Fangio not impressed by Lawson (per Glenn Dickey article)

IMO Lawson has a couple of strikes against him. First off he is a nice guy and smart and I think especially for his type of role as a pass rusher, you have to be an assassin or black ops type of personality and being a bit dumb like killing yourself to accomplish that prowess. He is not really built to be a pass rusher. Not only that but he was not an accomplished pass rusher in college. A smart coach would have guessed that. He is a good linebacker but he is being asked to be what he is not. I think the niners should target Quinn if possible. If as some have said that 4 or 5 really tempting targets are there and a team wants a player bad and we drop a few slots, I would trade back. I think they might be able to do that for a guy like Peterson and Dareus and pick up a corner and a guy like JJ Watts, or Kerrigan or Paea or Sione.
I think if we can still get a premier player and drop a few slots for another team to get their guy, it could work out well for the niners. IMO there are some decent DBs till the third and beyond, raw but talented and the more picks we get in the first 2 rounds will pay off well. That said I think if we do go that route we should really try to get a good free agent DB. Dumping Franklin is a good idea because I think we would be cutting him the next season after a big payout. Frankly, even if we have a substandard QB,
I would prefer to have a pass rusher and two more guys like Paea and Sione Fua or JJ watts, etc. Next year we can package any excess talent and draft picks for a top qb.

Originally posted by 49erRider:

Originally posted by 49ersalldaway126:
http://www.sfexaminer.com/sports/nfl/2011/02/49ers-getting-track-lockout-looms#ixzz1EotVl8XQ

Quote:
Fangio believes in a 3-4 defense, with outside linebackers as primary pass rushers and frequent blitzes. He has apparently not been impressed by the play of Manny Lawson, now a free agent, so it’s unlikely the 49ers will try to persuade Lawson to return.

bad news i liked lawson a lot he was probally one of the best all around OLB in nfl and now were gonna have to find a replacement for him (hopefully laboy and brooks will be starters)

LOL @ being one of the best OLB's in the league when you play in a 3-4 defense and can't rush the passer.

AGREED. He's nowhere near the top. He's an average OLB at best. Don't see what he's ever done to warrant being labeled "one of the best". 2 career interceptions (for the best coverage lb in the game, as he's touted by many), minimal sacks. I can't wait to cut this guy loose along with Nate Clements.

Originally posted by NinerPrideinNJ:

Originally posted by 49erRider:

Originally posted by 49ersalldaway126:
http://www.sfexaminer.com/sports/nfl/2011/02/49ers-getting-track-lockout-looms#ixzz1EotVl8XQ

Quote:
Fangio believes in a 3-4 defense, with outside linebackers as primary pass rushers and frequent blitzes. He has apparently not been impressed by the play of Manny Lawson, now a free agent, so it’s unlikely the 49ers will try to persuade Lawson to return.

bad news i liked lawson a lot he was probally one of the best all around OLB in
nil and now were gonna have to find a replacement for him (hopefully laboy and brooks will be starters)

LOL @ being one of the best OLB's in the league when you play in a 3-4 defense and can't rush the passer.

But he is a 80 in madden


AGREED. He's nowhere near the top. He's an average OLB at best. Don't see what he's ever done to warrant being labeled "one of the best". 2 career interceptions (for the best coverage lb in the game, as he's touted by many), minimal sacks. I can't wait to cut this guy loose along with Nate Clements.

Originally posted by NinerPrideinNJ:

Originally posted by 49erRider:

Originally posted by 49ersalldaway126:
http://www.sfexaminer.com/sports/nfl/2011/02/49ers-getting-track-lockout-looms#ixzz1EotVl8XQ

Quote:
Fangio believes in a 3-4 defense, with outside linebackers as primary pass rushers and frequent blitzes. He has apparently not been impressed by the play of Manny Lawson, now a free agent, so it’s unlikely the 49ers will try to persuade Lawson to return.

bad news i liked lawson a lot he was probally one of the best all around OLB in nfl and now were gonna have to find a replacement for him (hopefully laboy and brooks will be starters)

LOL @ being one of the best OLB's in the league when you play in a 3-4 defense and can't rush the passer.

AGREED. He's nowhere near the top. He's an average OLB at best. Don't see what he's ever done to warrant being labeled "one of the best". 2 career interceptions (for the best coverage lb in the game, as he's touted by many), minimal sacks. I can't wait to cut this guy loose along with Nate Clements.

Who are you going to put in his place? The 49ers have no one else that can do what he does. If he leaves, it creates another hole on the roster that needs to be filled.

This entire thread points out the critical importance of using the #7 pick on a pass rusher. Not only will a stud pass rusher help the secondary, it would also put Lawson back into the same situation he was in at NC with Mario Williams drawing the major interest on the other side which freed Lawson to pressure the passer via blitz and speed moves.

Again, the lack of quality coaching and failure to establish an effective defensive philosophy falls back on Nolan/Sing. They insisted on players fitting into a system instead of building a system around the players they already had.

Originally posted by mrbusinessman499:

Originally posted by NinerPrideinNJ:

Originally posted by 49erRider:

Originally posted by 49ersalldaway126:
http://www.sfexaminer.com/sports/nfl/2011/02/49ers-getting-track-lockout-looms#ixzz1EotVl8XQ

Quote:
Fangio believes in a 3-4 defense, with outside linebackers as primary pass rushers and frequent blitzes. He has apparently not been impressed by the play of Manny Lawson, now a free agent, so it’s unlikely the 49ers will try to persuade Lawson to return.

bad news i liked lawson a lot he was probally one of the best all around OLB in
nil and now were gonna have to find a replacement for him (hopefully laboy and brooks will be starters)

LOL @ being one of the best OLB's in the league when you play in a 3-4 defense and can't rush the passer.

But he is a 80 in madden


AGREED. He's nowhere near the top. He's an average OLB at best. Don't see what he's ever done to warrant being labeled "one of the best". 2 career interceptions (for the best coverage lb in the game, as he's touted by many), minimal sacks. I can't wait to cut this guy loose along with Nate Clements.

Really he should be on the field limited with Miller/Quinn. Nate can go! Just draft a cb high maybe 2. Qb, FB.

thread fail

Originally posted by DonnieDarko:
thread fail

Comment fail. Why wouldn't we tender him ? If someone really wants him we then own the rights to trade him should we be able to work something out, otherwise he can be given a final chance with the organization and a 1st and likely only chance by this regime to be competing for a job come TC and if it doesn't pan out then snippity snip!

That's a pretty high tender. Does that mean he would be gaureenteed a certain amount of cash.

Originally posted by Oakland-Niner:
That's a pretty high tender. Does that mean he would be gaureenteed a certain amount of cash.

Restricted tenders along with Franchise tags don't mean much until we know the details of the new CBA.

Originally posted by Hopper:

Originally posted by Oakland-Niner:
That's a pretty high tender. Does that mean he would be gaureenteed a certain amount of cash.

Restricted tenders along with Franchise tags don't mean much until we know the details of the new CBA.

This issue is going to make my head explode.

I think I finally get it. Using the franchise secures some of our players until we have a new CBA. But when we get a new CBA the tenders we put on them today disappears? You have to excuse me, I have a pea brain.

Originally posted by Oakland-Niner:

Originally posted by Hopper:

Originally posted by Oakland-Niner:
That's a pretty high tender. Does that mean he would be gaureenteed a certain amount of cash.

Restricted tenders along with Franchise tags don't mean much until we know the details of the new CBA.

This issue is going to make my head explode.

I think I finally get it. Using the franchise secures some of our players until we have a new CBA. But when we get a new CBA the tenders we put on them today disappears? You have to excuse me, I have a pea brain.

Franchise tag and these restricted tenders are 2 totally different things. The restricted free agent rules were only put in place to combat the rich owners not being able to buy all of the free agents up in an uncapped year. Remember how last year was an uncapped year. So the theory is that once a new CBA is established that the restricted free agent tags will also disappear b/c they were only in place for an uncapped year. While franchise tags were part of a capped or uncapped year so the thought it they will remain part of a new deal.

Originally posted by lamontb:

Originally posted by Oakland-Niner:

Originally posted by Hopper:

Originally posted by Oakland-Niner:
That's a pretty high tender. Does that mean he would be gaureenteed a certain amount of cash.

Restricted tenders along with Franchise tags don't mean much until we know the details of the new CBA.

This issue is going to make my head explode.

I think I finally get it. Using the franchise secures some of our players until we have a new CBA. But when we get a new CBA the tenders we put on them today disappears? You have to excuse me, I have a pea brain.

Franchise tag and these restricted tenders are 2 totally different things. The restricted free agent rules were only put in place to combat the rich owners not being able to buy all of the free agents up in an uncapped year. Remember how last year was an uncapped year. So the theory is that once a new CBA is established that the restricted free agent tags will also disappear b/c they were only in place for an uncapped year. While franchise tags were part of a capped or uncapped year so the thought it they will remain part of a new deal.

Insightful. So it sounds like nothing more than a meaningless formality, unless this makes it into the new cba and even then it depends on how many years qualifies as an ufa.

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by NinerPrideinNJ:

Originally posted by 49erRider:

Originally posted by 49ersalldaway126:
http://www.sfexaminer.com/sports/nfl/2011/02/49ers-getting-track-lockout-looms#ixzz1EotVl8XQ

Quote:
Fangio believes in a 3-4 defense, with outside linebackers as primary pass rushers and frequent blitzes. He has apparently not been impressed by the play of Manny Lawson, now a free agent, so it’s unlikely the 49ers will try to persuade Lawson to return.

bad news i liked lawson a lot he was probally one of the best all around OLB in nfl and now were gonna have to find a replacement for him (hopefully laboy and brooks will be starters)

LOL @ being one of the best OLB's in the league when you play in a 3-4 defense and can't rush the passer.

AGREED. He's nowhere near the top. He's an average OLB at best. Don't see what he's ever done to warrant being labeled "one of the best". 2 career interceptions (for the best coverage lb in the game, as he's touted by many), minimal sacks. I can't wait to cut this guy loose along with Nate Clements.

Who are you going to put in his place? The 49ers have no one else that can do what he does. If he leaves, it creates another hole on the roster that needs to be filled.

This entire thread points out the critical importance of using the #7 pick on a pass rusher. Not only will a stud pass rusher help the secondary, it would also put Lawson back into the same situation he was in at NC with Mario Williams drawing the major interest on the other side which freed Lawson to pressure the passer via blitz and speed moves.

Again, the lack of quality coaching and failure to establish an effective defensive philosophy falls back on Nolan/Sing. They insisted on players fitting into a system instead of building a system around the players they already had.

I don't mind keeping Lawson. He had a couple great games in 2010. However, I think his abilities are a bit fabricated on here. He does help keep the running game inside, but when people on here act like nobody else can replace him and do the same, it's just ridiculous. I mean, if you really think nobody else can run to their left and clog up a lane on a pitch to the outside, then I really don't know what to tell you. Lawson is good in coverage, but at the end of the day, we play a 3-4 defense and an OLB's main objective is to provide a pass rush in this system. He can't do that. It doesn't matter how good he is at coverage when the lack of pass rush is allowing QBs to go downfield with success.

Lawman is a good solid player, at a position were you want your star!

Every scheme and every coach has places to hide lesser players and places they know they need stars.

That rush OLB in 3-4 that's super star country, and Lawman is good, but he needs to be great!

Originally posted by GolittaCamper:
Lawman is a good solid player, at a position were you want your star!

Every scheme and every coach has places to hide lesser players and places they know they need stars.

That rush OLB in 3-4 that's super star country, and Lawman is good, but he needs to be great!

Nobody here knows what Lawson is asking. And whatever was said prior to the season may have no baring on today. Imo, we have a bunch of bums backing up Lawson, we don't have many superstars so we have plenty of money under the cap when we get one I'm sure, so what's the big rush to move on? Pay the man and draft a legit passrusher. Unless he is asking for over the top type money, keep him. Even if we pay a little more than a average olb. I don't know of any team that has two stud passrushers. You can't afford it. This board seems to be full of penny pinchers and I don't know why.