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

Eric Reids Potential
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> San Francisco 49ers
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
757-NINER


Joined: 08 Jan 2013
Posts: 414
PostPosted: Sun Feb 16, 2014 7:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yea I read the article. I understand what your saying but to me, I don't care who you are and how good you play, your going to give up some catches. Most of the plays Whitner gave up in coverage were not the kind of plays I thought warranted concern. Most of those TDs were just great plays by the QB and pass catcher. Like the throw Ponder made to the Vikings TE(forgets the name) when we loss to them. It was just a insane catch and throw to the only part of the field he could have caught it. Whitner really couldnt have played it any better really. All safties give up completions in man coverage once and awhile, even very good ones. Its when your blowing coverages and guys are running wide open or are just getting totally owned in man coverage is when fans need to nit-pick.

And TOTALLY agree about Joyner. That kid is going to make some GM very happy. As badly as I want Pryor, I'd will happily take Joyner as a consolation prize if we stand pat@30. Joyner reminds me a lot of Earl Thomas, more so than Pryor with his CB-like man coverage ability. Kid is just a baller.


Last edited by 757-NINER on Mon Feb 17, 2014 9:57 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
J-ALL-DAY


Joined: 17 Oct 2007
Posts: 26683
PostPosted: Sun Feb 16, 2014 7:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Um, maybe they didn't rip into him, but they were very honest about his lack of coverage ability in the offseason.

I mean yeah, you can't expect safeties NOT to give up any catches in one on one coverage, but it was especially bad for Whitner. He would get beat on the simplest routes and the blown coverages were absolutely terrible for the entire secondary late in the season. Everyone thinks it was Culliver allowing the big play to Jones, but Whitner was at fault just as much. Culliver thought Whitner would have help over the top, but he just took the underneath route. Unfortunately for us, we had a lot of mis-communication after the Smith bros got hurt.

Joyner is going to be a good one. We need a guy who would cover the slot with Rogers likely gone, so why not him?

And off topic, but the long pass allowed against Dallas was actually on Rogers not Whitner. Rogers bit on the PA, and then Whitner tried to get back there but it was to late.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
757-NINER


Joined: 08 Jan 2013
Posts: 414
PostPosted: Sun Feb 16, 2014 7:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

All I remember is Whitner taking full responsibility after the game. I think he had deep responsibility and got sucked up by something the offense did.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
J-ALL-DAY


Joined: 17 Oct 2007
Posts: 26683
PostPosted: Sun Feb 16, 2014 8:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

757-NINER wrote:
All I remember is Whitner taking full responsibility after the game. I think he had deep responsibility and got sucked up by something the offense did.


Yeah, Rogers took responsibility as well, but I remember Whitner going to twitter and saying like you guys know what really happened Laughing .

So I went back to watch the play and Rogers did indeed bite on that PA. Oh well, that loss did very little in the big picture. We still held the NFCCG at our place and had a chance to get to the big dance.

Anyways:

Quote:
Pete Damilatis ‏@PFF_Pete 2h
@BdukeKing Haha, try double that. Byrd, Ward, and Whitner are all going to get Top 10 safety money, if not Top 5. Looking at $7-9M per year.


If that is the case, Whitner is DEFINITELY gone. Sucks, but lets hope his replacement is a good one.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
J-ALL-DAY


Joined: 17 Oct 2007
Posts: 26683
PostPosted: Tue Feb 18, 2014 2:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Showing the improvement of Whitner in coverage:

https://mobile.twitter.com/PFF_Pete/status/435836322725380096/photo/1?screen_name=PFF_Pete
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Chrissooner49er


Joined: 03 Feb 2005
Posts: 4001
Location: Tulsa, OK
PostPosted: Wed Feb 19, 2014 10:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

So no one thinks Whitner could be willing to take less to stay? I think he may have learned something from Goldson's situation...sure, the money is nice but perhaps somewhat less to play for a contender would be better.

I think Reid is as good as he is at least in part due to Whitner. If Whitner goes, we may see a regression in Reid. Perhaps.
_________________
fa·nat·ic (f-ntk)
A person marked or motivated by an extreme, unreasoning enthusiasm, as for a cause.
Draft wishes:1st-Beckham/Cooks,Fuller/Verrett;2nd-T. Murphy,Moncrief,Su'a-Filo,M. Smith;3rd-Abbrederis,Ben Gardner,J.Watkins,T. Reilly...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rudyZ


Joined: 12 Mar 2007
Posts: 13204
Location: Québec
PostPosted: Wed Feb 19, 2014 10:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Chrissooner49er wrote:
So no one thinks Whitner could be willing to take less to stay? I think he may have learned something from Goldson's situation...sure, the money is nice but perhaps somewhat less to play for a contender would be better.

I think Reid is as good as he is at least in part due to Whitner. If Whitner goes, we may see a regression in Reid. Perhaps.



I'm sure he would take less to stay, but that might still not be enough for us to retain him. I'll use fake numbers here, but let's say he wants 10, would be willing to take 8 from us, but all we're offering is 6.

It would surely hurt Reid, unless we find an equal replacement (who knows) in free agency. If we're forced to play Dahl (I just threw up in my mouth a little) or Spillman, it will suck. If we're forced to play a rookie, we'll have struggles with two young guys back there. Hopefully we can improve the play of our corners enough that it doesn't put too much pressure on the safeties. And hopefully our pass rush doesn't disappear as it did at times last year. If can keep rushing the passer consistently, we'll be fine. And we have Donatell, so I have hope.
_________________


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
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
oldman9er


Joined: 24 Oct 2006
Posts: 39889
PostPosted: Wed Feb 19, 2014 10:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

rudyZ wrote:
If we're forced to play Spillman, it will suck.


It's a bit like the Kilgore situation, no? How do we really know "it would suck" to see Spillman (or some other unproven/untested) out there instead?

Up to me, I would let Whitner walk away, if he required more than 4-5 mil per.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rudyZ


Joined: 12 Mar 2007
Posts: 13204
Location: Québec
PostPosted: Wed Feb 19, 2014 11:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

oldman9er wrote:
rudyZ wrote:
If we're forced to play Spillman, it will suck.


It's a bit like the Kilgore situation, no? How do we really know "it would suck" to see Spillman (or some other unproven/untested) out there instead?

Up to me, I would let Whitner walk away, if he required more than 4-5 mil per.



Well, for a couple of years already, we've heard chatter from the staff and reporters that Kilgore was just waiting in the wings to take over once Goodwin was gone. With Spillman, we've had the opposite, actually. I remember reading that the staff was disappointed in his progress as a defender. Maybe that's what prompted us to trade up to get Reid last year. I don't think the Dahl signing had much to do with it, as he was signed before we even had OTAs last year. If Spillman or Dahl had stepped up and showed something prior to the draft, we wouldn't have had a need for Reid. Unless the staff was predicting the eventual loss of Whitner, after losing Goldson last year, and preemptively filled the need by getting Reid, having him get experience for one year with Whitner, then truly take over in 2014, with one of Dahl or Spillman. It's possible Spillman is a good enough replacement, you're right. But a faint memory of criticism towards him (maybe I just imagined it, too) makes me feel like he's not going to be our starter this year.

Whoever starts alongside Reid, I'm sure we'll need the rest of the defense to step it up a notch, again. We're also likely getting a new corner who will have to make a substantial contribution, whether he's starting outside or just a nickel back. That's two new defensive backs playing major roles, so I do expect some struggles at times.
_________________


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
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
oldman9er


Joined: 24 Oct 2006
Posts: 39889
PostPosted: Wed Feb 19, 2014 11:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

if you say so...

I can't say I ever read of any Spillman disappointment... and can't say teams only draft for need, as if to say it was an indictment on Spillman that we selected Reid. Seems a fair conclusion to reach, but still... who can say? Spillman's been around a while now, so I can accept that maybe he sucks as a starting S.

Many thought that an unknown could not step right into Goldson's shoes and adequately replace him. Just maybe.. behind the same front 7, it could happen again for Whitner's unknown replacement.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rudyZ


Joined: 12 Mar 2007
Posts: 13204
Location: Québec
PostPosted: Wed Feb 19, 2014 11:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

oldman9er wrote:
if you say so...

I can't say I ever read of any Spillman disappointment... and can't say teams only draft for need, as if to say it was an indictment on Spillman that we selected Reid. Seems a fair conclusion to reach, but still... who can say? Spillman's been around a while now, so I can accept that maybe he sucks as a starting S.

Many thought that an unknown could not step right into Goldson's shoes and adequately replace him. Just maybe.. behind the same front 7, it could happen again for Whitner's unknown replacement.



Totally agree. Hence my insistence that the front 7 will have to step up once again. We'll have 2 new "starters" on D (if we include the nickel back). Last year, we only had one new starter, so that may have helped Reid get up to speed as fast as he did. I'm sure by the end of the year, no matter who plays back there, our D will be playing at a high level. The fact that Reid is such a smart and dedicated player is really good news for the future. Hopefully he's going to be a core player for a long time, and we can just plug a cheaper option next to him. Maybe he truly was too good to pass up, and not at all an indictment on Spillman. He did beat Trenton Robinson, Darcel McBath and Michael Thomas for his job, so I guess that supports the side of "he's not that bad". The impression that I have with CJ, it's that he would get a lot of big hits as a starter, but also several whiffs.
_________________


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
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
757-NINER


Joined: 08 Jan 2013
Posts: 414
PostPosted: Wed Feb 19, 2014 1:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

oldman9er wrote:
if you say so...

I can't say I ever read of any Spillman disappointment... and can't say teams only draft for need, as if to say it was an indictment on Spillman that we selected Reid. Seems a fair conclusion to reach, but still... who can say? Spillman's been around a while now, so I can accept that maybe he sucks as a starting S.

Many thought that an unknown could not step right into Goldson's shoes and adequately replace him. Just maybe.. behind the same front 7, it could happen again for Whitner's unknown replacement.


Well we can gather as much because he is STILL regulated to STs and goaline package only. The extenstion they gave Spillman was along the lines of the ones they gave Boone and Ian Williams. It was a 'hey, we believe your going to take the next step and turn into a productive starter for us because we can see progress in your play but just in case we whiff, here's a small investment' type of extenstion. The difference is Boone and Williams actually stepped up and fulfilled the prophecy. Spillman's extentsion was two years ago...no way Baalke extends a guy like that simply for his STs prowless alone. He simply hasn't gained the trust of the staff to be a viable option as a starter. Remember, Reid wasn't a instant starter. He had to beat out both Dahl and Spillman in training camp for the job at FS. It was a open competition. He hasn't even leapfrogged Dahl on the depth chart. That speaks tons about where he is as a player right now. You look at Spillman and think man, this guy should be a awesome FS by now. He's has speed(4.4), good size and is a very good tackler as we see on STs. But I think he may struggle with the mental aspects of the game because physically, he's ready to go.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rudyZ


Joined: 12 Mar 2007
Posts: 13204
Location: Québec
PostPosted: Wed Feb 19, 2014 1:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

757-NINER wrote:
oldman9er wrote:
if you say so...

I can't say I ever read of any Spillman disappointment... and can't say teams only draft for need, as if to say it was an indictment on Spillman that we selected Reid. Seems a fair conclusion to reach, but still... who can say? Spillman's been around a while now, so I can accept that maybe he sucks as a starting S.

Many thought that an unknown could not step right into Goldson's shoes and adequately replace him. Just maybe.. behind the same front 7, it could happen again for Whitner's unknown replacement.


Well we can gather as much because he is STILL regulated to STs and goaline package only. The extenstion they gave Spillman was along the lines of the ones they gave Boone and Ian Williams. It was a 'hey, we believe your going to take the next step and turn into a productive starter for us because we can see progress in your play but just in case we whiff, here's a small investment' type of extenstion. The difference is Boone and Williams actually stepped up and fulfilled the prophecy. Spillman's extentsion was two years ago...no way Baalke extends a guy like that simply for his STs prowless alone. He simply hasn't gained the trust of the staff to be a viable option as a starter. Remember, Reid wasn't a instant starter. He had to beat out both Dahl and Spillman in training camp for the job at FS. It was a open competition. He hasn't even leapfrogged Dahl on the depth chart. That speaks tons about where he is as a player right now. You look at Spillman and think man, this guy should be a awesome FS by now. He's has speed(4.4), good size and is a very good tackler as we see on STs. But I think he may struggle with the mental aspects of the game because physically, he's ready to go.



On the other hand, he might be better at Whitner's spot than he was at Reid's. He lost out last year, but he gained in experience from that battle. Maybe this time around, he shows more.
_________________


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
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
757-NINER


Joined: 08 Jan 2013
Posts: 414
PostPosted: Wed Feb 19, 2014 2:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

rudyZ wrote:
757-NINER wrote:
oldman9er wrote:
if you say so...

I can't say I ever read of any Spillman disappointment... and can't say teams only draft for need, as if to say it was an indictment on Spillman that we selected Reid. Seems a fair conclusion to reach, but still... who can say? Spillman's been around a while now, so I can accept that maybe he sucks as a starting S.

Many thought that an unknown could not step right into Goldson's shoes and adequately replace him. Just maybe.. behind the same front 7, it could happen again for Whitner's unknown replacement.


Well we can gather as much because he is STILL regulated to STs and goaline package only. The extenstion they gave Spillman was along the lines of the ones they gave Boone and Ian Williams. It was a 'hey, we believe your going to take the next step and turn into a productive starter for us because we can see progress in your play but just in case we whiff, here's a small investment' type of extenstion. The difference is Boone and Williams actually stepped up and fulfilled the prophecy. Spillman's extentsion was two years ago...no way Baalke extends a guy like that simply for his STs prowless alone. He simply hasn't gained the trust of the staff to be a viable option as a starter. Remember, Reid wasn't a instant starter. He had to beat out both Dahl and Spillman in training camp for the job at FS. It was a open competition. He hasn't even leapfrogged Dahl on the depth chart. That speaks tons about where he is as a player right now. You look at Spillman and think man, this guy should be a awesome FS by now. He's has speed(4.4), good size and is a very good tackler as we see on STs. But I think he may struggle with the mental aspects of the game because physically, he's ready to go.



On the other hand, he might be better at Whitner's spot than he was at Reid's. He lost out last year, but he gained in experience from that battle. Maybe this time around, he shows more.


We'll see but I think the fact he's behind a guy who most ppl believe is a complete scrub, a guy who has also been in the scheme for far less time, says it all. Maybe if he was a 2nd stringer or the first safety off the bench l could see the sense for optimism.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
oldman9er


Joined: 24 Oct 2006
Posts: 39889
PostPosted: Wed Feb 19, 2014 2:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

757-NINER wrote:

We'll see but I think the fact he's behind a guy who most ppl believe is a complete scrub, a guy who has also been in the scheme for far less time, says it all. Maybe if he was a 2nd stringer or the first safety off the bench l could see the sense for optimism.


You could be right... but something to think about...

Spillman had 79 snaps at S last season... all but 14 of those were as SS.

Dahl had 89 snaps... all as FS.
_________________
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  Next
Page 2 of 3

 
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