The Demise of our Pass Defense in the Play-Offs

It was Fangio's fault.... slow to react, slow to switch up looks, people know exactly what they're gonna get and gameplan accordingly.


People tend to forget because they chalk it up to a loud home stadium, but the blowout loss in Seattle was directly on Fangio. Seattle used a series of pick plays on offense to get their receivers to run free. It was literally the only passing plays they had the entire game. but it didnt matter, because it worked. Any zone, at any time during those plays, probably leads to a pick.

Lord Fangio? he BLOWS! He gets by with superior players.

Originally posted by JoeCos:
A one healthy arm Justin Smith is the reason. Not enough pressure to the QB. Same with sore shoulder Aldon Smith.

A little more than a sore shoulder I would say. Aldon Smith had surgery to repair a torn labrum after the season.

they should have used our two all pro linebackers in pass rush rather than to have them setting around playing f**king checkers in run coverage,,, what the hell good is it to have two all pros if you are not going to use them??? it was the most important game of the year and if they knew justin and aldon could not be effective then unleash your two pro bowlers,,, that was terrible coaching

yeah, I forgot about that. that was ugly.

It's simple, Justin smith. As soon as he tore his triceps in the pats game everything went down hill for our d and especially the secondary. We must find players coaches are comfortable subbing in for smith and McDonald to give them breathers.

We'll soon all find out in a few weeks. Need big, strong, physical players on defense that can go after the ball and provide depth and quality.

Originally posted by TheRatMan13:
This. Culliver was beat up in the Super Bowl. Goldson let Jones rip an interception out of his hands in Atlanta. Jones also beat Brown for a few scores.

Our whole secondary was manhandled by big/strong receivers.

Not sure this is true.

Originally posted by robniner:
This is why we need big corners and safeties in the secondary; at least they'll be able to handle the big/strong receivers. Undersized players are good when they can take the ball out of the receiver's hand, but when the tall receivers catches the ball, they get burned for a very big play.

I think we need to worry about our corners and safeties being able to handle good receivers. Quality not size is key.

Here are the wide receivers that led their team in receiving against us in 2012 in both the regular season and the play-offs.

I organized the list by yardage gained.

Brando Lloyd 6-0 200 10 for 190
J. Jones 6-3 220 11 for 182
M. Floyd 6-3 225 8 for 166
A. Boldin 6-1 220 6 for 104
R. White 6-0 211 7 for 100
D. Amendola 5-11 188 11 for 101
Calvin Johnson 6-5 236 8 for 94
Givens 6-0 190 11 for 92
Percy Harvin 5-11 9 for 89
James Jones 6-1 208 4 for 87
James Jones 6-1 208 4 for 81 (played against us 2x)
D. Hixon 6-2 197 4 for 78
Randle Cobb 5-10 192 9 for 77
Andre Roberts 5-11 195 7 for 65
Victor Cruz 6-0 204 6 for 58
G. Jennings 5-11 198 6 for 54
Doug Baldwin 5-10 189 4 for 53
Ben Obomanu 6-1 204 3 for 50
Chaz Schilens 6-4 225 3 for 45
Sidney Rice 6-4 202 2 for 32
Steve Johnson 6-2 207 6 for 39
Devin Hester 5-11 190 3 for 23
B. Marshall 6-4 230 2 for 21

edit: just noticed there are two big receivers in the top 5, and 3 of them in the bottom five.

It's NOT complicated.

Justin was the cog in the wheel for the pass rush and pressure.

Less pressure means MORE time for the opposing QB to find targets.

More time to throw menas more completions.

Not complicated.

Originally posted by LasVegasWally:
It's NOT complicated.

Justin was the cog in the wheel for the pass rush and pressure.

Less pressure means MORE time for the opposing QB to find targets.

More time to throw menas more completions.

Not complicated.

Not so simple.

Justin Smith (and Aldon Smith) were injured in both the Atlanta and the Baltimore game.

They did not recover from their injuries in the second half of those games.

The pass defense was terrible in the first half of each of those games, and much better in the second half.

If anything it seems that injuries to Justin and Aldon would have hurt their play as the game wore on, if the demise was simply the result of those injuries, the pass defense would not have improved in the second half of those games.

Originally posted by Beeker:
Here's what happened:

Justin Smith was injured.
Aldon Smith was injured.

Depth is needed.

There is some truth here but it's only one side of the coin. The other side of the coin is that b/c our secondary could not cover, esp. in the playoffs, the pass rush couldn't get there and get those "coverage sacks." There are a TON of reasons why our secondary failed and some had nothing to do with the pass rush:

• Fangio (Scheme) - IMHO, d/t poor personnel at the S positions, (range, speed, lack of over-the-top help esp. along the sidelines, short, mismatches, IQ, etc.) Fangio played the odds and started our S's, sometimes as deep as 30 yards to "keep everything in front of them and avoid the big plays." Picture Culliver in the Superbowl and then ask yourself, was there a S even in the general vicinity? Nope! Fangio has the best LBers in the NFL but used 3 of them in coverage a TON. Ever wonder why? The big concern I have with his scheme is the same as it's always been...playing his CB's a mile off on 3rd downs (even 3rd and shorts). The worst is when he dials up a blitz but then plays his CB's a mile off giving the QB an easy pitch-n-catch (an easy hot read). It drives me NUTS!!!! He's very VaNolan-like in this aspect and there was no reason to play this way when you have a more dynamic offense.
• Whitner - gave up 14 TD's alone...worst in the NFL. He's short, slow and was abused ALL YEAR consistently in the RZ by TE's, RB's and slot WR's. He was also consistently poor in this area last year and this is WITH help underneath by Willis/Bowman (another concern of mine).
• Goldson - was he EVER matched up on a TE in the RZ/EZ? Had he EVER knocked down a pass along the sidelines on over-the-top coverage? Missed tackles, poor angles, personal foul penalties, blown coverages, beat on double moves even after starting 20 yards deep, etc. Good physical talent, timing on hits, intimidator but didn't have the speed or range needed to help out our CB's. Not the smartest guy either. If you were Fangio, you can't blitz your LB's (play them more down hill) b/c of the poor S play.
• Brown/Rogers - not the most physical of CB's to say the least (the anti-Seattle). But what concerned me most is that their technique became complacent/weak as the year went on. In fact, Rogers got almost ALL of his INT's the previous year by breaking off coverage and under-cutting (disguised) routes. He didn't do that ONE time last year. Huge drop off across the board on INT's and pass breakups (I believe). Very vanilla. In fact, their entire mindset changed. I can hardly remember either playing a ball in the air. It's almost like they were coached to play the ball once the WR's body language demonstrated the ball arriving vs. keeping the WR at bay AND playing the QB/ball at the same time. As a result of a different "focus" INT's went way down. Rogers struggles in the slot now too (age/motivation). To me, he half-assesd it all year and Baalke took notice...welcome Nnamdi! We are susceptible to WR's like Amendola who can be moved all over the field. That demonstrates a vanilla scheme and poor personnel/adjustments. Both CB's are short and always lose the jump-ball plays and are easily out-muscled.
• Culliver - again, physically talented, physical and a intimidator but not the sharpest tool in the shed. We weren't beat by better QB's...we were beat by teams with much bigger, taller, stronger, more physical WR's. Culliver has the pedigree Baalke is now looking for but does he have the brains to take it to the next (starting) level?

Originally posted by FredFlintstone:
It's simple, Justin smith. As soon as he tore his triceps in the pats game everything went down hill for our d and especially the secondary. We must find players coaches are comfortable subbing in for smith and McDonald to give them breathers.

if your theory is true and i think it is,, it is kind of scary to think we are so dependent on one player. i am sure they are taking steps to correct that for the coming year and beyond when there is no more justin smith

Originally posted by NCommand:
There is some truth here but it's only one side of the coin. The other side of the coin is that b/c our secondary could not cover, esp. in the playoffs, the pass rush couldn't get there and get those "coverage sacks." There are a TON of reasons why our secondary failed and some had nothing to do with the pass rush:

• Fangio (Scheme) - IMHO, d/t poor personnel at the S positions, (range, speed, lack of over-the-top help esp. along the sidelines, short, mismatches, IQ, etc.) Fangio played the odds and started our S's, sometimes as deep as 30 yards to "keep everything in front of them and avoid the big plays." Picture Culliver in the Superbowl and then ask yourself, was there a S even in the general vicinity? Nope! Fangio has the best LBers in the NFL but used 3 of them in coverage a TON. Ever wonder why? The big concern I have with his scheme is the same as it's always been...playing his CB's a mile off on 3rd downs (even 3rd and shorts). The worst is when he dials up a blitz but then plays his CB's a mile off giving the QB an easy pitch-n-catch (an easy hot read). It drives me NUTS!!!! He's very VaNolan-like in this aspect and there was no reason to play this way when you have a more dynamic offense.
• Whitner - gave up 14 TD's alone...worst in the NFL. He's short, slow and was abused ALL YEAR consistently in the RZ by TE's, RB's and slot WR's. He was also consistently poor in this area last year and this is WITH help underneath by Willis/Bowman (another concern of mine).
• Goldson - was he EVER matched up on a TE in the RZ/EZ? Had he EVER knocked down a pass along the sidelines on over-the-top coverage? Missed tackles, poor angles, personal foul penalties, blown coverages, beat on double moves even after starting 20 yards deep, etc. Good physical talent, timing on hits, intimidator but didn't have the speed or range needed to help out our CB's. Not the smartest guy either. If you were Fangio, you can't blitz your LB's (play them more down hill) b/c of the poor S play.
• Brown/Rogers - not the most physical of CB's to say the least (the anti-Seattle). But what concerned me most is that their technique became complacent/weak as the year went on. In fact, Rogers got almost ALL of his INT's the previous year by breaking off coverage and under-cutting (disguised) routes. He didn't do that ONE time last year. Huge drop off across the board on INT's and pass breakups (I believe). Very vanilla. In fact, their entire mindset changed. I can hardly remember either playing a ball in the air. It's almost like they were coached to play the ball once the WR's body language demonstrated the ball arriving vs. keeping the WR at bay AND playing the QB/ball at the same time. As a result of a different "focus" INT's went way down. Rogers struggles in the slot now too (age/motivation). To me, he half-assesd it all year and Baalke took notice...welcome Nnamdi! We are susceptible to WR's like Amendola who can be moved all over the field. That demonstrates a vanilla scheme and poor personnel/adjustments. Both CB's are short and always lose the jump-ball plays and are easily out-muscled.
• Culliver - again, physically talented, physical and a intimidator but not the sharpest tool in the shed. We weren't beat by better QB's...we were beat by teams with much bigger, taller, stronger, more physical WR's. Culliver has the pedigree Baalke is now looking for but does he have the brains to take it to the next (starting) level?

NC said nothing wrong esp about the mis use of our all pro linebackers

Command, have to admit there was plenty there i saw, but never processed. Jeez , no wonder Ravens picked us apart. Thanks for a really nice breakdown of a season of extremely substandard CB and S play, with a big vote going to fangio who either needs to get his head out, or get a good verbal lashing by JH, or needs to move on. I would like to see him stay, but his vanilla and lack luster play calling has to change for us to get better. I know we draft BPA and then for need, but CB, S and DL have to be the picks early. We actually could get #20, #25 and #61 by bundling and 3 comp picks(there are many other bundles out there, some way better than mine), but this bundle would mean Tavon would be in the mix....would trent and JH do that? I guess you could make the case with tavon that we have 3 top notch WRs and then just go out and outscore everybody. Unfortunately it doesn't always work that way...you gotta have the D. Our DL got worn out last yr, and if we draft 2 or 3 more DLs, i wouldn't be surprised. But we gotta have that CB and S who can not only cover, but they break up passes...unlike the jumpballs on the sideline that anquan and his 2 buddies killed us with. Actually there was good coverage on most of those, but that was it. CBs nor Ss didn't break up the pass....they just had the WRs covered.

Originally posted by buck:

Originally posted by blm7754:
I think the difference in halfs is due to the fact that we have great coaches and smart veteran players than can make adjustments to what the opponent is doing. I think we play smarter in the second half, not necessarily better.

Not sure, I understand the distinction that you are making.

I agree good adjustments were made. The results were better in the second half of those two games.

If we played smarter and the results were better, how does playing smarter not equal playing better.

What is the difference between playing smarter and playing better.

By playing better, I mean winning individual one-on-one matchups. We schemed better in the second half of those games to eliminate mistakes like allowing Roddy White to run free down the field. But individuals didn't improve in their one-on-one match-ups. Defensive linemen still failed to get pressure on the QB. Chris Culliver was still loosing jump balls to Boldin. But we eliminated mistakes and called better plays. Which resulted in better results.

Originally posted by Big_Daddy:
It was Fangio's fault.... slow to react, slow to switch up looks, people know exactly what they're gonna get and gameplan accordingly.


People tend to forget because they chalk it up to a loud home stadium, but the blowout loss in Seattle was directly on Fangio. Seattle used a series of pick plays on offense to get their receivers to run free. It was literally the only passing plays they had the entire game. but it didnt matter, because it worked. Any zone, at any time during those plays, probably leads to a pick.

Lord Fangio? he BLOWS! He gets by with superior players.

Intresting. Something to think about.