) = 17.5 of their 43 sacks (41%)

#15 - 49ers:
Parys Haralson/Manny Lawson (11.5)
Diyral Briggs (0)/ Ahmad Brooks (6) = 17.5 of their 44 sacks (40%)

#31 - Browns:
Kamerion Wimbley/David Bowens (12)
Jason Trusnik (2.5)/Alex Hall (0) = 14.5 of their 40 sacks (36%)

#1 - Jets:
Vernon Gholston/Bryan Thomas (2)
Calvin Pace (8)/Marques Murrell (0) = 10 of their 32 sacks (31%)

Not surprisingly, team defense goes as the OLB’s go in the 3-4 defenses just as the effectiveness of your DE’s are tied to the success of 4-3 defenses. It appears that 50% is the key number here. Teams that generate 50% or more of their sacks from the OLB positions are also ranking in the top 10 in defense with the exception of the Ravens (though they use a Hybrid defense and generate pressure from the DE’s too) and the Jets (who generate a tremendous scheme). The Cowboys were the only top 10 defense that didn’t reach the 50% but generate plenty of pressure from Ware & Spencer with 15 sacks combined. Note that there are some teams who rank low in overall defense but high in production from the OLB’s. Could that be poor scheme, major holes in talent in other areas, missing a dominant NT, etc.?

And one thing holds true as well ~ all the top 3-4 defenses have at least one dominant pass rusher at either the SAM or WILL. Even if the starter is ineffective, there tends to be another player who steps up as a specialist or starter d/t injury or other reason. So, in order to take our defense to the next level, we will need to get at least one dominant pass rusher (duh?) and continue to improve our scheme (Manusky, see Jets). As long as we maintain pressure from the other areas like we are we’ll remain an average defense but scheme and at least one dominant pass rusher should push us towards the top in 2010. I think this is why many fans want us to draft Graham and/or insert Brooks into a FT role.

Brooks helped to boost the % for us last year though we remain at the bottom. Note that our starters are putting up sack numbers that some of other team’s backups are.

You can see a down-year for some of the proven starters last year d/t key injuries and other reasons.

So to answer your question…who would I choose over Manny? Just about any starter, including some backups from the list above as most of these guys have all “proven” they can be effective and are consistent pass rushers whereas Manny never has unless you consider 6.5 sporadic sacks “proven” in 2009. Even Haralson has only proven effective coming in off the bench in limited snaps (same with Brooks). Remember, the WILL & SAM are interchangeable in most 3-4 defenses and therefore, there would be a lot of players I’d choose over Manny (and Haralson).

One more thing - what about consistency of sacks which has been a HUGE issue for our team, in general?

Manny had 6.5 sacks:
1 in week 4 against the Rams
1 in week 7 against Houston
1 in week 9 against the Titans
Brooks inserted into the lineup more here
1 in week 11 against the Packers
1 in week 12 against Jacksonville
1 in week 13 against Seattle
.5 sacks in week 17 against the Rams

Remember, 2009 was declared Manny’s year ~ his big breakout year! He was 100% healthy, we hired a pass rushing specialist coach for the OLB’s and others and gave Manny and Haralson free reign to rush the passer the mass majority of the time!

11.5 collective sacks isn’t terrible…it isn’t great either. 44 sacks IS great though so now that we are not rebuilding anymore, the goal will be to upgrade the SAM & WILL positions like the Steelers have who do not have to rely on 3rd down specialists (50% production) along with a scheme such as the Jets combined with a total sack production of the 49ers which comes mostly from the d-line, inside LB blitzes mixed in with a few CB & safety blitzes ~ that is, if we want to take the next step and improve our chances of being a top 10 defense.

Damn. Superb.

Damn obvious more like. Nearly every one of his examples of teams in the 50% or greater category had a dominant PR on one side. Yah think that might soften things up for a guy like Lawson? Do you think for one moment that if we were to put a PR stud like Porter, Ware or Woodley on the other side of Lawson that he wouldn't pick up 2-4 more sacks and make more plays?

This isn't rocket science. NC is dazzling with BS. You put a dominant player at Haralsons spot (you know, the spot the rush is generally generated from) and Many all the sudden is putting up 8-10 sacks a season and making more plays. THATS how it works.....

Originally posted by NCommand:


Hey Wodwo - sorry it took me so long to get back to you. Here should be some interesting things for you...(and good points BTW)

So to answer your question…who would I choose over Manny? Just about any starter, including some backups from the list above as most of these guys have all “proven” they can be effective and are consistent pass rushers whereas Manny never has unless you consider 6.5 sporadic sacks “proven” in 2009. Even Haralson has only proven effective coming in off the bench in limited snaps (same with Brooks). Remember, the WILL & SAM are interchangeable in most 3-4 defenses and therefore, there would be a lot of players I’d choose over Manny (and Haralson).

11.5 collective sacks isn’t terrible…it isn’t great either. 44 sacks IS great though so now that we are not rebuilding anymore, the goal will be to upgrade the SAM & WILL positions like the Steelers have who do not have to rely on 3rd down specialists (50% production) along with a scheme such as the Jets combined with a total sack production of the 49ers which comes mostly from the d-line, inside LB blitzes mixed in with a few CB & safety blitzes ~ that is, if we want to take the next step and improve our chances of being a top 10 defense.

No worries, I'm patient... I think the Ginn story broke right after I posted, so I understand.

You still aren't answering my questions, though.


I don't agree that the SAM and WILL positions are interchangeable.

Joe Collier on the two positions:

Originally posted by Joe Collier:
Outside linebacker (weak side, away from the tight end): "He's the rusher, he's the speed guy. Has to be good enough in the rush to beat tackles one-on-one enough to make plays and always beat any backs who try to block him."

Outside linebacker (strong side, directly across from the tight end): "This is a tough position to play, because he has to be quick enough to help you in the rush and drop out and cover that tight end or back a lot. But he's also got to be strong enough to get in there against the run, because most teams are going to be dominant to the strong side in the run game."

LINK

I agree that players are moved around to cause confusion and/or better match-ups, but the two positions have emphasis on different skills. You'll line up your best rusher on the QB's blind side most of the time... this is the reason that Left Tackles make so much money in the NFL. You'll line up the guy with better skills against the run and in pass coverage on the strong side.

So, hopefully you can now see that they are indeed different positions. With that idea in mind, what players at the SAM position can you find that are dominant pass rushers?

I don't recall asking what player you would like to replace Lawson. Your argument is that you would take any starter over Lawson based on consistency, correct? Well, maybe you can give Manny a break on this one considering he's been in the league 4 seasons... one of which he spent on IR with an ACL tear. The fact remains that his production last season was comparable to other starters at his position. This league is all about "what have you done for me lately?".

I hope you didn't go through too much effort to get those statistics. You're trying to show that 3-4 teams who have a higher percentage of sacks from the OLBs have higher ranking defenses, right? I don't see how your statistics support that. If you take the top six teams and the bottom six teams and calculate the average defensive ranking, the top six is 12.8 and the bottom six is 13.2. (Note: Odd number of teams, so left out Chargers who were in the middle and also ranked in the middle of the NFL in total defense.) Not a statistically relevant result.

Also, the point of your statistics (if I am correct on that) is not relevant to the discussion. Showing statistics from all OLBs on a team does not help to prove that Lawson needs upgrading, as the vast majority of these sacks are from one position: WILL.

Originally posted by NinerGM:

Originally posted by WINiner:

Originally posted by NinerGM:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Wodwo:
Ok, you just did a great job of avoiding answering my question.

I already agreed that the ideal would be to have dominant pass rush on both sides. I wanted you to show an example of this outside the Steelers. The only SAM you mentioned is Phillips and, I'm sorry, but I fail to see how you can consider him being dominant through his career. He's only surpassed 10 sacks once in his career and every other year he's had comparable numbers to Lawson last season.

My point is that, while having what the Steelers have is ideal, it isn't essential, and that replacing Lawson shouldn't be the priority. Getting a dominant WILL should be. The players you mention that get moved around are dominant pass rushing WILL linebackers.

Lastly, your point that in order to be an elite defense, we must have two dominant pass rushing OLBs is just bogus. Jets had no elite pass rushers. They ranked 18th in the league in sacks. They have the best corner in the league and aggressive schemed blitzes. Also, the Steeler's defense may be ranked 5th overall, but they were 3rd against the run and 16th against the pass. We're talking a difference of around 200 yards over the season between our pass defense and theirs. A total difference of about 20 yards a game both run and pass. However, we ranked 4th overall in points per game, while the Steelers were 12th. A difference of a field goal per game. The Jets had the top PPG on defense and the best pass defense and the best total yardage defense... without even one dominant pass rusher at OLB.

Hey Wodwo - sorry it took me so long to get back to you. Here should be some interesting things for you...(and good points BTW)

OLB sacks (including specialists), accounts for injuries, relative to total team sacks and percentages.

Per official websites depth charts & official stats via NFL.com

Overall Defensive Ranking - Through week 17 2009 (Final Update)

#11 - Patriots:
Pierre Woods/Adalius Thomas (3)
Derrick Burgess (5)/Tully Banta-Cain (10)/Rob Ninkovich (1) = 19 of their 31 sacks (61%)

#22 - Dolphins:
Jason Taylor/Joey Porter (16)
Cameron Wake (5.5)/Quentin Moses(1)/Charlie Anderson (2)/Erik Walden (0) = 24.5 of their 44 sacks (56%)

#7 - Broncos:
Mario Haggan/Elvis Dumervil (18)
Darrell Reid (4)/Robert Ayers (0) = 22 of their 39 sacks (56%)

#5 - Steelers:
LaMarr Woodley/James Harrison (23.5)
Andre Frazier (0)/Patrick Bailey (0) = 23.5 of their 47 sacks (50%)

#2 - Packers:
Aaron Kampman/Brady Poppinga (4.5)
Jeremy Thompson (0)/Clay Matthews (10)/Brad Jones (4) = 18.5 of their 37 sacks (50%)

#30 - Chiefs:
Mike Vrabel/Tamba Hali (10.5)
Andy Studebaker (0)/Pierre Walters (0) = 10.5 of their 22 sacks (48%)

#16 - Chargers: Jamal Williams out all season
Shawne Merriman/Shaun Phillips = (11)
Marques Harris (2)/Larry English (2)/Jyles Tucker (0) = 15 of their 35 sacks (43%)

#9 - Cowboys:
DeMarcus Ware/Anthony Spencer (15)
Curtis Johnson (0)/Steve Octavien (0)/Victor Butler (3) = 18 of their 42 sacks (43%)

#3 - Ravens (Hybrid):
Terrell Suggs/Jarret Johnson (10.5)
Antwan Barnes (3)/Paul Kruger (0) = 13.5 of their 32 sacks (42%)

#20 - Cardinals:
Chike Okeafor/Clark Haggans (9.5)
Will Davis (2)/Bertrand Berry (6) = 17.5 of their 43 sacks (41%)

#15 - 49ers:
Parys Haralson/Manny Lawson (11.5)
Diyral Briggs (0)/ Ahmad Brooks (6) = 17.5 of their 44 sacks (40%)

#31 - Browns:
Kamerion Wimbley/David Bowens (12)
Jason Trusnik (2.5)/Alex Hall (0) = 14.5 of their 40 sacks (36%)

#1 - Jets:
Vernon Gholston/Bryan Thomas (2)
Calvin Pace (8)/Marques Murrell (0) = 10 of their 32 sacks (31%)

Not surprisingly, team defense goes as the OLB’s go in the 3-4 defenses just as the effectiveness of your DE’s are tied to the success of 4-3 defenses. It appears that 50% is the key number here. Teams that generate 50% or more of their sacks from the OLB positions are also ranking in the top 10 in defense with the exception of the Ravens (though they use a Hybrid defense and generate pressure from the DE’s too) and the Jets (who generate a tremendous scheme). The Cowboys were the only top 10 defense that didn’t reach the 50% but generate plenty of pressure from Ware & Spencer with 15 sacks combined. Note that there are some teams who rank low in overall defense but high in production from the OLB’s. Could that be poor scheme, major holes in talent in other areas, missing a dominant NT, etc.?

And one thing holds true as well ~ all the top 3-4 defenses have at least one dominant pass rusher at either the SAM or WILL. Even if the starter is ineffective, there tends to be another player who steps up as a specialist or starter d/t injury or other reason. So, in order to take our defense to the next level, we will need to get at least one dominant pass rusher (duh?) and continue to improve our scheme (Manusky, see Jets). As long as we maintain pressure from the other areas like we are we’ll remain an average defense but scheme and at least one dominant pass rusher should push us towards the top in 2010. I think this is why many fans want us to draft Graham and/or insert Brooks into a FT role.

Brooks helped to boost the % for us last year though we remain at the bottom. Note that our starters are putting up sack numbers that some of other team’s backups are.

You can see a down-year for some of the proven starters last year d/t key injuries and other reasons.

So to answer your question…who would I choose over Manny? Just about any starter, including some backups from the list above as most of these guys have all “proven” they can be effective and are consistent pass rushers whereas Manny never has unless you consider 6.5 sporadic sacks “proven” in 2009. Even Haralson has only proven effective coming in off the bench in limited snaps (same with Brooks). Remember, the WILL & SAM are interchangeable in most 3-4 defenses and therefore, there would be a lot of players I’d choose over Manny (and Haralson).

One more thing - what about consistency of sacks which has been a HUGE issue for our team, in general?

Manny had 6.5 sacks:
1 in week 4 against the Rams
1 in week 7 against Houston
1 in week 9 against the Titans
Brooks inserted into the lineup more here
1 in week 11 against the Packers
1 in week 12 against Jacksonville
1 in week 13 against Seattle
.5 sacks in week 17 against the Rams

Remember, 2009 was declared Manny’s year ~ his big breakout year! He was 100% healthy, we hired a pass rushing specialist coach for the OLB’s and others and gave Manny and Haralson free reign to rush the passer the mass majority of the time!

11.5 collective sacks isn’t terrible…it isn’t great either. 44 sacks IS great though so now that we are not rebuilding anymore, the goal will be to upgrade the SAM & WILL positions like the Steelers have who do not have to rely on 3rd down specialists (50% production) along with a scheme such as the Jets combined with a total sack production of the 49ers which comes mostly from the d-line, inside LB blitzes mixed in with a few CB & safety blitzes ~ that is, if we want to take the next step and improve our chances of being a top 10 defense.

Damn. Superb.

Damn obvious more like. Nearly every one of his examples of teams in the 50% or greater category had a dominant PR on one side. Yah think that might soften things up for a guy like Lawson? Do you think for one moment that if we were to put a PR stud like Porter, Ware or Woodley on the other side of Lawson that he wouldn't pick up 2-4 more sacks and make more plays?

This isn't rocket science. NC is dazzling with BS. You put a dominant player at Haralsons spot (you know, the spot the rush is generally generated from) and Many all the sudden is putting up 8-10 sacks a season and making more plays. THATS how it works.....

If it's that obvious then NC wouldn't have to explain repeatedly in such detail, right?

I have never used the term for anyone here but in this case it's so apropos:

Dude, you're a hater. LOL

Nah, I generally like Nc's stuff, but on this particular topic he is trying to win an argument by dazzling with BS. Lawson is fine and easily one of our least worries.

Originally posted by WINiner:
Damn obvious more like. Nearly every one of his examples of teams in the 50% or greater category had a dominant PR on one side. Yah think that might soften things up for a guy like Lawson? Do you think for one moment that if we were to put a PR stud like Porter, Ware or Woodley on the other side of Lawson that he wouldn't pick up 2-4 more sacks and make more plays?

This isn't rocket science. NC is dazzling with BS. You put a dominant player at Haralsons spot (you know, the spot the rush is generally generated from) and Many all the sudden is putting up 8-10 sacks a season and making more plays. THATS how it works.....

Ummm, OK. I'll cover it again...Lawson WAS a WILL his rookie season and didn't have a pass rush and was moved to the SAM. In recent years, he's been completely removed in pass rushing situations. So, if we had a dominant PR @ the WILL (which I #1 agree we need also), what makes you think suddenly Manny will be a dominant PR himself? What evidence do you base this huge assumption on? And if you haven't noticed, we just signed two more OLB's with better pass rush abilities over Manny (Brooks & LeBoy).

Manny is nothing more then a 1st and 2nd down LB on THIS team and he certainly won't be an every down LB next year (assuming he's still with us).

If you value a LB who's only used on 1st and 2nd downs and ST's that's cool. I think most fans would like an every down LB who #1 is a very good pass rusher #2 sets the edge and sniffs out screen passes #3 can drop back in zone coverage once in a while and maybe even make a play here and there.

I think Manny is a good 1st and 2nd down LB but overall, and for what the position requires, average. Period. IMHO, we should have higher standards and not just settle b/c he's really good at one thing.

It seems obvious to me that the coaching staff has zero confidence in Manny's ability to get to the QB. I have a feeling that has hamstrung Manusky and even more so with an ineffective Haralson on the other side.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by WINiner:
Damn obvious more like. Nearly every one of his examples of teams in the 50% or greater category had a dominant PR on one side. Yah think that might soften things up for a guy like Lawson? Do you think for one moment that if we were to put a PR stud like Porter, Ware or Woodley on the other side of Lawson that he wouldn't pick up 2-4 more sacks and make more plays?

This isn't rocket science. NC is dazzling with BS. You put a dominant player at Haralsons spot (you know, the spot the rush is generally generated from) and Many all the sudden is putting up 8-10 sacks a season and making more plays. THATS how it works.....

Ummm, OK. I'll cover it again...Lawson WAS a WILL his rookie season and didn't have a pass rush and was moved to the SAM. In recent years, he's been completely removed in pass rushing situations. So, if we had a dominant PR @ the WILL (which I #1 agree we need also), what makes you think suddenly Manny will be a dominant PR himself? What evidence do you base this huge assumption on? And if you haven't noticed, we just signed two more OLB's with better pass rush abilities over Manny (Brooks & LeBoy).

Manny is nothing more then a 1st and 2nd down LB on THIS team and he certainly won't be an every down LB next year (assuming he's still with us).

If you value a LB who's only used on 1st and 2nd downs and ST's that's cool. I think most fans would like an every down LB who #1 is a very good pass rusher #2 sets the edge and sniffs out screen passes #3 can drop back in zone coverage once in a while and maybe even make a play here and there.

I think Manny is a good 1st and 2nd down LB but overall, and for what the position requires, average. Period. IMHO, we should have higher standards and not just settle b/c he's really good at one thing.

It seems obvious to me that the coaching staff has zero confidence in Manny's ability to get to the QB. I have a feeling that has hamstrung Manusky and even more so with an ineffective Haralson on the other side.

I always thought the saying was "if you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with BS."

That said, I agree with NC on Manny. Manny's a great guy, and may be better than Haralson at holding the edge, playing the run, dropping back in coverage.

BUT he doesn't seem to have that little extra that allows him to get to the QB on time. See the last play of the Minnesota game for reference.

Or watch how hard Briggs worked in the last exhibition game last season, against San Diego, for comparison. Every down, every play, all game long--until he finally started getting to the QB in the second half. When did we see Manny, or Haralson, work that hard, bring that kind of pressure on an opposing OL/QB?

Even with the addition of LaBoy, I could see the Niners going for a rush OLB in the draft.

I hope its Graham. Then let's see what Manusky can do generating a pass rush! Graham, Brooks, LaBoy! All big, fast, relentless OLBers with bad intentions for opposing QBs!

And Manny and Haralson either step it up, or become backups, ST guys, or traded.

Originally posted by WINiner:
This isn't rocket science. NC is dazzling with BS.

You have to admit, he is good at it though!

Originally posted by Wodwo:
No worries, I'm patient... I think the Ginn story broke right after I posted, so I understand.

You still aren't answering my questions, though.

Damn, I'm still not answering your questions? LOL. I'm trying, man...

Just want to say I appreciate your refutes...figured if we cover both sides of the same coin, we'll let the masses form their own opinions, so again, much appreciated.

Originally posted by Wodwo:
I don't agree that the SAM and WILL positions are interchangeable.

Joe Collier on the two positions:

Originally posted by Joe Collier:
Outside linebacker (weak side, away from the tight end): "He's the rusher, he's the speed guy. Has to be good enough in the rush to beat tackles one-on-one enough to make plays and always beat any backs who try to block him."

Outside linebacker (strong side, directly across from the tight end): "This is a tough position to play, because he has to be quick enough to help you in the rush and drop out and cover that tight end or back a lot. But he's also got to be strong enough to get in there against the run, because most teams are going to be dominant to the strong side in the run game."

LINK

I'd have to say I generally agree with the definition of the SAM and WILL but both positions have certainly evolved over the years as the 3-4 defense has become the more dominant defense in the league growing every year in the number of teams who employ it as evidenced above. And that still doesn't dismiss the fact that the #1 priority is to rush the passer on the way to stopping the run, screen passes and both drop back in zones from time to time.

And the numbers prove it. Both Haralson and Lawson had the same number of pass rush attempts, plays against the run and coverage duties. In short, their positions are totally interchangeable. You can drop ANY WILL player from any 3-4 team into a SAM and likewise.

While the WILL is typically your rush spot b/c of the blindside of the QB, the SAM and WILL still rotate (not us though) a lot to create mismatches. The other thing to consider is that the TE does not always line up over the RT. Look at Vernon Davis...he almost exclusively lines up over the LT making it the strong side.

You'll also see of the OLBs last year, many of the WILL sacks came from a SAM position and likewise. You'll also see some SAM's with more sacks then the WILL.

Again, Joe's definition dismisses the #1 priority of both OLB's and the 3-4 in general - the pass rush (and disguising it). In fact, Joe's SAM definition doesn't even mention pass rush as a responsibility of the SAM and that certainly is not true.

The SAM & WILL are as interchangeable as the two safety positions in the 3-4.

Originally posted by Wodwo:
I agree that players are moved around to cause confusion and/or better match-ups, but the two positions have emphasis on different skills. You'll line up your best rusher on the QB's blind side most of the time... this is the reason that Left Tackles make so much money in the NFL. You'll line up the guy with better skills against the run and in pass coverage on the strong side.

So, hopefully you can now see that they are indeed different positions. With that idea in mind, what players at the SAM position can you find that are dominant pass rushers?

See above...but like I said, I do agree generally on the definitions of the two in principle.

Originally posted by Wodwo:
I don't recall asking what player you would like to replace Lawson. Your argument is that you would take any starter over Lawson based on consistency, correct? Well, maybe you can give Manny a break on this one considering he's been in the league 4 seasons... one of which he spent on IR with an ACL tear. The fact remains that his production last season was comparable to other starters at his position. This league is all about "what have you done for me lately?".

I'd give Manny a break here if he was an every down SAM and clearly showed some pass rush potential...and the drive and motivation to play at a very high level game in, game out. But I don't. If we should be giving anyone a break, it might be Haralson b/c las year was his first as a starter and he was average compared to many of the WILL's as noted above. I just feel Manny has always been a square-peg, round-hole in this defense and average is the most you are going to get with his overall game.

I think the coaching staff is looking to upgrade both positions and I still wouldn't be surprised to see Manny traded for a draft pick and/or Brooks and LaBoy given legitimate shots are becoming every down OLB's. That said, I still wouldn't be surprised if we drafted Graham also.

Originally posted by Wodwo:
I hope you didn't go through too much effort to get those statistics. You're trying to show that 3-4 teams who have a higher percentage of sacks from the OLBs have higher ranking defenses, right? I don't see how your statistics support that. If you take the top six teams and the bottom six teams and calculate the average defensive ranking, the top six is 12.8 and the bottom six is 13.2. (Note: Odd number of teams, so left out Chargers who were in the middle and also ranked in the middle of the NFL in total defense.) Not a statistically relevant result.

Also, the point of your statistics (if I am correct on that) is not relevant to the discussion. Showing statistics from all OLBs on a team does not help to prove that Lawson needs upgrading, as the vast majority of these sacks are from one position: WILL.

Oh, no worries, my friend. I already started this exact same post/data at the start of last year so I just had to update the numbers for the rest of 2009.

I don't understand your numbers though. I was showing a relatively strong correlation between the productivity of ALL the OLB's as related to the total teams sacks which is very very hight. Two players account for most of the teams sacks across the board. And for those teams who are even more successful (50% or more) seem to correlate to successful top 10 defenses which should be our goal, right?

I have to show all OLB's d/t injuries and how teams use them. For instance, the Steelers never take their two off the field whereas others substitute more. What I noticed is that for the more successful defense (duh), even when the starters weren't putting up great numbers, another OLB stepped up - TBC is a good example of that with 10 sacks. I also use him as an example of how important scheme is - he was a very good pass rusher initially with the Pats, come here and blows, goes back to the Pats and puts up 10 sacks. The Pats moved him around a lot AND rushed him more then just on predictable downs ~ hence, we play a very vanilla 3-4 defense.

Originally posted by Gavintech:

Originally posted by WINiner:
This isn't rocket science. NC is dazzling with BS.

You have to admit, he is good at it though!

LMAO! You guys are killing me!

Originally posted by NinerGM:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Gavintech:

Originally posted by WINiner:
This isn't rocket science. NC is dazzling with BS.

You have to admit, he is good at it though!

LMAO! You guys are killing me!

Consider the source(s) dude, consider the source(s).

So what do you make of this? LaBoy competing against Lawson? You'd think he'd be more in competition with Haralson...but again, the WILL & SAM are interchangeable, so he can play either though the SAM may be more "technical."

LaBoy to compete with Lawson

Some other good points from Niner fans:

t15_logic4/21/2010 11:45:34 AM
"The run defense argument has been overused. Maybe 3.6 y/a was all that jazz in 2009 but it sure isn't that great in historical terms.

Teams don't need to run against you when your pass defense is in such a poor shape.

Teams attack the path of least resistance."

dniner4/21/2010 12:20:59 PM
"LaBoy when healthy is a beast off the edge.... I remember lots of plays he made againts us...Hope he works out for us. I also want to see Manny take that next step as a pass rusher. He plays the run great and covers good also..."

Jake20074/21/2010 12:24:08 PM
"In today's pro game, containing the pass is much more important than containing the run. It's become a passing game and if the pass defense gives a QB 5 or more seconds to throw, that is far more damaging than if your defense allows an extra 0.5 yards/carry. If your outside linebackers (in a 3-4 scheme) can only contain the run but can't pressure the QB you've got a serious problem because the league has too many QBs who can exploit that extra time and slice up the defensive secondary. In today's game YOU GOTTA HAVE A SERIOUS PASS RUSH!! "

Making Sense of 49ers' Manny Lawson (ESPN)

Originally posted by PTulini:
Making Sense of 49ers' Manny Lawson (ESPN)

Quote:
Matt Barrows' recent note about Manny Lawson wanting a new contract was used to explain the San Francisco outside linebacker's absence from a recent voluntary camp.

ESPN's Adam Schefter, citing a league source, now suggests Lawson could be traded, and that at least one team has shown interest already.

Lawson is phenomenally athletic and an often-dominant player on special teams. He stands as one of the few combine athletes in recent memory -- Matt Jones was another -- to measure taller than 6-foot-5 before running the 40-yard dash in the low 4.4-second range and approaching 40 inches with his vertical leap (39.5 in Lawson's case). His performance at the 2006 combine helped make Lawson a first-round choice.

There's much to like about Lawson's attitude and effort levels. I've found him to be affable and engaging. He seems like a good teammate and good team player for the 49ers.

The production hasn't matched his draft status, however, and that helps explain why the 49ers haven't addressed Lawson's contract as he enters the final year of his rookie deal. Lawson finished last season with a career-high 6.5 sacks. The team does have other options at outside linebacker, but if Calvin Pace can cash in after a 6.5-sack season in Arizona, Lawson isn't out of line thinking he should get more than his $625,000 salary for this season.

Thinking he should get more and getting more are not the same thing, of course. Lawson's problem is an NFL players' problem. Players aren't becoming unrestricted free agents until they play six seasons. Teams have the upper hand in negotiations as a result. For the 49ers, a new deal for Lawson should rank below re-signing Pro Bowl tight end Vernon Davis, whose deal runs through this season, or Pro Bowl linebacker Patrick Willis, whose deal runs through 2011.

I would expect the 49ers to act more decisively once they have a better feel for the future labor landscape.

Look, I like Manny. He seems very funny and like a nice guy. He is loaded with athleticism. But he just isn't a good football player who deserves a big contract or a future on this team.

To me, Manny is more of a 4-3 DE.