Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

GDT: Week 10 vs Carolina
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 55, 56, 57  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> San Francisco 49ers
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
big9erfan


Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 13819
PostPosted: Mon Nov 04, 2013 7:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Forge wrote:
steadypimpin wrote:
We should use James like the Chargers us Woodhead.


james isnt as good out of the backfield as Woodhead, but a more realistic comparison than Sproles. He's not as good of a runner as Gore or Hunter though, and both of those guys can work out of the backfield as well, so I honestly just don't know what advantage LMJ presents. He'd be best in space which is much different than Gore and Hunter but does that fit our offense at all?


A missing part of our offense is a swing pass that has any chance at all of being anything other than a short gain. If we could get James in the flat with no one near him, or just one man to beat that could go for along gain instead of a short one.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Forge


Joined: 19 Feb 2010
Posts: 6973
PostPosted: Tue Nov 05, 2013 12:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

big9erfan wrote:
Forge wrote:
steadypimpin wrote:
We should use James like the Chargers us Woodhead.


james isnt as good out of the backfield as Woodhead, but a more realistic comparison than Sproles. He's not as good of a runner as Gore or Hunter though, and both of those guys can work out of the backfield as well, so I honestly just don't know what advantage LMJ presents. He'd be best in space which is much different than Gore and Hunter but does that fit our offense at all?


A missing part of our offense is a swing pass that has any chance at all of being anything other than a short gain. If we could get James in the flat with no one near him, or just one man to beat that could go for along gain instead of a short one.


My problem with that is why is it missing? While Hunter doesn't have the top end speed of LMJ, I don't see why we couldn't give him that play as well. He moves well in space, and does have decent speed to not get caught from behind if he breaks one. He's also got better vision in following his blockers, so I think he's just as capable of breaking one of those as James is, though he doesn't have the outright elusiveness of the smaller back. I do believe he catches the ball better and is better in pass protection as well, so its not as much as an obvious tell if he's in the backfield as compared to LMJ. To me, if we are not using that in the overall offensive scheme, it's just because that's the coaching staff's choice, not because we don't have the talent or skillset sans LMJ to make it work. I don't know that they would put in a small package of plays just to find some use for James. I could be wrong, after all they did find a package of plays to get kaepernick in the game when we had Smith starting, but since we had to have a second quarterback active it's a little bit of a different circumstance as opposed to a fifth running back active.
_________________


Two in harmony surpasses one in perfection - P3
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
clarkfn2284


Joined: 07 Jan 2007
Posts: 3159
Location: Modesto,CA
PostPosted: Tue Nov 05, 2013 1:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Forge wrote:
big9erfan wrote:
Forge wrote:
steadypimpin wrote:
We should use James like the Chargers us Woodhead.


james isnt as good out of the backfield as Woodhead, but a more realistic comparison than Sproles. He's not as good of a runner as Gore or Hunter though, and both of those guys can work out of the backfield as well, so I honestly just don't know what advantage LMJ presents. He'd be best in space which is much different than Gore and Hunter but does that fit our offense at all?


A missing part of our offense is a swing pass that has any chance at all of being anything other than a short gain. If we could get James in the flat with no one near him, or just one man to beat that could go for along gain instead of a short one.


My problem with that is why is it missing? While Hunter doesn't have the top end speed of LMJ, I don't see why we couldn't give him that play as well. He moves well in space, and does have decent speed to not get caught from behind if he breaks one. He's also got better vision in following his blockers, so I think he's just as capable of breaking one of those as James is, though he doesn't have the outright elusiveness of the smaller back. I do believe he catches the ball better and is better in pass protection as well, so its not as much as an obvious tell if he's in the backfield as compared to LMJ. To me, if we are not using that in the overall offensive scheme, it's just because that's the coaching staff's choice, not because we don't have the talent or skillset sans LMJ to make it work. I don't know that they would put in a small package of plays just to find some use for James. I could be wrong, after all they did find a package of plays to get kaepernick in the game when we had Smith starting, but since we had to have a second quarterback active it's a little bit of a different circumstance as opposed to a fifth running back active.


While I disagree with you about this weeks game. I must say you have a cautious optimism to your posts that i like. I agree with you about Manningham. I like him, but I like him with Eli in that NYG passing game. I havent seen much from the guy in terms of production soi expecting much is setting ones self up for a let down. I dont see the passing game changing much with his prescence on the field. I also agree with you regarding Hunter and James. One thing I see with Hunter that I dont see with James is an ability to run through tackles. Hunter while not as fast is much better at running through arm tackles. He has good vision and can break it . James only sees the field on ST in my opinion, but he isnt exactly the answer there either. I liked what I saw from Dixon.
_________________
NextBigThing wrote:
rice wasn't close to do as good as his stats would lead one to assume


okie dokie!!! He only had 1200 rec yards at 40, but he clearly isnt as good as it appears.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
y2lamanaki


Moderator
FF Fanatic
Joined: 03 Jan 2006
Posts: 9758
Location: Lancaster, PA
PostPosted: Tue Nov 05, 2013 8:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

clarkfn2284 wrote:
While I disagree with you about this weeks game. I must say you have a cautious optimism to your posts that i like. I agree with you about Manningham. I like him, but I like him with Eli in that NYG passing game. I havent seen much from the guy in terms of production soi expecting much is setting ones self up for a let down. I dont see the passing game changing much with his prescence on the field. I also agree with you regarding Hunter and James. One thing I see with Hunter that I dont see with James is an ability to run through tackles. Hunter while not as fast is much better at running through arm tackles. He has good vision and can break it . James only sees the field on ST in my opinion, but he isnt exactly the answer there either. I liked what I saw from Dixon.


I don't know what the difference is between Manningham with Eli or Manningham with Kaepernick to you, but if you take the three healthy games he played with Kaep starting (eliminating the Seahawks when he got injured), and projected those numbers over a full 16-game season, he'd have 64 receptions for 805 yards, which are numbers I'd absolutely love in a 2nd receiver right now (soon to be third), and would put him right in line with the numbers he had with Eli.
_________________


Frank Gore 10,000 yard tracker:

Currently - 9,967
Ranked 29th all-time
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
clarkfn2284


Joined: 07 Jan 2007
Posts: 3159
Location: Modesto,CA
PostPosted: Tue Nov 05, 2013 12:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

y2lamanaki wrote:
clarkfn2284 wrote:
While I disagree with you about this weeks game. I must say you have a cautious optimism to your posts that i like. I agree with you about Manningham. I like him, but I like him with Eli in that NYG passing game. I havent seen much from the guy in terms of production soi expecting much is setting ones self up for a let down. I dont see the passing game changing much with his prescence on the field. I also agree with you regarding Hunter and James. One thing I see with Hunter that I dont see with James is an ability to run through tackles. Hunter while not as fast is much better at running through arm tackles. He has good vision and can break it . James only sees the field on ST in my opinion, but he isnt exactly the answer there either. I liked what I saw from Dixon.


I don't know what the difference is between Manningham with Eli or Manningham with Kaepernick to you, but if you take the three healthy games he played with Kaep starting (eliminating the Seahawks when he got injured), and projected those numbers over a full 16-game season, he'd have 64 receptions for 805 yards, which are numbers I'd absolutely love in a 2nd receiver right now (soon to be third), and would put him right in line with the numbers he had with Eli.


Manningham played in a much more pass happy offense in NY. I want Manningham to have opportunities because I do believe he is a good WR. Especially a #3. I just dont expect it with the Niners because they dont throw the ball 40 times a game. Manning and the Giants threw that ball 35-40 times a game and left plenty of targets for Manningham. Also there is a crazy expectation that he is going to jump on the field and be a savior for a pass offense that has been less then impressive with the exception of a game this year. Manningham is a chain mover. He will definitely help the offense, but the high levels of expectation are a little odd considering the guy blew out his knee less then a year ago. You can deal in hypotheticals and say if he didnt blow out his knee his numbers would have projected out to X, but he did blow out his knee and to expect him to jump back into the mix immediately is a bit far fetched. I would expect him to come along slowly. He definitely sets the team up for the late push this season.
_________________
NextBigThing wrote:
rice wasn't close to do as good as his stats would lead one to assume


okie dokie!!! He only had 1200 rec yards at 40, but he clearly isnt as good as it appears.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
big9erfan


Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 13819
PostPosted: Tue Nov 05, 2013 2:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Forge wrote:
big9erfan wrote:
Forge wrote:
steadypimpin wrote:
We should use James like the Chargers us Woodhead.


james isnt as good out of the backfield as Woodhead, but a more realistic comparison than Sproles. He's not as good of a runner as Gore or Hunter though, and both of those guys can work out of the backfield as well, so I honestly just don't know what advantage LMJ presents. He'd be best in space which is much different than Gore and Hunter but does that fit our offense at all?


A missing part of our offense is a swing pass that has any chance at all of being anything other than a short gain. If we could get James in the flat with no one near him, or just one man to beat that could go for along gain instead of a short one.


My problem with that is why is it missing? While Hunter doesn't have the top end speed of LMJ, I don't see why we couldn't give him that play as well. He moves well in space, and does have decent speed to not get caught from behind if he breaks one. He's also got better vision in following his blockers, so I think he's just as capable of breaking one of those as James is, though he doesn't have the outright elusiveness of the smaller back. I do believe he catches the ball better and is better in pass protection as well, so its not as much as an obvious tell if he's in the backfield as compared to LMJ. To me, if we are not using that in the overall offensive scheme, it's just because that's the coaching staff's choice, not because we don't have the talent or skillset sans LMJ to make it work. I don't know that they would put in a small package of plays just to find some use for James. I could be wrong, after all they did find a package of plays to get kaepernick in the game when we had Smith starting, but since we had to have a second quarterback active it's a little bit of a different circumstance as opposed to a fifth running back active.


I agree with this. Sometimes Roman uses his players like a kid with a new toy. Recently his new toy is Miller. Don't get me wrong, I love Miller. But if we're going to run the "hidden receiver" play where a guy seems to leave the field, but doesn't why put one of our slowest guys in that role when a WR who got the ball in that position might take it all the way. Same think with our swing passes. An occasional surprise swing to the FB is fine, but if we're calling a swing pass, or even just looking for a relief valve why not Hunter (or James as I said at first) instead of Miller.

Frankly I think it would help Kap's game to look for his back out of the backfield a little more. But we tend to keep our RB in to block a lot. That gives Kap a bit more time, but with our receiving corps that time doesn't always result in an open receiver. I'd rather see the back out in the flat more often giving Kap someone to look to quickly if our receiveres seem to be well covered. Our fallback strategy, even in the passing game, is always more of the jumbo approach than the wide-open spread approach.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
big9erfan


Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 13819
PostPosted: Tue Nov 05, 2013 3:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Over/under for how many snaps Manningham plays this week?
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
NinerNation21


Joined: 05 Feb 2007
Posts: 1716
Location: South Central PA
PostPosted: Tue Nov 05, 2013 3:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

big9erfan wrote:
Over/under for how many snaps Manningham plays this week?


I'm thinking 15 snaps and maybe 2 catches for 20 yards. Very low production in the first game back. I think they will bring him along slowly for the first week or two and after that I see him being a bigger contributor as the season goes on.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
DirtyJersey9er


Joined: 17 Feb 2006
Posts: 3842
Location: Jersey
PostPosted: Tue Nov 05, 2013 4:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

NinerNation21 wrote:
big9erfan wrote:
Over/under for how many snaps Manningham plays this week?


I'm thinking 15 snaps and maybe 2 catches for 20 yards. Very low production in the first game back. I think they will bring him along slowly for the first week or two and after that I see him being a bigger contributor as the season goes on.


2 catches for 20 yards is sadly better than the other non-Boldin WRs have done in the first 8 games this season.
_________________
Welcome to the 9ers Q!

I have a new Sports Blog check it at:
http://buttfumblesports.wordpress.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
big9erfan


Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 13819
PostPosted: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

DirtyJersey9er wrote:
NinerNation21 wrote:
big9erfan wrote:
Over/under for how many snaps Manningham plays this week?


I'm thinking 15 snaps and maybe 2 catches for 20 yards. Very low production in the first game back. I think they will bring him along slowly for the first week or two and after that I see him being a bigger contributor as the season goes on.


2 catches for 20 yards is sadly better than the other non-Boldin WRs have done in the first 8 games this season.


Yuk ... so sad
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AndyLeesAunt


Joined: 21 Feb 2013
Posts: 960
Location: New York
PostPosted: Tue Nov 05, 2013 6:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I heard on morning radio a few days ago that Carolina's SoS up to now is 16th in the NFC... just putting that out there
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
49ers Finest


Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 8799
Location: San Jose
PostPosted: Tue Nov 05, 2013 6:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

AndyLeesAunt wrote:
I heard on morning radio a few days ago that Carolina's SoS up to now is 16th in the NFC... just putting that out there

seattle helps that a lot.
and they play saints twice.

they have a tough schedule coming up... us, saints, pats

theyre a good team. but theyre recent win streak is all against some teams playing some bad football... well as has to i guess


going to be a good game
_________________
***WE RUN THE WEST!***
SB AT HOME!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

new sig... sorry alex
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
y2lamanaki


Moderator
FF Fanatic
Joined: 03 Jan 2006
Posts: 9758
Location: Lancaster, PA
PostPosted: Tue Nov 05, 2013 7:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

clarkfn2284 wrote:
Manningham played in a much more pass happy offense in NY. I want Manningham to have opportunities because I do believe he is a good WR. Especially a #3. I just dont expect it with the Niners because they dont throw the ball 40 times a game. Manning and the Giants threw that ball 35-40 times a game and left plenty of targets for Manningham. Also there is a crazy expectation that he is going to jump on the field and be a savior for a pass offense that has been less then impressive with the exception of a game this year. Manningham is a chain mover. He will definitely help the offense, but the high levels of expectation are a little odd considering the guy blew out his knee less then a year ago. You can deal in hypotheticals and say if he didnt blow out his knee his numbers would have projected out to X, but he did blow out his knee and to expect him to jump back into the mix immediately is a bit far fetched. I would expect him to come along slowly. He definitely sets the team up for the late push this season.


I'm not dealing in hypothetical situations by eliminating the injury - I'm talking about how he performed when he was with the team. Of course he will likely come along slowly because of the knee, but my point was - when he was last seen playing for us, he was playing at a pace in which he would rival his numbers from the Giants, so there should be no preference to him being with Eli in the passing game. His injury was a moot point as far as I was concerned, because I would expect post-injury Manningham to look about the same on either the Giants or the 49ers, because pre-injury Manningham looked about the same on the 49ers as he did with the Giants.
_________________


Frank Gore 10,000 yard tracker:

Currently - 9,967
Ranked 29th all-time
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
y2lamanaki


Moderator
FF Fanatic
Joined: 03 Jan 2006
Posts: 9758
Location: Lancaster, PA
PostPosted: Tue Nov 05, 2013 7:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

NinerNation21 wrote:
big9erfan wrote:
Over/under for how many snaps Manningham plays this week?


I'm thinking 15 snaps and maybe 2 catches for 20 yards. Very low production in the first game back. I think they will bring him along slowly for the first week or two and after that I see him being a bigger contributor as the season goes on.


I'll take the over on the snaps (only slightly, I'm thinking more like 20), but the production (2 receptions 20-25 yards) sounds about right.
_________________


Frank Gore 10,000 yard tracker:

Currently - 9,967
Ranked 29th all-time
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
big9erfan


Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 13819
PostPosted: Tue Nov 05, 2013 8:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

If Frank hits 10000 by the end of the year, which seems like a reasonable target where will that put him on the all time list?
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> San Francisco 49ers All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 55, 56, 57  Next
Page 4 of 57

 
Jump to:  
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