Our Defensive Coordinator, Vic Fangio

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by defenderDX:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by defenderDX:
Guess what? that's our scheme. Get over it.

Also, we did not have the personnel we needed. And it's shown the last couple weeks. Even more so against Manning.

Very weak argument. We were #2 coming into this game WITH THE PERSONNEL WE'VE BEEN USING ALL YEAR LONG against two 5-1 teams, KC, AZ, Chicago, etc. That's DAMN impressive. Last night had nothing to do with personnel. Get over it!

Yes it did. Late in the game we had 3 available corners to us. Which meant we had to play in our base defense MOST of the time. Mismatch. especially over the middle. Look at our last 3 games to begin. 2 games in a row now we've given up TD's on consecutive drives? or is it 3 games. Either way, we LOST players later in the game, which limited our packges.

Do agree about the odd lineups by Fangio though

Oh, gotcha...so we only had a healthy Brock, Cox and Johnson and that affected the scheme? Shoot, that's pretty darn good but truth, it could have meant different we had to run coverage where more ILB's were involved vs. an extra CB. So Borland would have to stay on. That's fair but how many of this personnel issue do you think lead to them attacking our LB's and scoring TD's late in the game?

all I know is Brock did not have to drop back passed the goal line giving up the record breaking TD. every down before that I saw other 49er corners not dropping that far. Was not a good game for Brock to return in in my opinion..

Originally posted by thl408:
The best way to beat Manning (any elite QB) is to get pressure with 4, which allows 7 to drop into coverage. Blitzing works if the CBs can hang in 1v1 man coverage against the WRs. The 49ers had neither the 4 man rush or the ability to go 1v1 man coverage. Game over.

that's basically what I've been saying this whole time about 4-man pressure. Perhaps I didn't articulate it well enough? We needed to pressure WITHOUT having to blitz. And we couldn't do it.

Originally posted by thl408:
The best way to beat Manning (any elite QB) is to get pressure with 4, which allows 7 to drop into coverage. Blitzing works if the CBs can hang in 1v1 man coverage against the WRs. The 49ers had neither the 4 man rush or the ability to go 1v1 man coverage. Game over.

I disagree. The teams that have beat Manning over the years (Chargers, Pats, Ravens, Hawks, etc.) played very physical with their WR's throwing off timing and allowed the rush to get there. Did the Hawks get there with just 4 men under 3 seconds this year? Nope!

Since we have never TRIED to play press here, I'm unwilling to say we can't match up. I'm actually willing to bet we'd play pretty well here and would probably get better and better. Throw in Fangio's off coverage schemes as well and I think you have something special here IMHO.

Originally posted by defenderDX:

Originally posted by thl408:
The best way to beat Manning (any elite QB) is to get pressure with 4, which allows 7 to drop into coverage. Blitzing works if the CBs can hang in 1v1 man coverage against the WRs. The 49ers had neither the 4 man rush or the ability to go 1v1 man coverage. Game over.

that's basically what I've been saying this whole time about 4-man pressure. Perhaps I didn't articulate it well enough? We needed to pressure WITHOUT having to blitz. And we couldn't do it.

Who can under 3 seconds? That's REALLY hard to do! We had good pressure around the 3.5+ second-mark esp. with Lynch which is great. This is where the secondary works in tandem with the pass rushers. This is where scheme can help. That's all. At one point in a 42-point blowout do you think, "You know, maybe this scheme isn't working for my guys?"

Originally posted by defenderDX:
And Fangio knows this. HENCE the off coverage. We needed a pass rush last night more than ever. Just a tough game. But we were as thin as we've ever been last night in the secondary. Limited our packages.

We needed a pass rush last night is right. He should have taken a page from the NY Giants and put the best pass rushers on the DLine, no matter what position they play. Unfortunately one of those didn't even get to dress up because of Fangio's stubbornness. Lynch, Justin Smith, Tank Carradine, Brooks going all out selling out on the pass rush. Maybe insert Carradine to put his long arms in Manning's face up the middle and Justin play a 4-3 defensive end. Nothing in the rule book says we have to play 3-4 all the time. We should have dared Manning to run the ball. At least the score would have been closer.

Originally posted by defenderDX:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by defenderDX:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by defenderDX:
Guess what? that's our scheme. Get over it.

Also, we did not have the personnel we needed. And it's shown the last couple weeks. Even more so against Manning.

Very weak argument. We were #2 coming into this game WITH THE PERSONNEL WE'VE BEEN USING ALL YEAR LONG against two 5-1 teams, KC, AZ, Chicago, etc. That's DAMN impressive. Last night had nothing to do with personnel. Get over it!

Yes it did. Late in the game we had 3 available corners to us. Which meant we had to play in our base defense MOST of the time. Mismatch. especially over the middle. Look at our last 3 games to begin. 2 games in a row now we've given up TD's on consecutive drives? or is it 3 games. Either way, we LOST players later in the game, which limited our packges.

Do agree about the odd lineups by Fangio though

Oh, gotcha...so we only had a healthy Brock, Cox and Johnson and that affected the scheme? Shoot, that's pretty darn good but truth, it could have meant different we had to run coverage where more ILB's were involved vs. an extra CB. So Borland would have to stay on. That's fair but how many of this personnel issue do you think lead to them attacking our LB's and scoring TD's late in the game?

all I know is Brock did not have to drop back passed the goal line giving up the record breaking TD. every down before that I saw other 49er corners not dropping that far. Was not a good game for Brock to return in in my opinion..

I know...I lost my sh!t on that one. I don't mind the off coverage schemes at all. Many are quite intricate. But in the RZ, everyone and their mother knows it's going to Thomas and 99% of the time to the near corner and thrown away from the defender where only he can get it. And what do we do? How do we play it?

Originally posted by defenderDX:

Originally posted by ninerfansinceday1:
If anybody on this forum thinks that not having #52, #29(even though I am not a huge fan of his) and #22 doesn't impact he way we run our defense, then you are wearing blinders. Anybody knows that part of the game is Chemistry....just look at #52 and #57 the first 2 games vs the last 4 together.....COMPLETELY different for the better.....now remove #52 from the game and that chemistry is back to sqare one with #50 and #57....same goes for the secondary....and this essentially was #26's first game of the year......

and that really f**ks zone coverage. when everyone has to be on the same page. especially pattern matching. my lord... thing is though, pass rush eliminates all that.

And pass rush is in the bay area watching the game, posting pics on Facebook waiting to be re-instated....

then they, the donkeys, were able to double team the only other viable option, the Cowboy, which rendered him useless....who is left???? Aaron Lynch, who in my opinion is doing a fine job, but he is still a rookie who has a lot to learn....

Originally posted by defenderDX:

Originally posted by jonesadrian:

Originally posted by defenderDX:

Originally posted by brodiebluebanaszak:
Nc you didnt feel there was a drop off in ilb play?

apparently not. borland plays with heart but he just looked undersized and was a total mismatch vs. run and pass

our linebackers didn't cost us the game last night though. it was not playing press coverage when that is obviously the solution when you play an offense that is completely dependent on timing.

we can say we're missing everyone in the world BUT
if you don't press the bronco's then they go and do what they want

you press them you beat them. that's been the case for a peyton manning led offense for 16 years now
that's the point.

it's like me telling you that you can stop bullets with this bullet proof vest and you say no that's ok I'll try something else.

We did play man coverage last night. Still got beat.

not press man.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by defenderDX:

Originally posted by thl408:
The best way to beat Manning (any elite QB) is to get pressure with 4, which allows 7 to drop into coverage. Blitzing works if the CBs can hang in 1v1 man coverage against the WRs. The 49ers had neither the 4 man rush or the ability to go 1v1 man coverage. Game over.

that's basically what I've been saying this whole time about 4-man pressure. Perhaps I didn't articulate it well enough? We needed to pressure WITHOUT having to blitz. And we couldn't do it.

Who can under 3 seconds? That's REALLY hard to do! We had good pressure around the 3.5 second-mark esp. with Lynch which is great. This is where the secondary works in tandem with the pass rushers. This is where scheme can help. That's all. At one point is a 42-point blowout do you think, "You know, maybe this scheme isn't working for my guys?"

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by defenderDX:

Originally posted by thl408:
The best way to beat Manning (any elite QB) is to get pressure with 4, which allows 7 to drop into coverage. Blitzing works if the CBs can hang in 1v1 man coverage against the WRs. The 49ers had neither the 4 man rush or the ability to go 1v1 man coverage. Game over.

that's basically what I've been saying this whole time about 4-man pressure. Perhaps I didn't articulate it well enough? We needed to pressure WITHOUT having to blitz. And we couldn't do it.

Who can under 3 seconds? That's REALLY hard to do! We had good pressure around the 3.5+ second-mark esp. with Lynch which is great. This is where the secondary works in tandem with the pass rushers. This is where scheme can help. That's all. At one point in a 42-point blowout do you think, "You know, maybe this scheme isn't working for my guys?"

Pressure not just getting to the quarterback. But making him uncomfortable. We did it all the time with Aldon Manning didn't have to move off his spot barely at all.

Originally posted by defenderDX:

Originally posted by thl408:
The best way to beat Manning (any elite QB) is to get pressure with 4, which allows 7 to drop into coverage. Blitzing works if the CBs can hang in 1v1 man coverage against the WRs. The 49ers had neither the 4 man rush or the ability to go 1v1 man coverage. Game over.

that's basically what I've been saying this whole time about 4-man pressure. Perhaps I didn't articulate it well enough? We needed to pressure WITHOUT having to blitz. And we couldn't do it.

I agree. I just don't think we had the depth or the personnel to get it done last night. sorry but Cox is not that great of a DB. a lot of his picks have come from some very bad passes. if you watch the tape he got burned in the dallas game & philly game badly & thank god the qb's couldn't capitalize.

Unfortunately we are missing too many key players to make the packages we want work

Originally posted by jonesadrian:
not press man.

yeah, good luck playing press vs. those receivers. we're not Seattle.

Originally posted by REB4:

Originally posted by defenderDX:
And Fangio knows this. HENCE the off coverage. We needed a pass rush last night more than ever. Just a tough game. But we were as thin as we've ever been last night in the secondary. Limited our packages.

We needed a pass rush last night is right. He should have taken a page from the NY Giants and put the best pass rushers on the DLine, no matter what position they play. Unfortunately one of those didn't even get to dress up because of Fangio's stubbornness. Lynch, Justin Smith, Tank Carradine, Brooks going all out selling out on the pass rush. Maybe insert Carradine to put his long arms in Manning's face up the middle and Justin play a 4-3 defensive end. Nothing in the rule book says we have to play 3-4 all the time. We should have dared Manning to run the ball. At least the score would have been closer.

Their RT was weak and they were talking about it during the game just as Lynch blew by him for a sack. One way of targeting this weakness is to overload pass rushers on that side. Attack this weakness. And to your point, using different personnel that would continue to exploit it. Denver was able to pin their ears back all day long and destroy Davis/Staley but they also brougth heat as well and disguised things...some great individual moves, etc. That's the most times I've seen CK on the ground (it seemed). They did some things to free those pass rushers up as great as they are individually.

Originally posted by defenderDX:

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by defenderDX:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by brodiebluebanaszak:

Originally posted by defenderDX:
apparently not. borland plays with heart but he just looked undersized and was a total mismatch vs. run and pass

Yeah. It impacted a lot. I think last td he got bowled.

And you think Willis makes that tackles with a wall of offense there? Borland lead the team with 8 tackles. The last full game Willis played, he too had 8 tackles. So no, not THAT big of a drop off. What hurt more than anything was that Wilhoite was forced into calling the defensive alignments. That said, I don't remember any blown assignments but we also don't know if we had to dumb down the alignments either.

How the f**k does losing Willis in replacement of Borland NOT that big of a drop off? you're laughable.

Willis made 8 tackles last game and Borland made 8 tackles this game. Therefore Borland more or less equals Willis.

Come on, NC. You can't use that logic to come to that conclusion.

Playing press man coverage is a bold statement. It says "our CBs are better than your WRs - physcially and technique wise". That is not that case when it's Cox/Cook/Brock versus DThomas/WWelker/ESanders. This whole notion of playing press equals a 49er victory is hogwash. Would it have given the 49ers a better chance? Who knows, but based on the matchups above, I doubt it. The 49er CBs are not better than the DEN WRs and it's not even close.

And Fangio knows this. HENCE the off coverage. We needed a pass rush last night more than ever. Just a tough game. But we were as thin as we've ever been last night in the secondary. Limited our packages.

so just sit back and take it then. that's the solution
clearly off coverage and our pattern matching offered no resistance in the 1st half...

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by defenderDX:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by brodiebluebanaszak:

Originally posted by defenderDX:
apparently not. borland plays with heart but he just looked undersized and was a total mismatch vs. run and pass

Yeah. It impacted a lot. I think last td he got bowled.

And you think Willis makes that tackles with a wall of offense there? Borland lead the team with 8 tackles. The last full game Willis played, he too had 8 tackles. So no, not THAT big of a drop off. What hurt more than anything was that Wilhoite was forced into calling the defensive alignments. That said, I don't remember any blown assignments but we also don't know if we had to dumb down the alignments either.

How the f**k does losing Willis in replacement of Borland NOT that big of a drop off? you're laughable.

Willis made 8 tackles last game and Borland made 8 tackles this game. Therefore Borland more or less equals Willis.

Come on, NC. You can't use that logic to come to that conclusion.

Playing press man coverage is a bold statement. It says "our CBs are better than your WRs - physcially and technique wise". That is not that case when it's Cox/Cook/Brock versus DThomas/WWelker/ESanders. This whole notion of playing press equals a 49er victory is hogwash. Would it have given the 49ers a better chance? Who knows, but based on the matchups above, I doubt it. The 49er CBs are not better than the DEN WRs and it's not even close.

No of course not thl! You know me better than that...I said production wise, it was similar and certainly not enough to warrant significance in such a lopsided loss. I even explained in a previous post that Willis does a lot of things that don't show up on stat sheet. The big one was that Wilhoite had to call the defensive alignments...this means, and it's an assumption, the alignment calls were dumbed down.

Press coverage doesn't necessarily mean we're better than you or that we'll stay in your hip pocket everywhere you go...it says, "You, mother$%^&, are not coming off this line free and clean and uncontested. You will have to earn every yard you get and I will throw you off your timing." That's all. The big one we needed to worry about physically, like all teams, is Thomas. And that would be a battle. The rest of the "speedy" guys, the last thing you want to do is give them free, clean releases. Ask Harvin how that's worked out in Seattle when teams suddenly challenge you physically and beat you up and don't give you clean releases.

I'm never said we'd win the game...I said mixing up the two style would certainly give us a fighting chance. Everyone knows the only way you beat Manning (or give yourself a chance) is to throw off the timing of routes. Period. I don't know too many pass rushes who can get their consistently under 3 seconds. Do you?

Not sure what you mean by the last line...better? The Giants back in the day were not better than our WR's but they challenged us physically and won.

When going 1v1 in man coverage it helps to have a great pass rush. I know you know this, just stating it so that I can make the next point. The longer a CB is forced to be 1v1 against a WR that is better than him, the more separation that WR will get. Please don't use the 'Giants back in the day' as an example and compare it to the 49er defense that was fielded yesterday. They had Lawrance Taylor wrecking havoc. Oh and they also played zone. It was about jamming the WRs to throw off the timing routes, while keeping their eyes on the QB (zone).

Originally posted by wailers15:

Originally posted by defenderDX:

Originally posted by thl408:
The best way to beat Manning (any elite QB) is to get pressure with 4, which allows 7 to drop into coverage. Blitzing works if the CBs can hang in 1v1 man coverage against the WRs. The 49ers had neither the 4 man rush or the ability to go 1v1 man coverage. Game over.

that's basically what I've been saying this whole time about 4-man pressure. Perhaps I didn't articulate it well enough? We needed to pressure WITHOUT having to blitz. And we couldn't do it.

I agree. I just don't think we had the depth or the personnel to get it done last night. sorry but Cox is not that great of a DB. a lot of his picks have come from some very bad passes. if you watch the tape he got burned in the dallas game & philly game badly & thank god the qb's couldn't capitalize.

Unfortunately we are missing too many key players to make the packages we want work

Which left Borland in a lot of spread out passing situations. not good... something an elite team like Denver will easily take advantage of.