"Scheme Fit" vs. Football Players

Originally posted by Oakland-Niner:

No. They drafted great football players. Earl Thomas, Bobby Wagner, Bennett, Sherman and Kam would be great regardless of scheme. You just drank the koolaid.

Earl was the best single high FS in the draft...wait for it, that's one of the most important roles in Pete's scheme.

They never drafted Bennett he was a UDFA and played in Tampa....and sucked. He was a great scheme fit for Pete.

Originally posted by Oakland-Niner:
NE is a poor example. Let's see how competitive they are without Tom and Billy. Those two are that elite. Also, drafting a player or two for certain situations is a lot different than trying to design the whole team that way.

No, they just aren't conducive to not so well-thought out argument. All great coaches and teams draft for scheme. If you don't have an idea of what you want to be, you will never get there. The best coaches had a vision, and then they went out and made it happen. Belichick, Walsh, Jimmy Johnson, Bill Cowher, Joe Gibbs, Mike Shanahan, all these guys knew what they wanted to be on offense and defense, knew the style of players they wanted, knew the schemes they wanted to run and they acquired players that they thought would be most successful in those schemes.

Smart coaches and GM's understand what they are trying to do, how they want to play and they go out and acquire players who they feel will best help bring that to fruition. Sometimes they are right, sometimes they are wrong, but at least they have a guiding, clear philosophy for what they want to be. s**tty coaches and GMs throwing spaghetti at the wall and hope for the best.

Originally posted by Heroism:

Originally posted by TheGore49er:

These guys were a good scheme fit

Glad we are in agreement that scheme fit is important.

The problem is our coaching staff has taken that to the extreme. They don't seem to care much about pass success. They only seem to be concerned that you check whatever physical boxes they are looking for. Good football players don't miss tackles like our guys do. They shouldn't be starting. Tacking is a mentality.

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

Originally posted by Oakland-Niner:

NE is a poor example. Let's see how competitive they are without Tom and Billy. Those two are that elite. Also, drafting a player or two for certain situations is a lot different than trying to design the whole team that way.

No, they just aren't conductive to not so well-thought out argument. All great coaches and teams draft for scheme. If you don't have an idea of what you want to be, you will never get there. The best coaches had a vision, and then they went out and made it happen. Belichick, Walsh, Jimmy Johnson, Bill Cowher, Joe Gibbs, Mike Shanahan, all these guys knew what they wanted to be on offense and defense, knew the style of players they wanted, knew the schemes they wanted to run and they acquired players that they thought would be most successful in those schemes.

Where do you come up with this stuff. What great Walsh Niner wouldn't of been good on other teams?

How anyone can be a Niner fan and complain about scheme fit is beyond me...what the hell do you think Bill Walsh did here?

Without question every single HC/GM look at what player fits what they want to do from a schematic standpoint.

Originally posted by Oakland-Niner:

Originally posted by Heroism:

Originally posted by TheGore49er:
These guys were a good scheme fit

Glad we are in agreement that scheme fit is important.

The problem is our coaching staff has taken that to the extreme. They don't seem to care much about pass success. They only seem to be concerned that you check whatever physical boxes they are looking for. Good football players don't miss tackles like our guys do. They shouldn't be starting. Tacking is a mentality.

just like posters here who take statements to extremes lol. i guess it has to beither all scheme or no scheme fit.

Originally posted by Oakland-Niner:
Where do you come up with this stuff. What great Walsh Niner wouldn't of been good on other teams?

Take Joe Montana and put him in a chuck and duck vertical passing offense, what kind of success do you think he has in an offense that asks him to throw it 25 yards downfield consistently instead of the quick firing, horizontal passing offense that Walsh put him in to help take advantage of his quick decision making?

How you use a player, the scheme that you put them in has a lot to do with how successful they are. How great did Steve Young look in Tampa before he came to the 49ers?

The point that you seem to be ignoring or not understanding is that your first and foremost concern is finding players who fit what you do. That doesn't mean that you're taking players short on talent. Joe Staley has shown he can play in pretty much any offense out there, he's still a great scheme fit for this offense. Richburg has had success in multiple offenses he's a great scheme fit. Foster and Buckner could probably play in numerous schemes, they are great scheme fits for what the 49ers want to do.

None of ur posts are a scheme fit for this thread

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by Oakland-Niner:

No. They drafted great football players. Earl Thomas, Bobby Wagner, Bennett, Sherman and Kam would be great regardless of scheme. You just drank the koolaid.

Earl was the best single high FS in the draft...wait for it, that's one of the most important roles in Pete's scheme.

They never drafted Bennett he was a UDFA and played in Tampa....and sucked. He was a great scheme fit for Pete.

Earl was a high draft pick that would of been great anywhere.

You can't scheme fit with non-talented guys. That's what we are trying to do and it's showing.

Originally posted by Oakland-Niner:
Earl was a high draft pick that would of been great anywhere.

And he happened to be a perfect scheme fit for what they were doing.

You can't scheme fit with non-talented guys. That's what we are trying to do and it's showing.

Its almost like this is a rebuilding roster that is far from complete.

Originally posted by Oakland-Niner:

No. They drafted great football players. Earl Thomas, Bobby Wagner, Bennett, Sherman and Kam would be great regardless of scheme. You just drank the koolaid.

Bobby Wagner- drafted 2nd round
Michael Bennett- drafted 6th round
Richard Sherman- drafted 5th round
Kam Chancellor- drafted 5th round

Only Earl Thomas was drafted in the first round. If all these players were so obvious great "football players" why weren't they drafted higher? Is it bc you are just using hindsight for how they turned out as a reason to complain?

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

Originally posted by Oakland-Niner:

Where do you come up with this stuff. What great Walsh Niner wouldn't of been good on other teams?

Take Joe Montana and put him in a chuck and duck vertical passing offense, what kind of success do you think he has in an offense that asks him to throw it 25 yards downfield consistently instead of the quick firing, horizontal passing offense that Walsh put him in to help take advantage of his quick decision making?

How you use a player, the scheme that you put them in has a lot to do with how successful they are. How great did Steve Young look in Tampa before he came to the 49ers?

Your kind of throwing out strawmen arguments. I didn't say scheme doesn't matter at all, but rather having good football players is first and foremost. We are just looking for fast and shifty players. That's pretty much it. Our FO thinks they can just throw anyone in there if they have the physical attributes.

Steve issue wasnt about scheme, he was just in a crappy situation. 49er where a dream spot, scheme or not.

All I know is that all you guys that love to argue and co-sign ever move the FO makes have literally been wrong at ever turn, going all the way back on how good Tomsula could be...

Literally all the know it all's have been wrong, but they are just like good attorneys. They can get a guilty man off, even if the truth is plain to see.

Keep defending our non-football playing roster. Our defense is a afraid to hit. That's not a scheme fit for anyone.

Originally posted by Oakland-Niner:

Earl was a high draft pick that would of been great anywhere.

You can't scheme fit with non-talented guys. That's what we are trying to do and it's showing.

So whats Bennett then? His skill set is that of a 4-3 DE not a 3-4 OLB that's called having a scheme fit.

Sherman wasn't some stud coming out of Stanford. He's skill set was ideal for the cover 3 scheme.

Earl was looked at as a ideal fit as a single high FS coming into the draft.

I get it you're upset that everyone they've brought in isn't a pro-bowler. Injuries and youth (both players, coaches, and FO) imo have lead to bumps in the road. They're not there yet, there's lots of work to do and I never expected it to magically be fixed heading into the 2nd yr.

Now with jimmy gone for the yr it stunts the team's growth even more...I also think they need a vet DC, Saleh is in over his head right now. A lot of undisciplined football being played and imo a lot of that falls on his shoes....all this gas no brakes BS has players flying around and not tackling properly.

Originally posted by Oakland-Niner:
Your kind of throwing out strawmen arguments. I didn't say scheme doesn't matter at all, but rather having good football players is first and foremost. We are just looking for fast and shifty players. That's pretty much it. Our FO thinks they can just throw anyone in there if they have the physical attributes.

Steve issue wasnt about scheme, he was just in a crappy situation. 49er where a dream spot, scheme or not.

Scheme matters, first and foremost. Talent matters for crap if guys can't do what you're asking them to do. There isn't a successful organization in the NFL that isn't first looking at who will fit in their system best. They can be great players in other systems too, but it matters most that they are fully capable of doing everything that you will ask them to do. When you try to take a square peg and insert them into a round hole, that is when busts happen.

You don't worry about how a player will perform in the other guy's offense or defense, you worry how they will do in yours. Beyond that, the rest is static.

On the other hand, there is the horizontal board. Teams in the Ron Wolf tree of scouting more typically use this, where draft prospects are graded and compared to players on that current roster. "We grade for our team," John Schneider explains, "we don't grade for the league. Our board basically represents that. We grade a guy based on whether we think he can compete with Bruce Irvin or Malcolm Smithor Bobby Wagner, and that's the way our board falls."
They want to select players that can compete with and hopefully beat out players at different positions on their roster. This makes draft day a little more hectic. It's a process that is grounded somewhere near BPA, but more flexible based on need and depth.