49ers-Lions: Notes and Quotes

by Fooch on Sep 22, 2008 4:00 AM PDT in News

I just received some of the psot-game notes and quotes from the 49ers and thought some were worth throwing out there.

With his 130 yards today, Gore passed QB Steve Young (3,581) and RB Kevan Barlow (3,614) to move into seventh place on the 49ers all-time rushing list with 3,692 yards for his career. HB Hugh McElhenny is sixth with 4,288 yards.
QB J.T. O’Sullivan entered the Detroit game with an NFL-high of seven pass completions over 25 yards. He completed a 25-yard pass to WR Bryant Johnson in the second quarter.
The 49ers offense had 351 yards of offense last week at Seattle and 370 yards today against Detroit. Last season the 49ers went over 300 yards in total offense just twice.
The 49ers scored 33 points last week at Seattle and 31 points today against Detroit. It is the first time the 49ers have had back-to-back 30-point games since the 2003 season when they won 30-10 vs. St. Louis (11-2-03) followed by a 30-14 win vs. Pittsburgh (11-17-03).

Mike Nolan
Whether he was surprised that Detroit played more of a read-and-react defense rather than doing a lot of blitzing:

“I saw them blitz some. I didn’t study their play-by-play, what they called, so I don’t think it’s wise for me to comment, to be honest with you, on that opponent, because I’d be wrong. I’d just be speculating on what I saw.”

Fooch: If they were in fact not doing a lot of blitzing, I'd be a bit stunned. If they had scouted out the 49ers the past two weeks they would see an offensive line that struggled and a QB who took a beating even when he got some time.

On who decided to go for it on 4th down (him or Martz):

“No, that’s my decision. Just like when we don’t make it, that’s my decision too. It was one yard to go but it was inches the first play. When Frank (Gore) got hit, I wasn’t sure if it was a yard, a yard-and-a-half or two yards. Somebody actually hollered out, ‘Two yards.’ That’s why I ran down the side to kind of see, and that’s why I called timeout when I got down there. I saw that it was a yard. We went for it.”

Whether that attempt was meant as a statement play:

“No, I did reflect on it – our offense was moving the ball. They were playing well. They had a lot of confidence. I thought that they would’ve had every reason to feel like they could stick it in. If we had not gotten the points (Detroit was) still two scores and a two point (conversion) at that point away from it, and the ball would have been on the one-yard line. So I felt to go 99 yards, basically to have three scores and still beat us it would be a good choice.”

On whether he wanted to talk to O'Sullivan about sliding at the end of runs:

“I thought about it two or three times today in the game, but I thought I don’t need to do that in a ball game. Just let him play because he was playing well. You don’t want to get a guy out of their game. But believe me, I thought about it a few times…about saying, ‘Look, just do something.’ But anyway, he makes plays. You don’t want to take a guy out of the zone because that’s where they get. They just get to playing the game and things happen. They happened well. He did it last week as well.”

Isaac Bruce
On the team's overall performance:

“[It’s] very evident that the word of God works. He’s confirming his word and sings following. His favor is going toward this team.”

Fooch: I can see why people call him the Reverend. There was a vote against using The Reverend so I'm down with that. Bruuuuuuuuce works just fine with me. Either way, I'm a fan of his game.

Frank Gore
Had the quote of the day when asked about how it feels to rack up big numbers: “It’s not about stats. It’s about winning.” Hell. Yes.

About as close as he'll come to slamming either Jim Hostler or Alex Smith:

How do you like playing in the Mike Martz offense? “The passing game is a whole lot better. The more we throw the ball, the more the receiver catches the ball, the better it’s going to be for me in the run game. Whatever it takes to win, I’m with it.”

J.T. O'Sullivan
On improving going forward:

"I think we are moving in the right direction, but I still feel we left a lot of yards on the field. I think I missed throws and from that standpoint, I want to get into the film and keep us going in the right direction.”

Everybody is saying the right things in terms of improving going forward. As previously mentioned, the Saints game is a big one. I'm willing to accept that we can't be sure how good (or not good) the 49ers will be this season. They've won on the road at a beaten down Seattle and at home against a god-awful Lions team. Next week will certainly be a better marker of the team's progress (or lack there of).

0 recs | Comment 21 comments |

Read Related

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Frank Gore really is an awesome dude

Simply by pulling on both ends, Patrick Willis can stretch diamonds back into coal

by 49erLou on Sep 22, 2008 7:59 AM PDT 1 recs

he’s a class act too.

by J2daZ on Sep 22, 2008 12:38 PM PDT up 0 recs

On going for it on 4th down

Normally I’m an advocate of going for it on 4th-and-short, but I think this was very foolish in this situation. The Lions have an explosive offense, even though it never came around yesterday. I believe there was about 6 minutes to go in the game at the time, and a FG would have made it a three-score game. If they had not made it, they were still only two scores down. It would have been tough for them to come back, yes, but when you’re playing a team with an offense like that, I would have ended the game right there with FG.

It worked out in the end, though, and that’s the only complaint I have about this game, really.

STEVE HOLM! refuses to be the odd man out.

by UnleashTheGore on Sep 22, 2008 9:21 AM PDT 0 recs

Both ways

I think I could have gone either way with that call. I definitely could have gone with the field goal (in essence, playing it safe) and went with the three score lead. I also think that Nolan downplayed the reason why they decided to go for it.

The 49ers haven’t had that “go for the jugular” mentality in years. It’s good to see a flash of it yesterday. I think Martz may have talked Nolan into it, as it seems like a very Martz-ian thing to do.

On a somewhat side note, the 49ers seem to like calling reverses in those kind of situations. Didn’t they do it against the Cards in last year’s opener?

by sfgfan on Sep 22, 2008 9:33 AM PDT up 0 recs

similar play

In the post-game Nolan was asked that very question and he said it was a similar play. Against the Cardinals it was to Battle for the win. Gotta love the random Allen Rossum sighting.

Niners Nation - The premier 49ers blog on the Internet!

by Fooch on Sep 22, 2008 9:41 AM PDT up 0 recs

yeah, it's hard to fault them

and I did love seeing a gutsy call from the coaching staff. I just think in this situation it could have really backfired if they didn’t make it.

On a side note, I wish they would call more WR options and utilize Battle’s throwing abilities. Robinson could also get in on that as well.

STEVE HOLM! refuses to be the odd man out.

by UnleashTheGore on Sep 22, 2008 9:51 AM PDT up 0 recs

backfire

Of course the Lions would have been starting at the 1 yard line and had not shown any real ability to move the ball all that much. I see it as a calculated risk.

Niners Nation - The premier 49ers blog on the Internet!

by Fooch on Sep 22, 2008 9:54 AM PDT up 0 recs

The thing is, the extra points from the touchdown didn’t change anything compared to a field goal. It was still a 3 score game. That, to me, is why it was a bad decision. They took a much bigger risk for very little reward and it’s a sign to me that Nolan still doesn’t really understand game management.

Again, though, it was all very inconsequential. Even if JTO had decided to just spike the ball on 4th down, we weren’t going to lose so it doesn’t really matter. I just get nervous that Nolan will do something stupid in a close game and it could end up costing us.

Neglectful father of David Quinowski

by marcello on Sep 22, 2008 10:47 AM PDT up 0 recs

this

STEVE HOLM! refuses to be the odd man out.

by UnleashTheGore on Sep 22, 2008 11:02 AM PDT up 0 recs

I think Nolan was confident that if they would have stopped us the D would have came out and held it down. I like the call because it has been so long since i’ve seen confidence in the offense.

Simply by pulling on both ends, Patrick Willis can stretch diamonds back into coal

by 49erLou on Sep 22, 2008 12:34 PM PDT up 0 recs

Trickery

I think that having Gore in the backfield for that direct snap to the HB with the QB split wide was a waste of an opportunity. I would have liked it if they had put Robinson back there to at least read the defense (pre-snap) and adjust the play if he was reading a blitz or something. It would have at least kept the defense on their toes a little.

by sfgfan on Sep 22, 2008 10:12 AM PDT up 0 recs

Trickery (part 2)

That play seemed to go decently for Ronnie Brown and the Phins. Maybe a better wrinkle would be to have Arnaz take the snap with Gore in the backfield. Or have Gore take it with DeShaun back there, too.

by StepUp on Sep 22, 2008 11:45 AM PDT up 0 recs

I actually feel like I’ve seen Nolan go for it in a lot of 4th and short situations over the last few years. I could be making it up, but that’s the impression I have.

My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.

by howtheyscored on Sep 22, 2008 2:19 PM PDT up 0 recs

4th and Short

I think Nolan picks and chooses his battles in those situations. He does go for it, but usually in a very conservative sort of way. Maybe I’ve just grown used to hearing the complaints about his conservativeness and his lack for going for it in certain situations and it’s kind of jaded me on his actions as a whole. It just seems like he doesn’t go for a lot of them, but he indeed, does go for them from time to time.

by sfgfan on Sep 22, 2008 2:31 PM PDT up 0 recs

I actually liked that call. It might not have been the top scoreboard strategy at the time, but I don’t think it’s as bad a decision as you’re making it sound, or even a bad decision at all. I think that the possibility of simply leaving your opponent on the one yard line is pretty darn underrated. That seems to me like it’s an extremely low percentage scoring scenario. Even if the Lions did score from there, the most likely scenario would have been a field goal that took 4+ minutes to get.

It seems like a pretty low-risk play to me. Of course, you’re always risking the other team going 99 yards in 35 seconds, but being worried about THAT sort of outcome feels like a pretty irrational fear to me. More likely than not, even a very good offense doesn’t do much with that field position. And then you’re getting the ball back again, anyway. You’re not really risking that much.

My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.

by howtheyscored on Sep 22, 2008 2:29 PM PDT up 0 recs

Improvements

As Fooch pointed out, the players are doing a very good job of making it appear like they’re keeping it all in perspective and mentioning things they need to fix going forward. I think that every team will do that, and even last year’s incarnation of the 49ers did the same. The difference this year? They are actually making good on those words.

The offensive line struggling against pass rushers and JT holding onto the ball too much? The line mans up and JT gets rid of it more and takes only one sack. Special teams coverage seems to be improving week to week.

by sfgfan on Sep 22, 2008 9:43 AM PDT 0 recs

Manny Lawson and the defense

Does anyone else think he isn’t playing enough? That they aren’t really using the 3-4 like they could?

Pedro Feliz would look great in Dodger Blue.

by irwin on Sep 22, 2008 10:10 AM PDT 0 recs

I think...

… these last two opponents kind of dictated what the 49ers wanted to do with their defense. Both teams use the passing game so much that you want your defense to be ready for it. With that in mind, I think the 49ers have been practicing with 4-man fronts a lot the past couple of weeks.

This is my condensed version of what I think the team feels about Manny Lawson. I think that the team feels there are two sides of the coin to him. Why is that? I think the team drafted him to be pass-rushing OLB. The problem is, they probably learned very quickly that he isn’t as good at rushing the passer without Mario Williams on the opposite side to divert some of the attention away (not to mention NFL players are just better). With that said, they are probably very disappointed in Manny Lawson “The Pass Rusher.” I think the positive side of the coin is that the 49ers found themselves a player that is somewhat similar to what Julian Peterson was in his latter years with the 49ers and is now with the Seahawks. Peterson is a MUCH better pass rusher, but both players have the physical talent to drop back into coverage and play, basically, a third safety. I think they’re excited about him in that regard.

I agree with you (and most others) in that he isn’t playing enough. The problem is, only the coaches really know how well he fits into a certain gameplan they are executing that particular week. Because the 49ers have had to go 5 DBs so often, they wanted to keep two “stronger” LBs against the run on the field. There are probably no better options on the 49ers roster right now than Patrick Willis and Takeo Spikes for that reason.

This is all, of course, speculation based on the fact the 49ers have played that SUB package so much the past couple of weeks. Whether or not you agree with the fact they’ve done that is a whole other issue. I think that with teams like the Saints, Giants and Eagles coming to town soon, the 49ers will probably be using a lot more of their base defense (whether it’s a 3-4 or a 4-3). I think it’s only fair to wait until then to make an assessment on the usage of Manny Lawson (and to a lesser extent, Parys Haralson).

by sfgfan on Sep 22, 2008 10:21 AM PDT up 0 recs

Not to mention, the coaches might just be protecting Lawson a bit due to his injury last year. They might want to ease him back into full action. It is odd that our best cover LB from last year is on the bench in passing formations.

Neglectful father of David Quinowski

by marcello on Sep 22, 2008 10:53 AM PDT up 0 recs

re

I can’t guess what the Niner brain-trust thinks of Lawson, but I can say that I seriously doubt that they have a very good basis for such belief [or that I trust their player evaluation skills at all]. Lawson wasn’t a great pass rusher as a rookie? There was nobody else around him to help, nor has [IMHO] been any sort of decent scheming to take advantage. The blitzes that they do use always seems rather obvious and/or poorly timed. Generally speaking, a good 3-4 gets OLB pressure in large part on it’s unpredictability, not because it has the type of pass rushers who you must account for on every snap. Sure, it’s great to have that type of guy, but you have to mix it up if you don’t have him.

I read you post as a guess as to what they think, but not necessarily what you think.

Pedro Feliz would look great in Dodger Blue.

by irwin on Sep 22, 2008 1:45 PM PDT up 0 recs

If what I suggested IS what the 49ers coaching staff sees in Lawson, I don’t think it’s THAT unfair of an assessment. Lawson did lose a year, which is certainly not his fault, but you can’t fault the 49ers for putting others in his position after the fact.

I think, so far, Parys Haralson and Justin Smith have done fairly well from the rush OLB position. While Lawson certainly could contribute, you can’t fault the team for going with those that work, either. Aside from that, Ray McDonald and Roderick Green seem to be contributing as well.

I don’t have the previous games Tivo’d at all, but I’d be curious to see where the blitzes have come from. Because of the fact they used the SUB packages so much, I guess the only game worth looking back on is the first game of the season. I don’t remember for sure (and I missed most of the second half), but I think Lawson was sent on blitzes quite a bit, but he’s also used to shadow the TE a lot. Aside from Willis, he’s the team’s most athletic LB, so it sort of makes sense he plays on the strong-side.

I’m with you on hoping he gets more play-time though. I don’t know (nor do I expect) if he’s as good a pass rusher as most people are asking him to be, but I’m content with him just being a poor-man’s version of Julian Peterson. It really sucks he missed last season, as he’s technically only going into his second year of a full workload.

On a side note, I just wanted to touch on the “predictability” of their blitzing scheme and how you suggest the 49ers need to mix it up in order to compensate for lack of talent. I think there are two schools of thought in that. I think one of those is definitely your suggestion. Lining up with a (practically) symmetric front seven so that the opposition doesn’t know where the blitz is coming from, thus giving them kind of a head start, should help players that lack the pass rushing technique. However, the other side of the coin is (I think) what the 49ers are doing. Instead of playing mind games or concealing their blitzers by keeping them off the line a little more, they are putting them closer to the line in order to cut off some of the time it takes to get to the QB. I don’t think all of their blitzes are predictable, as the DB blitzes tend to be pretty effective (and decently hidden) and they DO see to pile up at the line only to drop off some players (that’s how Justin Smith got his INT yesterday, no?).

I do agree some of them are pretty obvious, though.

by sfgfan on Sep 22, 2008 2:45 PM PDT up 0 recs