Is Fangio really a better option than Manusky?

Originally posted by Blitz:


I don't get this, it seems like it is a circular argument, or point, or whatever you want to call it, but it does seem circular, or contradicting, in some form:

"This defense is absolutely geared towards stopping the run above all else and it's hurt us. Blame the players if you want, but a good coach will scheme to their strengths and teach them discipline."

Heres why I don't get it.......

Isn't this exactly what Manusky has been doing (schemeing to their strengths, ie..."talent is strong at defensing the run" "scheme that strength"). Or is it we have a roster whose talent strength is defending then pass? If so, how come we are discussing drafting talent to defense the pass?

Well, considering we haven't had success defending the pass and Manusky has been doing exactly what you are saying he should, you have just proven yourself wrong.

If you have a defense that is talented at defending the run, you don't emphasize that talent, you use it to help cover the weakness in your pass defense.

What we have been doing as a defense is "pinching" the front. We keep our front seven tightly packed in the middle of the field. We do this to emphasize run defense. This strategy has obviously worked to help us stop the run considering our overall ranking and the fact that we are second in the league in yards per carry against our defense.

However, this strategy opens massive holes in our pass defense. First, we have been using a cover four... and a soft cover four at that. The fact that our front seven is "pinched" and our corners are 10 yards off the line of scrimmage has allowed teams to pick us apart with the short passing game. Short slants, swing passes, hitches, screens... it even hurts our run defense when we face quick backs who can bounce outside... Haralson is terrible in space and can't seal the edge at all.

Not only has it opened massive holes in our zones, it hurts our ability to rush the passer. The fact that we are so compacted on our front makes the outside pass rush nearly impossible. We play a one gap scheme and this fact already hurts our OLBs because they have to take on tackles as opposed to two gap systems which allow the OLB to rush free far more often. The fact that we pinch our front only increases the difficulty for our OLBs because they are not lined up in a technique position that allows them to get the best leverage on a pass rush. Manny Lawson especially has been used this way. This strategy would be fine if we had an elite pass rusher on the weak side... however, it is obvious that we don't. Not using the strengths of our personnel. You see?

Nate Clements is not a deep zone corner. He is a physical man cover corner that should be used in press coverage in order to throw off timing routes and give the pass rush that extra half a second to pressure the quarterback. I've heard people argue that we don't have any safety help over top to allow this, but it's hard to argue this because we haven't done it. Not using the strengths of the personnel.

The bottom line is this: If what you are doing isn't working, figure something else out. Try something different. Don't continue to do the same thing every game with the same result. Einstein's definition of insanity, yes? Manusky has had plenty of time to learn the strengths and weaknesses of our defenders and he hasn't been able to figure out a solution to the problem. Time to try something new.

Also, there is no excuse for the lack of discipline this defense has shown. If it were only a few players, I might agree that it could be an issue with our personnel. However, it is a problem with every player on our defense... excluding the defensive line. It is not a coincidence that Jim Tomsula was appointed interim Head Coach and is reported to likely stay on the staff.

You'd think after working with the same players for so long that Manusky could come up with something creative to get them to stop the pass. He hasn't. Time to move on.

Balke is on KNBR right now and was talking about the role of the OLB and to paraphrase, we'll remain a 3-4 defense AND the #1 responsibility of the OLB is to pass rush and #2 play the run. Ladies and gentlemen, he GETS IT! Manusky is defend the run #1, drop back in coverage #2 and rush the passer with specialists on 3rd downs #3. Totally backwards and it's why Manusky is gone.

BTW: That was one of the best GM interviews I've ever heard. Balke really seems to have a pulse on this organization and to each players strengths/weaknesses and take into account the bigger picture. He covered the OLB positon, Anthony Davis (and the entire o-line), Josh Morgan, the QB position, etc. He even covered "motivation" of players and how this affects play. Very very good interview.

Originally posted by Wodwo:

Originally posted by Blitz:


I don't get this, it seems like it is a circular argument, or point, or whatever you want to call it, but it does seem circular, or contradicting, in some form:

"This defense is absolutely geared towards stopping the run above all else and it's hurt us. Blame the players if you want, but a good coach will scheme to their strengths and teach them discipline."

Heres why I don't get it.......

Isn't this exactly what Manusky has been doing (schemeing to their strengths, ie..."talent is strong at defensing the run" "scheme that strength"). Or is it we have a roster whose talent strength is defending then pass? If so, how come we are discussing drafting talent to defense the pass?

Well, considering we haven't had success defending the pass and Manusky has been doing exactly what you are saying he should, you have just proven yourself wrong.

If you have a defense that is talented at defending the run, you don't emphasize that talent, you use it to help cover the weakness in your pass defense.

What we have been doing as a defense is "pinching" the front. We keep our front seven tightly packed in the middle of the field. We do this to emphasize run defense. This strategy has obviously worked to help us stop the run considering our overall ranking and the fact that we are second in the league in yards per carry against our defense.

However, this strategy opens massive holes in our pass defense. First, we have been using a cover four... and a soft cover four at that. The fact that our front seven is "pinched" and our corners are 10 yards off the line of scrimmage has allowed teams to pick us apart with the short passing game. Short slants, swing passes, hitches, screens... it even hurts our run defense when we face quick backs who can bounce outside... Haralson is terrible in space and can't seal the edge at all.

Not only has it opened massive holes in our zones, it hurts our ability to rush the passer. The fact that we are so compacted on our front makes the outside pass rush nearly impossible. We play a one gap scheme and this fact already hurts our OLBs because they have to take on tackles as opposed to two gap systems which allow the OLB to rush free far more often. The fact that we pinch our front only increases the difficulty for our OLBs because they are not lined up in a technique position that allows them to get the best leverage on a pass rush. Manny Lawson especially has been used this way. This strategy would be fine if we had an elite pass rusher on the weak side... however, it is obvious that we don't. Not using the strengths of our personnel. You see?

Nate Clements is not a deep zone corner. He is a physical man cover corner that should be used in press coverage in order to throw off timing routes and give the pass rush that extra half a second to pressure the quarterback. I've heard people argue that we don't have any safety help over top to allow this, but it's hard to argue this because we haven't done it. Not using the strengths of the personnel.

The bottom line is this: If what you are doing isn't working, figure something else out. Try something different. Don't continue to do the same thing every game with the same result. Einstein's definition of insanity, yes? Manusky has had plenty of time to learn the strengths and weaknesses of our defenders and he hasn't been able to figure out a solution to the problem. Time to try something new.

Also, there is no excuse for the lack of discipline this defense has shown. If it were only a few players, I might agree that it could be an issue with our personnel. However, it is a problem with every player on our defense... excluding the defensive line. It is not a coincidence that Jim Tomsula was appointed interim Head Coach and is reported to likely stay on the staff.

You'd think after working with the same players for so long that Manusky could come up with something creative to get them to stop the pass. He hasn't. Time to move on.

My turn to you! Great post!

Since fangio is a disciple of dom capers, does anyone feel maybe he could use clements like charles woodson, lining up outside, in the slot and some as a SAFETY. i know he likes to bite on double moves on the outside but i still think he's a ballhawk. basically, can we get charles woodson production from clements with this switch at DC. thoughts?

Originally posted by Pick6:

Originally posted by Norcal9erfan:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Norcal9erfan:

Originally posted by qnnhan7:
The way I see it, Fangio is a vet at the 3-4. There's nothing Manusky was doing with our team that Fangio don't know how to do himself. Fangio also add years of experience and Harbaugh have trust in Vic. No brainer.

Experience does not equate to success. In Fangio's case, more experience meant a worse overall ranking IN ALL 3 OF HIS PREVIOUS DC JOBS. He took top 15 overall defenses and took them to the bottom or one step above the bottom:

Carolina
1995: 7th
1996: 10th
1997: 15th
1998: 30th (last in the league)

Indianapolis
1999: 15th
2000: 21st
2001: 29th

Houston
2002: 16th
2003: 31st
2004: 23rd
2005: 31st

Lots of people talk about lack of talent on his previous teams. I think that is bullchit! He had at least 3 years on each team to adjust his roster via FA, trade, draft, etc. yet he was never able to fix them. Manusky's defenses were not bad and at least were consistent:

Overall Defense the last 6 years:

2010: 13th overall
2009: 15th overall
2008: 13th overall
2007: 25th overall (still under Nolan regime)

The first year he took over, our defense improved to essentially twice as good according to rankings. Bottom line is we dont know much about how Fangio will do if he comes, but I would be worried. Based on EXPERIENCE, our defense should go to chits here in a year or two.

Yeah, Jimmy Raye had a ton of "experience" too but that doesn't mean he fits the NFL today. At this juncture, Fangio "may" fit what is best for this team and what the top NFL defenses scheme towards in todays game. Manusky clearly does not and may be best suited for the college ranks or an NFL team with a tremendous offense that can score quickly. This casue for concern has been posted and reposted in this thread from the beginning and is a very valid concern that we all share and one, I'm sure, has been brought to his attention. But in this role, make no mistake about it, he has to come here with a "vision" much like Harbaugh and we will draft, sign our own and bring in FA's who fit that vision much like a Capers, Steelers, San Diego and Baltimore defensive team. Let's hope for the best in scouting players who fit our system and who we can plug in at any time and not miss a beat (ala the WCO or San Diego 3-4 defense). Having the right "system" is critical towards success in the NFL.

How many times have we seen "crappy players" on our team go to other systems and perform very well...

I agree. If he comes to be our D-Coordinator, which is looking more and more likely everyday, everyone must buy into "the vision" and Baalke needs to get him the players that he asks for. It may not be who we as fans or even Baalke wants in some cases, but give him the best chance to succeed.

Manusky has been "ok", but I want better than ok. Is Fangio better than "OK"... I don't know.

First of all two of the teams Fangio coached were expansion teams... so that should tell you something about their talent. That Houston team was AWFUL... think 9ers at the end of Erickson...

2nd - His 3 years in Indy he ran a 43?! My only guess is that was a combination of defensive talent and/or HC preference.

I was more skeptical at first, but having looked at it, Im not sure he EVER had the talent to run his DEF. Obviously I think we can throw out the 43 in Indy. His other two stops had horrible talent (expansion teams) and from what I remember both of those teams tried to put together a Def with Veterans hoping to be average and then build an OFF. I remember Carolina spending top draft picks on Kerry Collins, Tim Biakabatuka, Muhsin Muhammed and Rae Carruth.... the Texans picking David Carr, Andre Johnson, and Jabar Gafney. I'm guessing there were probably some OL in there that I'm missing and maybe some DEF player that I forgot about as well.

My Point -
I don't believe he ever really had the talent, AND I think the teams FOCUS was always more toward building the OFF while he was there.

Valid points and argument. Let's hope you are right.

Is it just me or do you guys think Justin Smith can make a similar impact Bryant Young made as a DT in a 4-3?

Too bad we will run a 3-4 without an edge rusher. I hope Fangio's 3-4 doesn't hold down Smiths' strengths which is attack rather than stand up and read the gap.

If Fangio goes to a more traditional 3-4, then are we overpaying for Justin Smith or even Franklin?

Originally posted by Joecool:
Is it just me or do you guys think Justin Smith can make a similar impact Bryant Young made as a DT in a 4-3?

Too bad we will run a 3-4 without an edge rusher. I hope Fangio's 3-4 doesn't hold down Smiths' strengths which is attack rather than stand up and read the gap.

If Fangio goes to a more traditional 3-4, then are we overpaying for Justin Smith or even Franklin?

Good point BUT, there are ways to isolate him, even in a 3-4, to free him to pass rush. We could overload two exceptional pass rushers on that side to free him up, move him inside, go to a four man front, even rotate him from RDE to LDE and look to attack the oppositions weakest OL-man. It just takes some film-watching and identifying how to free him up and attack their weaknesses.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Joecool:
Is it just me or do you guys think Justin Smith can make a similar impact Bryant Young made as a DT in a 4-3?

Too bad we will run a 3-4 without an edge rusher. I hope Fangio's 3-4 doesn't hold down Smiths' strengths which is attack rather than stand up and read the gap.

If Fangio goes to a more traditional 3-4, then are we overpaying for Justin Smith or even Franklin?

Good point BUT, there are ways to isolate him, even in a 3-4, to free him to pass rush. We could overload two exceptional pass rushers on that side to free him up, move him inside, go to a four man front, even rotate him from RDE to LDE and look to attach the oppositions weakest OL-man.

Yeah, but we need to acquire two exceptional pass rushers first. The point is to require 2 men to block him but we are lacking the entire reason why we want that: to allow 1-on-1 matchup with our pass rushers.

Originally posted by Joecool:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Joecool:
Is it just me or do you guys think Justin Smith can make a similar impact Bryant Young made as a DT in a 4-3?

Too bad we will run a 3-4 without an edge rusher. I hope Fangio's 3-4 doesn't hold down Smiths' strengths which is attack rather than stand up and read the gap.

If Fangio goes to a more traditional 3-4, then are we overpaying for Justin Smith or even Franklin?

Good point BUT, there are ways to isolate him, even in a 3-4, to free him to pass rush. We could overload two exceptional pass rushers on that side to free him up, move him inside, go to a four man front, even rotate him from RDE to LDE and look to attach the oppositions weakest OL-man.

Yeah, but we need to acquire two exceptional pass rushers first. The point is to require 2 men to block him but we are lacking the entire reason why we want that: to allow 1-on-1 matchup with our pass rushers.

You don't really "need" exceptional pass rushers per se' but if you overload the right side (see Green Bay recently) where Smith predominately plays, you can isolate him. You could have Brooks line up as a RDE, move Smith outside and have Willis line up behind them ready to shoot the gap. Naturally, your OT and LG would have to block the inside guys rushing (Brooks and Willis) which would leave Smith isolated outside and free to rush. Hell, he's such a great bull rusher, you can start him outside the RT, pinch inward taking two guys and have Willis and Brooks swing around the outside. There is so much you could do with just a simple overloaded blitz like this and unless the QB can get rid of it quickly (under 3 seconds), one of those guys is going to be hitting the QB really hard! The key is in a set like this, NOT to be Manusky-like and play 15 yards off the WR for an easy pitch-n-catch on a hot read! They need to be playing up tight at the LOS and ready to jump for a pick-6!

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Joecool:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Joecool:
Is it just me or do you guys think Justin Smith can make a similar impact Bryant Young made as a DT in a 4-3?

Too bad we will run a 3-4 without an edge rusher. I hope Fangio's 3-4 doesn't hold down Smiths' strengths which is attack rather than stand up and read the gap.

If Fangio goes to a more traditional 3-4, then are we overpaying for Justin Smith or even Franklin?

Good point BUT, there are ways to isolate him, even in a 3-4, to free him to pass rush. We could overload two exceptional pass rushers on that side to free him up, move him inside, go to a four man front, even rotate him from RDE to LDE and look to attach the oppositions weakest OL-man.

Yeah, but we need to acquire two exceptional pass rushers first. The point is to require 2 men to block him but we are lacking the entire reason why we want that: to allow 1-on-1 matchup with our pass rushers.

You don't really "need" exceptional pass rushers per se' but if you overload the right side (see Green Bay recently) where Smith predominately plays, you can isolate him. You could have Brooks line up as a RDE, move Smith outside and have Willis line up behind them ready to shoot the gap. Naturally, your OT and LG would have to block the inside guys rushing (Brooks and Willis) which would leave Smith isolated outside and free to rush. Hell, he's such a great bull rusher, you can start him outside the RT, pinch inward taking two guys and have Willis and Brooks swing around the outside. There is so much you could do with just a simple overloaded blitz like this and unless the QB can get rid of it quickly (under 3 seconds), one of those guys is going to be hitting the QB really hard! The key is in a set like this, NOT to be Manusky-like and play 15 yards off the WR for an easy pitch-n-catch on a hot read! They need to be playing up tight at the LOS and ready to jump for a pick-6!

Man, it sounds so good on paper. Hope the new guy can make it happen.

Originally posted by Joecool:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Joecool:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Joecool:
Is it just me or do you guys think Justin Smith can make a similar impact Bryant Young made as a DT in a 4-3?

Too bad we will run a 3-4 without an edge rusher. I hope Fangio's 3-4 doesn't hold down Smiths' strengths which is attack rather than stand up and read the gap.

If Fangio goes to a more traditional 3-4, then are we overpaying for Justin Smith or even Franklin?

Good point BUT, there are ways to isolate him, even in a 3-4, to free him to pass rush. We could overload two exceptional pass rushers on that side to free him up, move him inside, go to a four man front, even rotate him from RDE to LDE and look to attach the oppositions weakest OL-man.

Yeah, but we need to acquire two exceptional pass rushers first. The point is to require 2 men to block him but we are lacking the entire reason why we want that: to allow 1-on-1 matchup with our pass rushers.

You don't really "need" exceptional pass rushers per se' but if you overload the right side (see Green Bay recently) where Smith predominately plays, you can isolate him. You could have Brooks line up as a RDE, move Smith outside and have Willis line up behind them ready to shoot the gap. Naturally, your OT and LG would have to block the inside guys rushing (Brooks and Willis) which would leave Smith isolated outside and free to rush. Hell, he's such a great bull rusher, you can start him outside the RT, pinch inward taking two guys and have Willis and Brooks swing around the outside. There is so much you could do with just a simple overloaded blitz like this and unless the QB can get rid of it quickly (under 3 seconds), one of those guys is going to be hitting the QB really hard! The key is in a set like this, NOT to be Manusky-like and play 15 yards off the WR for an easy pitch-n-catch on a hot read! They need to be playing up tight at the LOS and ready to jump for a pick-6!

Man, it sounds so good on paper. Hope the new guy can make it happen.

Shooot, good DC's do simple things like this all the time (watch what the Steelers, Pats, Baltimore and GB do this w/e!). GB was not only doing this on the outside but on the inside with Matthews for pressure right up the gut! You can set an o-line up too and attack the weakest link on the o-line and then suddenly show your set and drop back in coverage instead and really throw them off or bring a CB blitz from the other side while the QB hesitates with everyone dropping back and while he has nobody to throw to and then BAM!

Originally posted by Wodwo:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by SandSlingin49er:
SOmeone just posted ea. teams blitz count.............

THe great Manusky had 1.6 all out blitz's a game (thats sending more than 6) and the saints led the NFL..... I think its time for change

Thank you! The average yards per game rankings during Manusky's tenure (b/c it's over now) is as deceptive as his 6th ranked defense against the run (but 17th in points allowed). Ppl can blame the offense all they want but in the grand scheme of things, this was a defense designed to stop the run first and played conservative to avoid the big play. As a result, we gave up countless 99 yard-like drives in 10+ minutes all season. We bent and broke but did it very slowly as teams exploited the underneath zones and took what we gave them methodically while allowing QB's all day to find the open, underneath RB's, WR's and TE's. At the end of the day we didn't give up a ton of yards and our run defense looked way better then it actually was. We gave up a lot of points (broke) and b/c the defense couldn't get off the field, the offense had fewer opportunities to get the ball back and gain any rhythm itself. We saw this ALL year long. Remember, there were only two teams that game-planned to exploit our front 7 on the ground (KC & Tampa) and both owned us in this matter; even Willis was owned. The rest of the teams easily exploited our underneath soft defense where even our OLB's were constantly dropping back in coverage.

TOP for the offense and defense was almost identical b/c as bad as the offense was at maintaining drives, the defense was equally bad at getting off the field on 3rd downs or creating TO's. Period.

Manusky is an intelligent man and played to the stats. We all saw how much more effective our secondary was (Goldson, Harris, Bly, Spencer, Clements, etc.) when Manusky schemed a team-pass rushing concept and even the TO's went up big time. This year, he played to get out of SF IMHO. In his long tenure here he had every opportunity to build a dominant defense; something other DC's did in just one or two seasons. For God's sakes, look at San Diego's 3-4, #1 in the NFL with essentially zero players left over from the "Lights Out!" days.

There is no question that this is by FAR, the most vanilla 3-4 defense of the entire NFL, the Nolan or Singletary or Raye-version of defense.

For a veteran defense who have had the same personnel for 5 years now under the same defense (including added pass rushers to the mix ala Brooks/LaBoy), this team continued to be exposed, outcoached, outschemed, zero half-time adjustments, destroyed easily when the game was on the line, constant crucial penalties, bone-headed play after bone-headed play, undisciplined, players quitting, no players developing at all (only regressing), etc.

In 2010, there were NO excuses for the defense (they failed) and any fan who watched every game could admit to that without hesitation. At the end of the day, given the offense had 4 QB changes, 2 OC changes, 2 philosophy changes, 2 rookies starting along the o-line, it's center and LT on IR, its #1 RB on IR, we'd expect what the offense delivered, a lower 1/3 of the league ranking (23rd). But the defense? No excuses!

It's time for a change, w/o question. As long as the new DC comes in with the same "attack" mentality to match Harbaugh and his offensive philosophy, that alone will weed out many of our one-dimensional players on defense and start a shift towards a defense to match today's NFL that is ALWAYS #1 or #2 in the NFL every year.

We should always be striving for that and become the Niners of old...top 5 ranking in offense AND defense!

No more "bend, but don't break". No more cover four shell.
This defense is absolutely geared towards stopping the run above all else and it's hurt us. Blame the players if you want, but a good coach will scheme to their strengths and teach them discipline.

This is what captured my attention watching Stanford... discipline. The players appeared to be in the correct positions to contain the offense. I think that factors more into my preference for Fangio than his attacking style.

Discipline first. Attacking second. Without the first, the second will fail.

Our defense last season lacked discipline at every level. Well, the defensive line was generally good... but other than that, there were containment breakdowns all over the field. We even managed to regress in our ability to tackle. Hell, I saw Willis get run over for the first time in his career.

There are no excuses for a veteran defense that has been together in the same scheme this long.

It's time to try something new.

I agree 100%. With Nate and Spencer holding it down it will be more like one quick strike for 6...

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Wodwo:

Originally posted by Blitz:


I don't get this, it seems like it is a circular argument, or point, or whatever you want to call it, but it does seem circular, or contradicting, in some form:

"This defense is absolutely geared towards stopping the run above all else and it's hurt us. Blame the players if you want, but a good coach will scheme to their strengths and teach them discipline."

Heres why I don't get it.......

Isn't this exactly what Manusky has been doing (schemeing to their strengths, ie..."talent is strong at defensing the run" "scheme that strength"). Or is it we have a roster whose talent strength is defending then pass? If so, how come we are discussing drafting talent to defense the pass?

Well, considering we haven't had success defending the pass and Manusky has been doing exactly what you are saying he should, you have just proven yourself wrong.

If you have a defense that is talented at defending the run, you don't emphasize that talent, you use it to help cover the weakness in your pass defense.

What we have been doing as a defense is "pinching" the front. We keep our front seven tightly packed in the middle of the field. We do this to emphasize run defense. This strategy has obviously worked to help us stop the run considering our overall ranking and the fact that we are second in the league in yards per carry against our defense.

However, this strategy opens massive holes in our pass defense. First, we have been using a cover four... and a soft cover four at that. The fact that our front seven is "pinched" and our corners are 10 yards off the line of scrimmage has allowed teams to pick us apart with the short passing game. Short slants, swing passes, hitches, screens... it even hurts our run defense when we face quick backs who can bounce outside... Haralson is terrible in space and can't seal the edge at all.

Not only has it opened massive holes in our zones, it hurts our ability to rush the passer. The fact that we are so compacted on our front makes the outside pass rush nearly impossible. We play a one gap scheme and this fact already hurts our OLBs because they have to take on tackles as opposed to two gap systems which allow the OLB to rush free far more often. The fact that we pinch our front only increases the difficulty for our OLBs because they are not lined up in a technique position that allows them to get the best leverage on a pass rush. Manny Lawson especially has been used this way. This strategy would be fine if we had an elite pass rusher on the weak side... however, it is obvious that we don't. Not using the strengths of our personnel. You see?

Nate Clements is not a deep zone corner. He is a physical man cover corner that should be used in press coverage in order to throw off timing routes and give the pass rush that extra half a second to pressure the quarterback. I've heard people argue that we don't have any safety help over top to allow this, but it's hard to argue this because we haven't done it. Not using the strengths of the personnel.

The bottom line is this: If what you are doing isn't working, figure something else out. Try something different. Don't continue to do the same thing every game with the same result. Einstein's definition of insanity, yes? Manusky has had plenty of time to learn the strengths and weaknesses of our defenders and he hasn't been able to figure out a solution to the problem. Time to try something new.

Also, there is no excuse for the lack of discipline this defense has shown. If it were only a few players, I might agree that it could be an issue with our personnel. However, it is a problem with every player on our defense... excluding the defensive line. It is not a coincidence that Jim Tomsula was appointed interim Head Coach and is reported to likely stay on the staff.

You'd think after working with the same players for so long that Manusky could come up with something creative to get them to stop the pass. He hasn't. Time to move on.

My turn to you! Great post!

I love a good defence discussion. You always get the technical minds showing up.

I'm not sure if its the Harbaugh factor or even the Baalke factor or, s**t, even both but the zone seems more relaxed and optimistic. Manusky gave us building blocks but he feel short in his design for them way too much for my liking.

We are about to have a fresh idea on offence and I think we would be foolish not to look at new ideas on defence.

Fangio is Harbaugh's top target to replace Manusky. He has 24 years of NFL experience and has been a defensive coordinator - with three different teams - for 11 of them. He and Green Bay defensive coordinator Dom Capers began their professional coaching careers together and both use a similar style. They prefer a 3-4 scheme and like to blitz from unconventional angles.

"He likes to move (the linebackers) around and keep the offense on its toes," said Stanford linebacker Shayne Skov, who attended today's press conference at Stanford. "That's something I definitely did a lot of this year. He definitely likes bringing varied looks."

Read more: http://blogs.sacbee.com/49ers/archives/2011/01/current-49ers-a.html#ixzz1Aye2M71c

I haz such a happi!!!!!

This D is going to be fun to watch. I am really and truly eager to see who Baalke brings in as our next pass rusher. Not only that, we have some great options for a possible duo of CBs in this draft. Add the fact that Fua from Stanford knows Fangio's D already and could seriously be our 2-gap NT after our Strength and Conditioning Coach has him for a season.

I can't contain my excitement after reading so many different articles about his "style" of D. Consistently, he pressured the QB and with less talented players. Can you imagine what he can do with some of the pieces we have? Then add FA, when it comes. Then the draft. Heck, I bet Baalke would be willing to trade some key pieces of this team for valuable pieces that "fit" the new identity.

I'm eager to see how it plays out. Heck, he's not on the team yet.

Originally posted by ninertico:
Fangio is Harbaugh's top target to replace Manusky. He has 24 years of NFL experience and has been a defensive coordinator - with three different teams - for 11 of them. He and Green Bay defensive coordinator Dom Capers began their professional coaching careers together and both use a similar style. They prefer a 3-4 scheme and like to blitz from unconventional angles.

"He likes to move (the linebackers) around and keep the offense on its toes," said Stanford linebacker Shayne Skov, who attended today's press conference at Stanford. "That's something I definitely did a lot of this year. He definitely likes bringing varied looks."

Read more: http://blogs.sacbee.com/49ers/archives/2011/01/current-49ers-a.html#ixzz1Aye2M71c

I haz such a happi!!!!!

This D is going to be fun to watch. I am really and truly eager to see who Baalke brings in as our next pass rusher. Not only that, we have some great options for a possible duo of CBs in this draft. Add the fact that Fua from Stanford knows Fangio's D already and could seriously be our 2-gap NT after our Strength and Conditioning Coach has him for a season.

I can't contain my excitement after reading so many different articles about his "style" of D. Consistently, he pressured the QB and with less talented players. Can you imagine what he can do with some of the pieces we have? Then add FA, when it comes. Then the draft. Heck, I bet Baalke would be willing to trade some key pieces of this team for valuable pieces that "fit" the new identity.

I'm eager to see how it plays out. Heck, he's not on the team yet.

I'm with you Tico! Don't be surprised if LaBoy now resigns (b/c of Fangio) and Brooks becomes a starter as well. Combined they had 10 sacks (5 each) in very limited snaps and Brooks only trailed Clements & Willis/Smith for Tackles for Losses which is a good indication of setting the edge and blowing up RB's in the backfield before they can get started (great play recognition and then playing off your blocker and making the play). He also had an INT (should have had at least 3).

And this is what I've been saying for years...we needs OLB's who can get after the QB AND set the edge on every single down to maintain the element of surprise. LaBoy & Brooks also switched WILL and SAM positions often on those 3rd downs. Fangio also would move his best pass rushers inside to the MIKE or TED positions to attack any weaknesses on the interior of the o-line (ala Matthews in GB).

If nothing else, this will be a very exciting defense to watch and the X's and O's (chess match) will be visible again. I can't wait to see a real 3-4 with this team and players being utilized correctly! Finally our LBers, all four, will be free to attack and make plays for this team.