So does anyone know which type of offense we are going to run?

We should employ the Seattle Seahawk offense: QB runs around in circles, throws ball up in the air, receiver always comes down with it.

'Beep beep, who got the keys to the Geep' offense.

Originally posted by thl408:
'Beep beep, who got the keys to the Geep' offense.

The Jeep-Gun offense

I don't think the coaches know either. They said they were going to evaluate each player on an individual basis, then tailor the offense to the strength of the roster. My guess is that it will involve establishing the run first, then using playaction to get simpler reads downfield off of that. I think it was Tomsula who said that the coaches were not going to bring playbooks to their first meetings. Just look at the players first, then work together to determine what kind of offense best suits their abilities. Sounds great, but lots of ideas sound great at first. We'll just have to wait and see.

Originally posted by NCommand:
Obviously we can only speculate but even MM/MB have stated that they expect the same verbiage/system for the most part. According to NFLN, Chryst stood up last year and stated that we weren't using CK to his best abilities and that we were getting away from our ID (safe to say, that's something we ALL agreed on last year and something Jed just stated as well). Logan comes from a traditional WCO system (BW) where the QB's feet are tied to the WR routes and precision (exact location of passes) are practiced until perfection and automatic (snaps under center vs. CK in shotgun on every snap); it also places a large emphasis on getting the ball out under 3 seconds, utilizing RB's as primary receivers (Miller, Hyde/Bush/Hunter) as outlets and puts more responsibility on the QB if there is a blitz. Logan will be working with CK directly and drawing up the passing game plans each week while Foerster, the running game plans. Logan also likes mobile QB's and and likes to stretch the field (welcome, Torrey Smith!). Also, right off the bat, he seems like he'll be an excellent game planner (see, his assessment on how to beat Seattle). The other thing that will fit nicely into this more traditional WCO is the addition of Chris Foerster and Eric Wolford where we can expect a zone blocking scheme implemented (vs. power run). This fits the experience AND strengths of Hyde/Hunter/Bush and even CK on the read option and designed naked bootlegs off tackle. My impression is we'll finally attack the middle of the field more and utilize the full 53.3 yard width of the field as well as stretch it and keep the defense off balance. I think we'll still be a heavy run offense but just more balanced inside/outside and significantly better with a well-balanced complimentary passing game.

ALL of this. I always find it amusing when people assume that zone running can't be power running. It's not the Power Blocking Scheme, but it can be powerful. The Seahawks can be a pretty tough short yardage team, and they run a mess of zone plays. They do a great job of integrating the FB into their zone scheme and varying the schemes they use to cut off the back side. Even though I hate the dirty technique that Sweezy uses to cut block (and roll ) the backside, you can do so legally very effectively, and having fill blocks by the FB or using a wing to pull opposite to the zone flow works well, too (the 49ers did not cut often on zone plays in the last 4 years, but they used the other two schemes).

Not sure any of us know many specifics yet...a few things Chryst and both Matts have said is they expect he'll run a more wide-open offense. He'll use his TE's a lot, use his RB's in different ways (screens, out in the flat, etc.) and obviously will want to stretch the field now that they have Simpson and Torrey Smith. Expect to see Kap run more...kind of like he did in 2012. With the OL healthy again and Brandon Thomas the favorite to win the LG job, I'm expecting that group to rebound from a dismal 2014. Hunter's back healthy and with the addition of Reggie Bush, there'll be more speed out of the backfield. BL, is I think we'll see a lot more from the offense, in part because of the coaching changes, but also the players Baalke's added. His and Jed's off-season goal was to get younger, stronger and faster. So far, I'd say they've done a good job doing that.

With iupati gone and the style of Hyde, Hunter and Bush. I see our bread and butter being zone run, read option, play action.

Maybe all 3 in one play...

The air tumsula

Originally posted by Marvin49:
When Jed said "got away from our core strengths", the talking heads in the media assumed he meant pre-Harbaugh.

He didn't. He meant 2012.

Power running. Play action. Some Pistol. Deep routes with speed receiver to open space underneath. Amid all the BS in the media, Jed was RIGHT. Question him for his decision making all you want, but he was absolutely correct about the offense last year.

So go back to harbahgh and roman's 2012 offense? The one that was exposed?

Originally posted by WRATHman44:
ALL of this. I always find it amusing when people assume that zone running can't be power running. It's not the Power Blocking Scheme, but it can be powerful. The Seahawks can be a pretty tough short yardage team, and they run a mess of zone plays. They do a great job of integrating the FB into their zone scheme and varying the schemes they use to cut off the back side. Even though I hate the dirty technique that Sweezy uses to cut block (and roll ) the backside, you can do so legally very effectively, and having fill blocks by the FB or using a wing to pull opposite to the zone flow works well, too (the 49ers did not cut often on zone plays in the last 4 years, but they used the other two schemes).

Great points! When people assume a blocking scheme will limit the O one way or another they are thinking that it will be used 100% of the time and for a specific reason. I believe that zone can be effective in all areas and, just like the offenses timing should vary, so should the blocking schemes. Many large linemen like the bully, straight ahead blocking because it's to their advantage. But even those linemen should realize that using variations does nothing but help them...by confusing the D...as long as they are quick enough to use variations.

I'm hoping that the team's blocking will be assisted by use of dump offs and short routes to punish defenses for over playing. No matter the scheme, if they can't get the ball out quickly the offense will be limited. McKittrick was a wonderful coach but playcalling helped his lines tremendously.

All the jumping around by the D starting taking it's toll during the first loss to the Ravens...2011? In a zone scheme it wouldn't have been so effective. And I really hate seeing all the pointing. Some of it may be a disguise, but it seems to me needlessly distracting.

Originally posted by Young2Rice:
So go back to harbahgh and roman's 2012 offense? The one that was exposed?

The one that averaged over 30 points a game in the 2012 playoffs.

In 2012 we had VD and Moss. Guys with speed. With Moss gone, we only have VD in 2013 and 2014. Also VD was out of the line up part of 2013 and I think he was playing injured in 2014. Anytime VD was out, our offense tanked. He makes the passing offense go with his speed and physical presence. If he can come back 100% next year along with Torrey Smith's speed, I think the production of 2012 offense will return.

Originally posted by qnnhan7:
In 2012 we had VD and Moss. Guys with speed. With Moss gone, we only have VD in 2013 and 2014. Also VD was out of the line up part of 2013 and I think he was playing injured in 2014. Anytime VD was out, our offense tanked. He makes the passing offense go with his speed and physical presence. If he can come back 100% next year along with Torrey Smith's speed, I think the production of 2012 offense will return.

You know you have to assume geep will prepare and create a similar game plan to roman's in order to assume that we will do anything similar to what roman did in previous years.

I don't think much of anything will be the same. We won't have gore, we ran certain successful running plays with gore and iupati. Not saying we will be a failure or geeps schemes won't work but they will be different in terms of assignments and the types of plays we will run with hyde. The same goes for the passing game. The only thing that might look the same is kap running when a play breaks down.

Originally posted by thl408:
I don't think the coaches know either. They said they were going to evaluate each player on an individual basis, then tailor the offense to the strength of the roster. My guess is that it will involve establishing the run first, then using playaction to get simpler reads downfield off of that. I think it was Tomsula who said that the coaches were not going to bring playbooks to their first meetings. Just look at the players first, then work together to determine what kind of offense best suits their abilities. Sounds great, but lots of ideas sound great at first. We'll just have to wait and see.

Honestly that sounds like a terrible plan or lack of one. Coaches should have a clear cut vision of what they wonna run and get players to fit that vision. Of course you may have to do some tinkering based on personnel but at least have a vision.

Originally posted by susweel:

Originally posted by thl408:
I don't think the coaches know either. They said they were going to evaluate each player on an individual basis, then tailor the offense to the strength of the roster. My guess is that it will involve establishing the run first, then using playaction to get simpler reads downfield off of that. I think it was Tomsula who said that the coaches were not going to bring playbooks to their first meetings. Just look at the players first, then work together to determine what kind of offense best suits their abilities. Sounds great, but lots of ideas sound great at first. We'll just have to wait and see.

Honestly that sounds like a terrible plan or lack of one. Coaches should have a clear cut vision of what they wonna run and get players to fit that vision. Of course you may have to do some tinkering based on personnel but at least have a vision.

Nothing wrong with being flexible and confidence in their coaching ability to implement something that will fit their changing personnel.