Which current 49ers fit in a 4-3 defense, which don't, and what will it look like

Originally posted by communist:
http://www.49erswebzone.com/commentary/1657-long-look-what-expect-under-49ers-fit-scheme/

Didn't Baalke described AA as a prototypical 4tech?

Take everything Baalke has ever said with a grain of salt.

Originally posted by jcs:

Originally posted by communist:
http://www.49erswebzone.com/commentary/1657-long-look-what-expect-under-49ers-fit-scheme/

Didn't Baalke described AA as a prototypical 4tech?

Take everything Baalke has ever said with a grain of salt.

Yeah because Baalke drafted on defensive side of the ball so bad...

Originally posted by communist:

Originally posted by jcs:

Originally posted by communist:
http://www.49erswebzone.com/commentary/1657-long-look-what-expect-under-49ers-fit-scheme/

Didn't Baalke described AA as a prototypical 4tech?

Take everything Baalke has ever said with a grain of salt.

Yeah because Baalke drafted on defensive side of the ball so bad...

What concerns me with AA in a 4 technique or a 6 for that matter is how he seems to play with tunnel vision. Well, during his rookie year, plays developed around him and seemed to lose track making it look like he was slow to react. His play reminded me a lot of sopoaga and how soap played. If AA beat his guy from the start he was great. AA's issues, jmo, are when he has to disengage and make a play.

Another JMO, jones and Defo are the best lineman on this roster at disengaging and making a play.

Originally posted by communist:
Yeah because Baalke drafted on defensive side of the ball so bad...

32nd ranked Defense helps your defense....How about worst 49er defense in the history of the franchise.

Originally posted by Draftology:

Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:

Originally posted by Draftology:
My only concern is with Armstead. I just don't see having both him and Buckner on the field in a 4-3. I think we're going to add another edge rusher and Armstead becomes a rotational/situational player.

That would mean that he's a bust. You don't draft 1st round rotational guys. But going into his 3rd season (on season full of injury) it's still too early to label him a bust, or relegate him to rotational status. Now, I think we should bring in other guys to compete. But Armstead should be given every opportunity to prove his draft status. IMHO.

It's not saying he's a bust...it's just saying Buckner is better and our defensive scheme may only call for one player with their skill set being on the field at a time. We shouldn't play him out of position because "he has to prove his draft status". We should put the best combination of 11 guys out there and it may not include Armstead most of the time.

Then my point stands. If he's not one of those best 11 players - a starter - who's on the field for most of the snaps then he's a bust. What you are describing, IMHO, is a rotational player. And I contend that a 1st rounder is a rotational player then he's a bust. Now, do I think that about Armstead? NO!!! It's too early to say that.

Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:

Originally posted by Draftology:

Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:

Originally posted by Draftology:
My only concern is with Armstead. I just don't see having both him and Buckner on the field in a 4-3. I think we're going to add another edge rusher and Armstead becomes a rotational/situational player.

That would mean that he's a bust. You don't draft 1st round rotational guys. But going into his 3rd season (on season full of injury) it's still too early to label him a bust, or relegate him to rotational status. Now, I think we should bring in other guys to compete. But Armstead should be given every opportunity to prove his draft status. IMHO.

It's not saying he's a bust...it's just saying Buckner is better and our defensive scheme may only call for one player with their skill set being on the field at a time. We shouldn't play him out of position because "he has to prove his draft status". We should put the best combination of 11 guys out there and it may not include Armstead most of the time.

Then my point stands. If he's not one of those best 11 players - a starter - who's on the field for most of the snaps then he's a bust. What you are describing, IMHO, is a rotational player. And I contend that a 1st rounder is a rotational player then he's a bust. Now, do I think that about Armstead? NO!!! It's too early to say that.

I think it is pretty ridiculous to call a second year player who still managed to decently hold down a starting job while injured most of the year a bust. He is clearly talented and is physically a beast. I realized we are a lot of abused children around here and prone to think the worst, but I simply do not get the constant push in these threads to throw away what little talent this roster has.

Originally posted by Niner4ever:
Very nice!

"Notes: In the draft, since Garrett is gone and ShanaLynch aren't sold on Trubisky, we go with a minor trade-back with the Jets and stay inside the top 6 and pick up an extra 2nd this year (40th), next year's 2nd and more (1,000 points). I cover the top 5 picks. In free agency, since we won't be paying for a FQB this year, ShanaLynch make a couple larger splashes in free agency (Bouye/Britt/Williams/Hawley) and add a number of second-tier free agent starters and resign several of our own who fit the Seattle defense and WCO well. 7 of the 18 are resigns. 4 are larger (over $6M) contracts (Bouye/Britt/Williams/Hawley) but nothing remotely back-breaking. The other 7 signings are upper second (starters) or third tier (depth) contracts"

Williams DT and Ingram DE and we couldn't ask for more out of free agency...Total success!

Thanks! Yeah, we could go that route instead as well...go Ingram but we'd have to replace either Williams, Britt, Williams or Hawley (or two of them). I went with Taco since he'd be cheap for 4-5 years and if he's the quality ER we expect, he can hit the ground running as a LEO in this 4-3 (one primary role - pin your ears back). Ingram is going to command a truck load of money b/c of the bidding war and the standard price tags on edge rushers now (i.e. Olivia Vernon got 5 years $85M). But I certainly wouldn't complain about it!

If we do switch to a 4-3, could Jonathon Allen be in play in the draft?

Originally posted by PhillyNiner:

Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:

Originally posted by Draftology:

Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:

Originally posted by Draftology:
My only concern is with Armstead. I just don't see having both him and Buckner on the field in a 4-3. I think we're going to add another edge rusher and Armstead becomes a rotational/situational player.

That would mean that he's a bust. You don't draft 1st round rotational guys. But going into his 3rd season (on season full of injury) it's still too early to label him a bust, or relegate him to rotational status. Now, I think we should bring in other guys to compete. But Armstead should be given every opportunity to prove his draft status. IMHO.

It's not saying he's a bust...it's just saying Buckner is better and our defensive scheme may only call for one player with their skill set being on the field at a time. We shouldn't play him out of position because "he has to prove his draft status". We should put the best combination of 11 guys out there and it may not include Armstead most of the time.

Then my point stands. If he's not one of those best 11 players - a starter - who's on the field for most of the snaps then he's a bust. What you are describing, IMHO, is a rotational player. And I contend that a 1st rounder is a rotational player then he's a bust. Now, do I think that about Armstead? NO!!! It's too early to say that.

I think it is pretty ridiculous to call a second year player who still managed to decently hold down a starting job while injured most of the year a bust. He is clearly talented and is physically a beast. I realized we are a lot of abused children around here and prone to think the worst, but I simply do not get the constant push in these threads to throw away what little talent this roster has.

Only reason Arik held down a starting job is because the cupboard was bare. 49ers picked up Chris Jones off the street and he started. lol

Originally posted by PacTiger:
What concerns me with AA in a 4 technique or a 6 for that matter is how he seems to play with tunnel vision. Well, during his rookie year, plays developed around him and seemed to lose track making it look like he was slow to react. His play reminded me a lot of sopoaga and how soap played. If AA beat his guy from the start he was great. AA's issues, jmo, are when he has to disengage and make a play.

Another JMO, jones and Defo are the best lineman on this roster at disengaging and making a play.

I think you guys are greatly underestimating what O'Neil was calling here/assignments of the DL. He essentially was having his DL one-gap and pass rush (pick a gap) on virtually every play (see Buckner's sacks, QB hits, pressures, knock downs, etc.) and asking the ILB's to read and fill the holes (once Bowman and Ray-Ray went down and Lynch took 5 weeks to get back, it was over, being stuck with Wilhoite/Bellore for much of the year to fill those holes). So much of it depends on the assignment and O'Neil was allergic to discipline. Keep in mind that "attack" is what ShanaLynch want to do here as well...but this time we'll have a plugger in the middle and adding a 4th DL. In short, it should be worlds more appropriate in stopping the run IF they can get their NT/1T Brandon Williams/Dontari Poe. It will also allow for more QB rushes.

Pass rushing is great and all but in O'Neil's scheme, it was actually counter-productive (over-pursue, no gap integrity, poor LB's behind the DL, aggressive blitz scheme, no true edge rushers, etc.).

Let's see a healthy AA in, what we hope, is a much more disciplined 4-3 defense with timely pass rushing assignments.

Originally posted by SoCold:
Only reason Arik held down a starting job is because the cupboard was bare. 49ers picked up Chris Jones off the street and he started. lol

LOL...for the very same reason (cupboard was bare after AA went on I.R).

Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:

Then my point stands. If he's not one of those best 11 players - a starter - who's on the field for most of the snaps then he's a bust. What you are describing, IMHO, is a rotational player. And I contend that a 1st rounder is a rotational player then he's a bust. Now, do I think that about Armstead? NO!!! It's too early to say that.

Read the rest of my post. If the defense only needs one player with that skillset on the field at one time, and Buckner is better, then Buckner should play. That's like saying Tevin Coleman sucks because he's not better than Devonta Freeman.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by SoCold:
Only reason Arik held down a starting job is because the cupboard was bare. 49ers picked up Chris Jones off the street and he started. lol

LOL...for the very same reason (cupboard was bare after AA went on I.R).

what? There was no one on the roster to push Arik for his starting spot. He was going to play even if injured, plus Trent had to prove he wasn't a bad pick. Arik managed all of 15 tackles in 8 games. Jones had 23 tackles in 6.

Ronald Blair had the same production in spot duty than hurt Arik had.
Arik 15 tackles 2.5 scaks
Blair 16 tackles 3 sacks

Now I know he was hurt but IMO I think Arik plays too high and gets dominated by tackles. Once his first power move fails he gets pushed around pretty easy by the tackle gaining leverage.

He's going to need to be 100% and get coached up on better technique if he's going to be a factor.

Originally posted by SoCold:

Originally posted by PhillyNiner:

Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:

Originally posted by Draftology:

Originally posted by 9ersLiferInChicago:

Originally posted by Draftology:
My only concern is with Armstead. I just don't see having both him and Buckner on the field in a 4-3. I think we're going to add another edge rusher and Armstead becomes a rotational/situational player.

That would mean that he's a bust. You don't draft 1st round rotational guys. But going into his 3rd season (on season full of injury) it's still too early to label him a bust, or relegate him to rotational status. Now, I think we should bring in other guys to compete. But Armstead should be given every opportunity to prove his draft status. IMHO.

It's not saying he's a bust...it's just saying Buckner is better and our defensive scheme may only call for one player with their skill set being on the field at a time. We shouldn't play him out of position because "he has to prove his draft status". We should put the best combination of 11 guys out there and it may not include Armstead most of the time.

Then my point stands. If he's not one of those best 11 players - a starter - who's on the field for most of the snaps then he's a bust. What you are describing, IMHO, is a rotational player. And I contend that a 1st rounder is a rotational player then he's a bust. Now, do I think that about Armstead? NO!!! It's too early to say that.

I think it is pretty ridiculous to call a second year player who still managed to decently hold down a starting job while injured most of the year a bust. He is clearly talented and is physically a beast. I realized we are a lot of abused children around here and prone to think the worst, but I simply do not get the constant push in these threads to throw away what little talent this roster has.

Only reason Arik held down a starting job is because the cupboard was bare. 49ers picked up Chris Jones off the street and he started. lol

He was still playing with one arm for a lot longer than when we broke down and signed somebody though... He has flashed plenty of quality with no consistency, a bad arm and being a rough prospect contribute a lot to that, not everyone pans out right from the get go. I will concede I would be more interested in him as a potential DT the end in this scheme though. Still I wouldn't say I would be shocked if he were to surprise people and have the light come on this year.

Originally posted by SoCold:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by SoCold:
Only reason Arik held down a starting job is because the cupboard was bare. 49ers picked up Chris Jones off the street and he started. lol

LOL...for the very same reason (cupboard was bare after AA went on I.R).

what? There was no one on the roster to push Arik for his starting spot. He was going to play even if injured, plus Trent had to prove he wasn't a bad pick. Arik managed all of 15 tackles in 8 games. Jones had 23 tackles in 6.

Ronald Blair had the same production in spot duty than hurt Arik had.
Arik 15 tackles 2.5 scaks
Blair 16 tackles 3 sacks

Now I know he was hurt but IMO I think Arik plays too high and gets dominated by tackles. Once his first power move fails he gets pushed around pretty easy by the tackle gaining leverage.

He's going to need to be 100% and get coached up on better technique if he's going to be a factor.

I can agree with this...his pad level is a tragedy, but that is bad coaching...it is really fixable. Not playing with leverage with a bad wing is going to get you keel hauled every time. I have zero faith in last years coaching knowing how to help him though.