Originally posted by dtg_9er:
NC...agree with your post. What I saw in the Bronco game is a team, niners, who couldn't figure out how to replace the coverage of the MLBs and the rush of the OLB who were missing. It's one thing to lose one great player, but losing three of your four all pro LBs...come on now folks, it just isn't reasonable to blame the back ups for not being the starters. If they had been able to make up for the loss of these players it would have taken a huge jump by the DBs...one of whom was returning for his first game after injury.
To use this game to label a player or coach is just sad! Throw this game out and look at the season as a whole...then draw conclusions if you must.
It was just a game plan, that's all. Fangio thought with the personnel we had for that game, we'd be better off with 8 in coverage (Brooks and ILB's dropping back a lot in zone) with only Aaron Lynch & Justin Smith rushing (you can't really count McDonald or Williams as a "rushers" here). We were forced into having Wilhoite call the defensive alignments b/c Willis was out. Overall, against the run, they played fairly well racking up 15 tackles. But naturally, the Broncos game plan very well and targeted the ILB's in coverage laterally and Brock, who was cold off an injury (b/c why would they target Cox?). But to be fair to Wilhoite, I don't think even Bowman or Willis would be able to keep up with Thomas across the field at full sprint on a clean release at the LOS. Maybe...just maybe, if someone jammed or bumped-and-released him to slow him down but he's a damn good player. We're not Seattle. They run a 4-3 with rotating fresh edge and inside pass rushers while playing real jam press (with good technique) at the LOS on the outside disrupting the timing of the Broncos play designs (adding more time for the rushers to get there). We are a 3-4 which relies on the discipline of the backend coverage to confuse the QB and force INT's and buy time for coverage sacks with the rushers who's main responsibility is to stop the run. In short, our defensive philosophy is the perfect storm for success for Manning and the type of offense they run and I'm not fully convinced even Aldon would have made that much of a difference in this game. It would be closer with a healthy Bowman, Willis in coverage as well as Brock, Ward, Culliver, etc. Fangio also made some curious personnel moves an choices.
But, IMHO, this is just one team our defensive philosophy doesn't match up well against at all. Manning was damn near perfect (22 of 26 with 3 dropped passes) sitting back there watching his 3 receivers run free and clean and win against 8 defenders, often times open several times at different points of their routes. They set us up well for one TD, went for the throat after the INT (no secret there), used the short passing game to control the game AND tempo/speed, scored inside the RZ and that lead to a worn out defense that started to give up chunks and big TD runs in the 4Q.
It was textbook old-school 49er offensive football. And getting up 21 early allowed the defense to continue to play man, physical, jump routes and bring the pass rush all night long. Tough night for all and hopefully Fangio and the players learn a ton from it.
On offense, well, the only real TD we scored was against a prevent defense late in the first half. They still have a lot to work on even with all those weapons. I know some may chalk this up to
just personnel/injuries and that we're fine but to me, we still have a lot of issues esp. on offense.
[ Edited by NCommand on Oct 22, 2014 at 11:19 AM ]
