The Big Question. Can we win it all?

who says our defense doesnt get better as the season goes on? bowman is just starting to get into coverage, aldon is getting better every week, carlos and the rest of the DBs seem to be getting better every week. i think if you get to the playoffs anyone can beat anyone. our division, as bad as its been lately has advanced more times than not and been in the superbowl a couple times recently.

Originally posted by ninertico:
But but but....


They are THE #1 red-zone defense.

So.... I'm just messin' with ya. I know what you are saying. But it is still a sample and meaningful one at that. I can't wait 'till we face NYG, Balti, and Pitt, teams with good if not very good QBs. We handled Stafford well, but got burned by Romo. Still, I believe that one Dallas game was a fluke, not the other way around.

We'll see Otter, but I still think that the arrow is pointing up on our Secondary, not down. But, it can be said that the secondary is the weak link in the D's armor.

I agree with you. I hope they can get better, and I will gladly admit that I was worried over nothing and they played better than I expected, if they do.


I am just of the opinion that those stats are bad signs, or areas of concern.

the yards are certainly something to keep an eye on, but another thing to consider about our secondary is that we've only had our starting safeties for the past two games. Unless I'm mistaken, Williams started at one or the other S spot in every game until then.

With a legit shot at a home game after a first round bye in the playoffs? Hell yeah!!! Get us to the Super Bowl and it's a wrap. San Francisco 49ers do not lose Super Bowls.

I think the Saints and Packers give us the most problems... The Saints I think we'd have a better shot at because I think our running game can pound it down the Saints throat and keep Brees on the sideline giving the defense much needed rest. I think we can make them 1 dimensional. But you gotta keep Brees off the field and win the time of possession battle.

Packers just have too many weapons. And when it's the big stage their defense really comes to play. I think the biggest shot against the Packers would be Delanie and Vernon vs. their linebackers and our front 7 vs. their most of the time banged up O-Line. If we can constantly pressure Rodgers into throwing before he wants to and take advantage of some mismatches on offense, and we certainly have the coaching staff to do so.. We can beat them...

The Chargers I think we can run over. Defense isn't that great anymore and we can definitely get to Rivers and make them one dimensional. We can make the Pats one dimensional as well, but they have Brady and a great schemer in Belicheck, so it wouldn't be a walk in the park.

Of those 4 I say the Saints and Packers would give us the most fits...

Originally posted by Eduardo75:
I think the Saints and Packers give us the most problems... The Saints I think we'd have a better shot at because I think our running game can pound it down the Saints throat and keep Brees on the sideline giving the defense much needed rest. I think we can make them 1 dimensional. But you gotta keep Brees off the field and win the time of possession battle.

Packers just have too many weapons. And when it's the big stage their defense really comes to play. I think the biggest shot against the Packers would be Delanie and Vernon vs. their linebackers and our front 7 vs. their most of the time banged up O-Line. If we can constantly pressure Rodgers into throwing before he wants to and take advantage of some mismatches on offense, and we certainly have the coaching staff to do so.. We can beat them...

The Chargers I think we can run over. Defense isn't that great anymore and we can definitely get to Rivers and make them one dimensional. We can make the Pats one dimensional as well, but they have Brady and a great schemer in Belicheck, so it wouldn't be a walk in the park.

Of those 4 I say the Saints and Packers would give us the most fits...

The 49ers matched up well against the Saints last year, and Smith actually gave a good account of himself in that game. I think a rematch might have a different outcome this time around. The Packers will be quite a challenge though.

Originally posted by NinerGM:
Sus - I respect you because you're consistent. You don't jump on and off the bandwagon when it's convenient. You have your beliefs and you hold true to them (unlike the OP). I may disagree with you but, I respect you for standing for what you believe in.

WHAT!!!!!!!

Sus? Respect? Don't do it! It's a trap!!!



Nah, I got my Bro's back, too.

Originally posted by dj43:
Sorry to jump in, but...the receiving corp is clearly the weak link. Injuries have put a microscope on the lack of quality depth on QR. When VD has to stay in to block, there is no one that gives DCs the slightest concern in the passing game. Hopefully Edwards can come back fully healthy after the bye. Without him this team will not go far against a quality opponent in the playoffs. This lack of depth was confirmed by the rumor that the 49ers tried to land Brandon Lloyd but he turned them down. Obviously Baalke and Harbaugh are aware of the problems at WR.

Although that is really just stating the obvious, very few teams go more than one game deep in the playoffs without good balance in offense.

So does the fact that Harbaugh and Baalke tried to get Matt Hasselback before the season mean we have problems at QB?

Originally posted by 80sbaby24:

Originally posted by dj43:
Sorry to jump in, but...the receiving corp is clearly the weak link. Injuries have put a microscope on the lack of quality depth on QR. When VD has to stay in to block, there is no one that gives DCs the slightest concern in the passing game. Hopefully Edwards can come back fully healthy after the bye. Without him this team will not go far against a quality opponent in the playoffs. This lack of depth was confirmed by the rumor that the 49ers tried to land Brandon Lloyd but he turned them down. Obviously Baalke and Harbaugh are aware of the problems at WR.

Although that is really just stating the obvious, very few teams go more than one game deep in the playoffs without good balance in offense.

So does the fact that Harbaugh and Baalke tried to get Matt Hasselback before the season mean we have problems at QB?

Matt Hasselback wasn't the only veteran QB they looked at. How does that compare to our WR situation?

Originally posted by ninertico:

Originally posted by NinerGM:
Sus - I respect you because you're consistent. You don't jump on and off the bandwagon when it's convenient. You have your beliefs and you hold true to them (unlike the OP). I may disagree with you but, I respect you for standing for what you believe in.

WHAT!!!!!!!

Sus? Respect? Don't do it! It's a trap!!!



Nah, I got my Bro's back, too.

Thanks Niner bros.

I just try to keep it real.

Originally posted by ninertico:

Originally posted by Otter:
We're only 6 games in to the season, that is a fairly small sample size. Historically teams that have that bend but don't break approach, meaning giving up lots of yards but keep the opponent out of the endzone, eventually break. I don't think we'll see a dramatic dropoff the rest of the regular season because we benefit from 5 games against the Rams, Cardinals, and Seahawks. But when it comes to the better teams in the playoffs, I would expect that if they can move the ball up and down the field, they will eventually push it in for the score.

Going in to the Detroit game the 49ers were one of the top, if not the top, teams in the league as far as redzone defense, allowing 4 TDs in 15 trips. They allowed Detroit to score two touchdowns. Detroit scored TDs on 50% of their red zone trips. Against the better offenses, I think our defensive red zone percentage goes up.

Overall the defense is #13 in terms of yards, but 24th in terms of passing yards. They struggle against the pass. If the rookie continues to improve and they generate a pass rush, that will likely go up, but our secondary is the weak link on this defense.

Detroit's success, our overall struggles against the pass, just seem to be bad omens to me for our future success. But again, 6 games is a small sample size and a lot can happen. Culliver may come on and prove to be an effective corner opposite Rogers. Goldson may finally learn to wrap up someone on the tackle.

But but but....


They are THE #1 red-zone defense.

So.... I'm just messin' with ya. I know what you are saying. But it is still a sample and meaningful one at that. I can't wait 'till we face NYG, Balti, and Pitt, teams with good if not very good QBs. We handled Stafford well, but got burned by Romo. Still, I believe that one Dallas game was a fluke, not the other way around.

We'll see Otter, but I still think that the arrow is pointing up on our Secondary, not down. But, it can be said that the secondary is the weak link in the D's armor.

Good in the Redzone is exactly what you want to be. I'm surprised we are this good. But it should do well for us.

If we get to the playoffs, anything can happen. Seattle last year weren't suppose win a playoff game. The Cards few years back surprise everyone in the playoffs to get to the SB. Get through the season, get into the playoffs. We have as good a chance as any team for the SB. Holes, weakness and all.