| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
big9erfan
Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 10670
|
 Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 3:28 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
|
| SoCalNiner wrote: | | big9erfan wrote: | | SoCalNiner wrote: | | Personally I like going for the jugular, and taking calculated risks. Playing at a high level where errors won't cost us. . |
I like going for the jugular and taking calculated risks too. One of the things I hate most about our team - and I fear this goes back to Jim, not just to Roman, is that it always seems we play "not to lose" rather than to win. I would prefer us to throw more deep passes. I would prefer us to not sit on the ball when we have a lead. I would prefer us to use more multiple receiver sets and fewer "jumbo" packages. But I don't want to see our QB try to thread the ball into a very tight window a long way downfield, or drop back over 20 yards into our own endzone trying to make something out of nothing. It just comes down to the results of the calculation in that "calculated risk" you are talking about. Simple fact of football - the team with the fewest turnovers is highly likely to win. I'm sure that is very much more highly correlated to winning than the QB who throws for the most yards in a game is.
Like a lot of things in life there's a continuum and perhaps you and I just draw the line in different places on that continuum. |
Well, that's everything I want in our game too. When it comes to our QB throwing into a tight window a long way, I don't mind it, if it's one on one and our guy has the advantage. However, I wouldn't want our guy throwing into triple coverage down field. Looks like we have similarities in what we want in an offensive attack. You just appreciate the aspect of no errors more than I do, and that's fine. Working in marketing all my life, it's been beaten in my head to take risks, and if you screw up you better be able to fix it. We don't get awards for not making mistakes, but get rewarded is a risk pays off, so it's just how I think. |
OK then. Happy middle ground for us. By the way by "tight window" I didn't mean tight coverage, I meant squeezing it between a couple of defenders and counting on your arm strength and accuracy to thread it in there. Looks impressive when it works, and might even be worth the risk depending on down and distance, or the game score and time remaining - just not a thing I'd like to see in general. Take the check down or throw it away, and do better on the next play.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
big9erfan
Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 10670
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 3:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| SoCalNiner wrote: | | Ataal wrote: | | Agreed, but that makes me wonder why were fairly ineffective against the Rams. I know their defense has improved dramatically, but man....we should be able to gash defenses with a multiple threat quarterback and Gore in the equation. However, they pretty much did what we did all last year. Stop the run and make you one-dimensional. Not sure what happened to our run game. We run some of the best run plays in the league, but the Rams had our number nearly every time. Even with a strong arm, play extension ability, and a good RB, if you're forced to pass nearly every down, you're still going to get shut down. |
I think you're underestimating their defense too much. A Fisher defense is much better than a Spags defense. Fisher has been a master a creating amazing defensive fronts, and the fact that his was set for him upon arrival made it much more easier for him. This Rams defensive unit is no joke. |
Seriously. The Rams had great game plans and great execution in both of their games against us. I'd say they figured out what to do against us much better than we figured out what to do against them.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
big9erfan
Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 10670
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 3:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| steadypimpin wrote: | | I think we see a good game from Kaep on Sunday. He made his mistakes and will learn from them. |
Kap is young enough and still growing in his game so that I think this is certainly true.
| steadypimpin wrote: | | The coaches learned from their mistakes too I'm sure we'll see that by the play selection on Sunday. |
On the other hand we've seen this offense for the better part of two season. I fear not too much will change. Sure they might not call a read option pitch deep in their own territory when they have the game essentially in the bag. But I fear the offense we've seen is pretty much the offense we're going to get.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ataal
Joined: 17 Oct 2011
Posts: 1578
Location: Avondale, Arizona
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 3:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| big9erfan wrote: | | steadypimpin wrote: | | I think we see a good game from Kaep on Sunday. He made his mistakes and will learn from them. |
Kap is young enough and still growing in his game so that I think this is certainly true.
| steadypimpin wrote: | | The coaches learned from their mistakes too I'm sure we'll see that by the play selection on Sunday. |
On the other hand we've seen this offense for the better part of two season. I fear not too much will change. Sure they might not call a read option pitch deep in their own territory when they have the game essentially in the bag. But I fear the offense we've seen is pretty much the offense we're going to get. |
I'm certainly hoping for Kaep to have a good game. I think we're going to need him to step up to win this one. Miami has a very stout run defense. However, if James plays, he has the advantage of no tape on him and our play calls tailored to his strengths. If we're forced to be one-dimensional, this is Kaep's time to shine(again). Not only are we coming off his first loss, but we're going to be asking him to place the team on his shoulders should Miami score at will. It's a pretty high expectation for a guy about to start his fourth game with the division in a complete toss-up. Seattle plays the Cardinals next. Anyone have any semblance of faith that Ryan Lindley can gash Seattle's defense on the road in Seattle? Yeah, me neither.
As for the offensive play calling, I'm in complete agreement. There's a time and a place to give an uncommon play a shot, but we really seem to find the absolute worst times to do it.
However, to play devil's advocate for a moment, we love these plays when they work. Surprise onside kick against the Giants to start the second half? Had we not gotten that ball back, we would have moaned and groaned about that for weeks if it cost us the game. Pass to a tackle for 17 yards? Same kind of thing.
As long as we don't do anything stupid inside our own 10 again, I'll be content with our play calling. Not ecstatic, but content.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SoCalNiner
Joined: 13 Nov 2007
Posts: 18586
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 7:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| big9erfan wrote: | | SoCalNiner wrote: | | big9erfan wrote: | | SoCalNiner wrote: | | Personally I like going for the jugular, and taking calculated risks. Playing at a high level where errors won't cost us. . |
I like going for the jugular and taking calculated risks too. One of the things I hate most about our team - and I fear this goes back to Jim, not just to Roman, is that it always seems we play "not to lose" rather than to win. I would prefer us to throw more deep passes. I would prefer us to not sit on the ball when we have a lead. I would prefer us to use more multiple receiver sets and fewer "jumbo" packages. But I don't want to see our QB try to thread the ball into a very tight window a long way downfield, or drop back over 20 yards into our own endzone trying to make something out of nothing. It just comes down to the results of the calculation in that "calculated risk" you are talking about. Simple fact of football - the team with the fewest turnovers is highly likely to win. I'm sure that is very much more highly correlated to winning than the QB who throws for the most yards in a game is.
Like a lot of things in life there's a continuum and perhaps you and I just draw the line in different places on that continuum. |
Well, that's everything I want in our game too. When it comes to our QB throwing into a tight window a long way, I don't mind it, if it's one on one and our guy has the advantage. However, I wouldn't want our guy throwing into triple coverage down field. Looks like we have similarities in what we want in an offensive attack. You just appreciate the aspect of no errors more than I do, and that's fine. Working in marketing all my life, it's been beaten in my head to take risks, and if you screw up you better be able to fix it. We don't get awards for not making mistakes, but get rewarded is a risk pays off, so it's just how I think. |
OK then. Happy middle ground for us. By the way by "tight window" I didn't mean tight coverage, I meant squeezing it between a couple of defenders and counting on your arm strength and accuracy to thread it in there. Looks impressive when it works, and might even be worth the risk depending on down and distance, or the game score and time remaining - just not a thing I'd like to see in general. Take the check down or throw it away, and do better on the next play. |
Oh, got it. Yeah I agree with you, certainly don't want Kaep to start trying to be Favre.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
steadypimpin
Joined: 01 Jan 2009
Posts: 7263
Location: Rockville, Maryland
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 10:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
We don't need Kaep to be Favre. We just need his ability to stretch the field. We didn't really have that before. If Kaep can be efficient with the football like Alex plus make plays with his feet and be able to stretch the field that would be a perfect scenario.
_________________
2011 & 2012 NFC West Champs!!! Back to back baby!!!
Xbox: Steadypimpin49
"Keep choppin' wood" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
straighthate
Joined: 15 Feb 2009
Posts: 513
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 11:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| steadypimpin wrote: | | We don't need Kaep to be Favre. We just need his ability to stretch the field. We didn't really have that before. If Kaep can be efficient with the football like Alex plus make plays with his feet and be able to stretch the field that would be a perfect scenario. |
If he can be efficient like Alex and stretch the field and use his legs, we've got a better version of Steve Young. I'm hoping for big things from Kap in his career but with his big play ability I don't see Smith's efficiency. Hopefully more effivient than Favre and hopefully better big play ability than Smith. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sherm
Joined: 09 Oct 2009
Posts: 1287
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2012 2:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
Anybody else hope our coaching staff takes a look @ Wash pistol style offense? Obviously Kaep is familiar with it and he can do some of the same things RGIII can. NYG have given us trouble and that offense has given them fits this yr. I think Kaep Gore and possibly adding in some LMJ we could execute some of those same plays.
Not saying full go but we can def add some packages of the pistol to help with the big plays and scoring opportunities.
_________________
I love me some 49ers, Michigan, and my Lakers.
2009- Brandon Graham, DE, Michigan - 64 Tck 26 TFL 10.5 sacks
2010- Sam Acho, DE, Texas - 59 tck, 17 TFL, 9 sacks, 5 FF, 5 FR |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
oldman9er
Joined: 24 Oct 2006
Posts: 36605
Location: New Orleans
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2012 9:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
Not expecting it, but with Ck7 in there, yes I'd like to see us open our offense up more frequently. Gore can still get his 17 carries a game from a pistol formation. Would be a fun time to change up our SOP. Not at all expecting it though... probably too much to expect from Roman and Harbaugh mid-season.
_________________
___  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rudyZ
Joined: 12 Mar 2007
Posts: 11347
Location: Québec
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2012 9:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| oldman9er wrote: | | Not expecting it, but with Ck7 in there, yes I'd like to see us open our offense up more frequently. Gore can still get his 17 carries a game from a pistol formation. Would be a fun time to change up our SOP. Not at all expecting it though... probably too much to expect from Roman and Harbaugh mid-season. |
I don't think it would be too hard to install more pistol plays. We could take the singleback plays we already have, keep the receiver routes, and give those some reps in practice. It would be easier on the player, since the play name wouldn't have to change outside the name of the formation. The timing of the throws would change, because Kap would be receiving the snap from 3-4 yards out, instead of under center. But that's what practice is for. Then we could build on that. We could set up pistol plays with singleback plays too, and switch back and forth.
But really... we need to playaction more, plain and simple.
_________________
RudyZ's Power Rankings Power Ranking
1) RudyZ's Power Rankings Power Ranking
2) y2's pie Power Rankings (3.1416 rules!)
3) N4L's Poster Power Rankings |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SoCalNiner
Joined: 13 Nov 2007
Posts: 18586
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2012 12:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| rudyZ wrote: | | But really... we need to playaction more, plain and simple. |
The things I'd for Houston's play action game.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
big9erfan
Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 10670
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2012 5:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| sherm wrote: | Anybody else hope our coaching staff takes a look @ Wash pistol style offense? Obviously Kaep is familiar with it and he can do some of the same things RGIII can. NYG have given us trouble and that offense has given them fits this yr. I think Kaep Gore and possibly adding in some LMJ we could execute some of those same plays.
Not saying full go but we can def add some packages of the pistol to help with the big plays and scoring opportunities. |
That's what I was thinking when I saw it. Our "option plays" suck compared to the way Washington runs theirs.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SoCalNiner
Joined: 13 Nov 2007
Posts: 18586
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LANiner
Joined: 15 Feb 2009
Posts: 382
Location: Los Angeles
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2012 11:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
he is so not a role model for other pet turtles
_________________
Sig provided by 48 1/2ers |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rudyZ
Joined: 12 Mar 2007
Posts: 11347
Location: Québec
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2012 11:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Anyone else thought of the scene with the turtle in Breaking Bad?
_________________
RudyZ's Power Rankings Power Ranking
1) RudyZ's Power Rankings Power Ranking
2) y2's pie Power Rankings (3.1416 rules!)
3) N4L's Poster Power Rankings |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
