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

Could Boldin play TE?
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> San Francisco 49ers
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
NJniners


Joined: 27 Jan 2013
Posts: 170
PostPosted: Sun May 25, 2014 8:02 am    Post subject: Could Boldin play TE? Reply with quote

I was thinking about this. Now that we have Johnson, Crabtree, Boldin, Patton, and Ellington thats just too much talent for 2-WR sets. Alot of times we play 2-WR, 2-TE sets though and while Vance did have a couple big moments, I think we still missed Delanies production. Boldin is about as physical as it gets for a WR, so could he make the switch? I would kill two birds with one stone. Solve the 2nd TE spot, and open up a spot so Johnson and Crabtree can play together too.[/quote]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
y2lamanaki


Moderator
FF Fanatic
Joined: 03 Jan 2006
Posts: 9881
Location: Lancaster, PA
PostPosted: Sun May 25, 2014 11:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't think it'd be a great move this late in his career, especially when he's still very productive as a receiver. If we plan on needing Boldin, Johnson, and Crabtree on the field at the same time, it will likely be via a 3-WR look with 1 TE. Won't be that much different anyway.
_________________


Frank Gore Career Rushing List Tracker:

*Currently Ranked 28th All-Time
*Yards needed to pass #26, Ottis Anderson: 178
*Yards needed to enter Top 20: 872
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
iwentundrafted


Joined: 18 Aug 2012
Posts: 3445
PostPosted: Sun May 25, 2014 1:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

y2lamanaki wrote:
I don't think it'd be a great move this late in his career, especially when he's still very productive as a receiver. If we plan on needing Boldin, Johnson, and Crabtree on the field at the same time, it will likely be via a 3-WR look with 1 TE. Won't be that much different anyway.



Only problem with that is it will be a single back set. IMO Bruce Miller in front of Gore is very important. Now obviously if Miller stays in then that takes Vernon Davis off the field which to most of you and probably all, is more important. Now even though I don't like it I understand it that Davis is more important than Bruce but I'm not sure how Gore will do without a FB.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ronnie's Pinky


Joined: 17 Sep 2012
Posts: 295
PostPosted: Sun May 25, 2014 3:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

iwentundrafted wrote:
Only problem with that is it will be a single back set. IMO Bruce Miller in front of Gore is very important. Now obviously if Miller stays in then that takes Vernon Davis off the field which to most of you and probably all, is more important. Now even though I don't like it I understand it that Davis is more important than Bruce but I'm not sure how Gore will do without a FB.


Three words: Car Los Hyde
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rudyZ


Joined: 12 Mar 2007
Posts: 13262
Location: Québec
PostPosted: Sun May 25, 2014 3:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think we might see some creative stuff, if Boldin is lined up in the slot in a 3 WR set, more so than with either Crabtree or Johnson being in the slot. Boldin is a great blocker and could do much of what Delanie used to do. Maybe not wham Ndamukong Suh, but he could perhaps wham a DE on an occasional run play. So no, I don't see him as a TE, but he could be used in a slot/H-Back role from time to time. I currently like our top 4 WRs (including Patton) both inside and outside, so that gives us a lot of potential flexibility. Now, knowing the Harbman offense, I doubt we use much of that potential, and we'll probably still see a lot of 2 WR sets, with Boldin and Johnson pretty much just platooning.
_________________


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
y2lamanaki


Moderator
FF Fanatic
Joined: 03 Jan 2006
Posts: 9881
Location: Lancaster, PA
PostPosted: Sun May 25, 2014 3:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

iwentundrafted wrote:
y2lamanaki wrote:
I don't think it'd be a great move this late in his career, especially when he's still very productive as a receiver. If we plan on needing Boldin, Johnson, and Crabtree on the field at the same time, it will likely be via a 3-WR look with 1 TE. Won't be that much different anyway.



Only problem with that is it will be a single back set. IMO Bruce Miller in front of Gore is very important. Now obviously if Miller stays in then that takes Vernon Davis off the field which to most of you and probably all, is more important. Now even though I don't like it I understand it that Davis is more important than Bruce but I'm not sure how Gore will do without a FB.


In a 2-WR, 2-TE set (which is what was being discussed), Miller won't be on the field anyway:

Crabtree-Johnson-Davis-McDonald (leaving Boldin out for the time being) (4)
Gore-Kaepernick (6)
Staley-Iupati-Kilgore-Boone-Davis (11)

So it will be a single back set either way.
_________________


Frank Gore Career Rushing List Tracker:

*Currently Ranked 28th All-Time
*Yards needed to pass #26, Ottis Anderson: 178
*Yards needed to enter Top 20: 872
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
big9erfan


Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 14004
PostPosted: Sun May 25, 2014 6:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

iwentundrafted wrote:
y2lamanaki wrote:
I don't think it'd be a great move this late in his career, especially when he's still very productive as a receiver. If we plan on needing Boldin, Johnson, and Crabtree on the field at the same time, it will likely be via a 3-WR look with 1 TE. Won't be that much different anyway.



Only problem with that is it will be a single back set. IMO Bruce Miller in front of Gore is very important. Now obviously if Miller stays in then that takes Vernon Davis off the field which to most of you and probably all, is more important. Now even though I don't like it I understand it that Davis is more important than Bruce but I'm not sure how Gore will do without a FB.


Gore doesn't NEED a FB. It's just the way we run our offense. At some point our coaches are going to have to realize we can run just as effectively if we put in 3 WRs and force the opposing defense to spread itself out more. Also, Hyde is going to getting more and more carries as the year goes on and he runs just fine without a FB ... and runs well from the pistol which is something that has been a big fail for us so far.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
neezy007


Joined: 21 May 2008
Posts: 9097
Location: El Paso
PostPosted: Sun May 25, 2014 7:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I was saying this when we picked him up last year. He wouldn't be a TE really but he would line up at an angle to the TE? I guess be used like Delanie. By "at an angle" I mean he would like the S key on your keyboard and VD would be the Q key on your key board.

Basically Quan could play the Joker role. Quan getting covered by LBs. Loool
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
iwentundrafted


Joined: 18 Aug 2012
Posts: 3445
PostPosted: Sun May 25, 2014 9:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

big9erfan wrote:
iwentundrafted wrote:
y2lamanaki wrote:
I don't think it'd be a great move this late in his career, especially when he's still very productive as a receiver. If we plan on needing Boldin, Johnson, and Crabtree on the field at the same time, it will likely be via a 3-WR look with 1 TE. Won't be that much different anyway.



Only problem with that is it will be a single back set. IMO Bruce Miller in front of Gore is very important. Now obviously if Miller stays in then that takes Vernon Davis off the field which to most of you and probably all, is more important. Now even though I don't like it I understand it that Davis is more important than Bruce but I'm not sure how Gore will do without a FB.


Gore doesn't NEED a FB. It's just the way we run our offense. At some point our coaches are going to have to realize we can run just as effectively if we put in 3 WRs and force the opposing defense to spread itself out more. Also, Hyde is going to getting more and more carries as the year goes on and he runs just fine without a FB ... and runs well from the pistol which is something that has been a big fail for us so far.


I know Gore doesn't need a FB but Bruce does a damn good job helping gore spring big runs. Also I don't know where you have ever seen Hyde in a pistol offense because they don't run the pistol at OSU. They run a spread/read option offense but yes I get what you're saying about Hyde. One thing I don't think a lot of you know is that Hyde isn't as physical as some of you think. Hopefully rathman does a good job of telling Hyde to be THAT guy but right now he runs a lot more shifty then you think. Kind of like dancing Dixon used to be before he pulled his head out of his butt. Hyde honestly runs a bit like Gore does or Leveon Bell. He's big but he likes to use some wiggle more or as much as lowering the helmet and moving bodies.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
big9erfan


Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 14004
PostPosted: Mon May 26, 2014 11:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

iwentundrafted wrote:
big9erfan wrote:
iwentundrafted wrote:
y2lamanaki wrote:
I don't think it'd be a great move this late in his career, especially when he's still very productive as a receiver. If we plan on needing Boldin, Johnson, and Crabtree on the field at the same time, it will likely be via a 3-WR look with 1 TE. Won't be that much different anyway.



Only problem with that is it will be a single back set. IMO Bruce Miller in front of Gore is very important. Now obviously if Miller stays in then that takes Vernon Davis off the field which to most of you and probably all, is more important. Now even though I don't like it I understand it that Davis is more important than Bruce but I'm not sure how Gore will do without a FB.



Gore doesn't NEED a FB. It's just the way we run our offense. At some point our coaches are going to have to realize we can run just as effectively if we put in 3 WRs and force the opposing defense to spread itself out more. Also, Hyde is going to getting more and more carries as the year goes on and he runs just fine without a FB ... and runs well from the pistol which is something that has been a big fail for us so far.


I know Gore doesn't need a FB but Bruce does a damn good job helping gore spring big runs. Also I don't know where you have ever seen Hyde in a pistol offense because they don't run the pistol at OSU. They run a spread/read option offense but yes I get what you're saying about Hyde. One thing I don't think a lot of you know is that Hyde isn't as physical as some of you think. Hopefully rathman does a good job of telling Hyde to be THAT guy but right now he runs a lot more shifty then you think. Kind of like dancing Dixon used to be before he pulled his head out of his butt. Hyde honestly runs a bit like Gore does or Leveon Bell. He's big but he likes to use some wiggle more or as much as lowering the helmet and moving bodies.


Before I posted I watched his highlights to see how I often he ran behind a FB. The answer is there were almost no highlights of him running behind a FB. But I did see lots of highlights where the QB was lined up a few yards behind the C and Hyde was a few yards behind him. Maybe there's something else that's necessary for a formation to be called a pistol, but when I see the QB a few yards back and a RB a few yards behind him I think of that as the pistol.

I agree with the shifty comments. He has really quick feet for a big man. I think he gets an extra yard or two after contact real often, but he does not just barrel straight into guys. He follows his blockers well, and picks his way through a defense. He reminds me a lot of Gore in that aspect of his running. Although he does have nice shiftiness, there's no way he reminds me of dancing Dixon. When he sees a hole, he hits it quick and hard.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
J-ALL-DAY


Joined: 17 Oct 2007
Posts: 26975
PostPosted: Mon May 26, 2014 2:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap2000000353311/article/nfls-top-receiving-corps-redskins-bears-lead-the-way?campaign=Twitter_atl

No clue where to put this so I'll just leave it here.

Brooks has our receiving core 4th in the league. Now, it is no secret we are a run first team, but how much should we air it out this year? Last year it was 52/48 in terms of running the ball, so would anyone mind if it is 53/47 in terms of passing the ball? Our offense loves running the ball and I'm good with that, but by throwing it a little more could make this a top 7 or so offense. We will never air it out 40 times a game because once we get a big lead, Harbaugh pretty much shuts it down.

Our running back depth also has to be one of the best in the league even with the uncertainty of Lattimore's health. Depending on how creative the offensive staff gets, our offense could be deadly this season. Of course, I'm not talking about being creative pre-snap LOL.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
big9erfan


Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 14004
PostPosted: Mon May 26, 2014 3:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

J-ALL-DAY wrote:
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap2000000353311/article/nfls-top-receiving-corps-redskins-bears-lead-the-way?campaign=Twitter_atl

No clue where to put this so I'll just leave it here.

Brooks has our receiving core 4th in the league. Now, it is no secret we are a run first team, but how much should we air it out this year? Last year it was 52/48 in terms of running the ball, so would anyone mind if it is 53/47 in terms of passing the ball? Our offense loves running the ball and I'm good with that, but by throwing it a little more could make this a top 7 or so offense. We will never air it out 40 times a game because once we get a big lead, Harbaugh pretty much shuts it down.

Our running back depth also has to be one of the best in the league even with the uncertainty of Lattimore's health. Depending on how creative the offensive staff gets, our offense could be deadly this season. Of course, I'm not talking about being creative pre-snap LOL.


I'd like to see a little more passing, but not more 15-20 yarders. We have enough of those in our offense. I'd like to see more WCO passing concepts. I don't know why we target our RBs as little as we do. Gore had a lot of drops last year, and has lost a step or two. So maybe we just don't see that as a productive option, but I think we're missing out on a lot of easy 5, 6, 7 yard gains. I'm hoping we'll use Hyde that way a little more than we've used Gore. Besides swing passes to the backs (not emergency outlet passes, but actual called passes where the RB is a legitimate option), we need more short passes - guys simply sitting down in a hole in the zone, or quick slants or quick hooks where the WR has a chance to get some YAC. Would like more screens too - except we suck at them, and have ever since Jim and his staff have come here. There's just something we don't seem to get right in our execution of them, or maybe it's when we choose to use them. Fix that, please, Jim.

Finally, of course, I'd like to see us use more 3 or even 4 WR sets. What I want to get out of that if more guys open for easy completions, upping our completion percentage and keeping drives alive, which in turn will make the deep stuff easier to hit. Plus I'd rather see our RBs running against 6 in the box than 8 or 9.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rudyZ


Joined: 12 Mar 2007
Posts: 13262
Location: Québec
PostPosted: Mon May 26, 2014 3:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think for us, it shouldn't be a matter of pass-run ratio. It should be more about how we throw, than how much we throw it. And by how, I mean two things: where and when. Where we throw the ball to. We have to stretch the field both vertically and horizontally, and not only play in a box, like we have for the past three years. More importantly to me, though, is when. How about in the first quarter, how about on first downs. And with some mixing, and with no giving up on what actually works, whether it's the run or the pass.
_________________


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
J-ALL-DAY


Joined: 17 Oct 2007
Posts: 26975
PostPosted: Mon May 26, 2014 3:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Boldin and Crabtree are extremely successful in WR screens even though they aren't speedsters like Jackson. They have the ability to make most DBs miss but it baffles me we run so little of them. Remember the quick hitter TD to Boldin against Atlanta? That is literally open most of the time. We do need to get RBs involved in the passing game, as that is a weakness from Kaepernick. I still would love to see more "big" plays through the air like in 2012 mixed in with an effective short game. I was watching some games over from that season and the spacing was ridiculous. Moss was taking two guys with him on go routes even though he hardly got any targets. Walker ended up with like eight or nine 20+ yard receptions after Kaepernick took over. McDonald has good speed but where he will excel is in the 5-10 yard area. Just get him the ball as he is another good receiver after the catch.

We love running in power heavy sets, but it is time to spread it out and run in 3-4 WR sets. I wish there were statistics to show how successful we are running in three WR sets.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Chrissooner49er


Joined: 03 Feb 2005
Posts: 4029
Location: Tulsa, OK
PostPosted: Tue May 27, 2014 9:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I would love to see a LOT more dink-and-dunk, Bill Walsh-style. We have the WRs for it and it would help set up the run and eat up the clock. More 3 to 4 yard slants and throwing to RBs in the flat.
_________________
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
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 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
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