49ers Outside Linebackers: Long Look Back, Brief Look Forward
To this point, we've taken a look at halfback, fullback, tight end and inside linebacker. They're important positions, to be sure, but they're all basically in good health as far as the 49ers are concerned. Now though, we're going to get our hands dirty and get into the nitty gritty of the 49ers. We'll take a look at one of the more important positions on the team, especially considering the 3-4 defense that Vic Fangio will be running.
Outside linebacker is a position that has seemed "decent" for the 49ers for awhile now and really hasn't been beyond that since 2002. Why is 2002 significant, you might ask? It's because no 49er has had more than 8.5 sacks in a single season since then. That's bad, no other way to look at it - just flat-out bad.
In fact, all but one outside linebacker on the 49ers roster right now has been "the guy" for the future at one point or another. They have all entered one offseason with considerable hype and fallen flat the next. Having a running back by committee is a strength to keep your guys fresh, but having an outside linebacker by committee almost never works if at least one of them isn't above "average" as a pass rusher. We'll address what to do in the "looking ahead" section later on after the jump, but first, a look back.
Manny Lawson
Manny did have a lot of big games this past season with the 49ers, but he did fall short of my expectations for him. This offseason, he had some contract issues and started a mini-holdout of sorts, but it was all settled and when he came in to play, he looked great. Weight was added, and it didn't appear to sacrifice any speed or quickness. He began making big plays here and there. Quarterbacks were made uncomfortable whenever he rushed, though it wasn't often, admittedly.
Early on, he was taken out in favor of some of the other guys in pass rushing situations. Said players were ineffective at doing what they were doing, and Lawson saw more time rushing the passer again. It still only amounted to 2.5 sacks, but he made his name known elsewhere, namely in the passing game. One play in particular was in week six against the Oakland Raiders, when he made a diving interception off of Jason Campbell. It's the kind of play Lawson can make with some measure of regularity, but he was still lacking where the 49ers need him most.
San Francisco can have the best cover linebackers in the league, the best against the run and they would still fail if they can't apply pressure effectively. It's clear after 2010 that Lawson is not a guy who can do that consistently. Still, his coverage is probably the best of any outside linebacker in the league, and his speed is a huge asset for the 49ers defense.
After the jump, we take a look at the other outside linebacker options on the 49ers' roster, 2011 free agents for the position and of course, the 2011 NFL draft ...
Parys Haralson
Haralson had a great year in 2008, and after that - almost nothing. He was just another one of the players who came on strong, got a little bit of money, and appeared geared for something special the following season. But offenses figured him out fast, and his moves were quickly picked apart. Last season, he gave way to the two players below more often than not, and in the time he didn't, his play was spotty at best.
The biggest problem with Parys is his inability to be consistent with playmaking ability. We went weeks at a time without even hearing his name, even at times when he was playing decently. He jut doesn't have "it" despite the fact that he might have appeared to be poised to show whatever "it" was following 2009.
He only had four sacks last season, and some say that's because he was rotated out frequently. I'd counter with the simple fact that if he was consistent with his pressure and sack numbers, he wouldn't need to be rotated in the first place. Haralson is a decent starter in the 3-4, but is in need of a replacement much more than Manny Lawson.
Ahmad Broooks
Brooks did a lot better than he has in recent years, but he's still come up short. He took snaps away from Manny Lawson, and he took snaps away from Parys Haralson. When he was rushing the passer, he looked good doing it, but he would often disappear for long stretches of time. Teams figured him out as well, and he stopped performing as the season went on. He fell short of my expectations.
One good thing that he showed, though, was the ability to cover. Many questioned his ability to drop back into coverage or move sideline to sideline, and he did show that. After taking over Haralson's pass rushing spot, he slowly began to take some coverage snaps from him as well. He even snagged an interception. I identified his best game as against Denver, where he was all over the field.
He came up short in one area, but came on strong in another. The problem is, we need a pass rusher, we've already got a few guys who can cover.
Travis LaBoy
LaBoy was a pleasant surprise this past season, but he's on the opposite side of the spectrum. Whereas he impressed with his pass rushing ability, he is almost laughably bad in coverage and is not great when a player gets to the outside. His five sacks were in limited playing time, but had he played better, he would have been in there more, so they're a good indication of where he's at.
He's probably the best pass rusher right now on the team, and to me that's a red flag. He gets the most pressure from the defensive end position and not the outside linebacker position. All I can really say about LaBoy is that he's been a good signing, but doesn't offer a whole lot for the future at the outside linebacker position.
Looking Ahead
Manny Lawson is a free agent, and I don't know that he'll be back in San Francisco. The NFL has told teams to go ahead and use their franchise tags, but I don't see it being used on Lawson. He's not that valuable to the 49ers at this point, he's not worth the $10 million or so that he would cost. But as a free agent, they might be able to sign him, though it feels as though he makes enough highlight reel-esque plays for some team to overpay for him.
Travis LaBoy is also a free agent, and I expect the 49ers to offer him something. I don't see his coverage skills improving and thus, I don't see him being much of an impact going forward. Ahmad Brooks and Parys Haralson will compete as usual, and maybe Vic Fangio can figure out Brooks and get him going. It's a definite possibility and the 49ers are not horrible at the position. Maybe someone else can make these guys reach their potential, and for that reason, they'll get their shot.
Thaddeus Gibson is a guy to look forward to. He was drafted by the Pittsburgh Steelers out of the fourth round but was cut due to an abundance of linebackers. If there's a team that understands the position, it's Pittsburgh, so we might have something here. The 49ers consider him a rookie going forward and will be evaluating him, though I don't really know what to expect.
LaMarr Woodley, Pittsburgh Steelers: Woodley has had a down year, and maybe that's enough to pry him away from Pittsburgh. They might be adverse to applying the tag on him and paying $10 million to a guy who had a down year on his contract year, the opposite of what you might expect. Still, a down year for Woodley is three less sacks, ten less tackles and two more interceptions? That doesn't sound too bad.
For a 49ers fan, it sounds great considering his number of sacks even after factoring in that he's had a "down" year is ten. Ten sacks, with three forced fumbles to boot. That's something the 49ers have lacked, and something they seriously need going forward in their 3-4 defense. Woodley won't come cheap, but he'll probably be worth every penny at this point. Probably my most wanted free agent.
Tamba Hali, Kansas City Chiefs: There's really not any scenario that I can see this guy leaving Kansas City. I feel as though he's going to be franchised there, and if not, he'll cost an awful lot of money. Still, the 14.5 sacks would just be ... wonderful, wouldn't it?
Beyond those two, there aren't many 3-4 outside linebacker-types that are worth it in free agency. The better course would be the draft.
Now there are some definite beasts here. In the first round at pick number seven, the 49ers may or may not have two options in Robert Quinn and Von Miller. Miller is a guy we already discussed, and can do just about everything the 49ers need. He's a very disruptive pass rusher, and he's shown the ability to get out and hold the edge, particularly in the Senior Bowl. He'd come in and immediately start.
Quinn has all the athleticism in the world, and providing he's in as good shape as he's supposed to, can make an immediate impact on the 49ers. There's a lot of options though, and some solid guys in rounds 2-4. Sam Acho is a guy I really like, while Justin Houston could be good as well. The link above is Drafttek's 3-4 OLB big board rankings, and you can look up reports on any one of those guys. I would only be happy with the first two in the first round, however.
QB | HB | FB | TE | WR | OT | G | C | DE | NT | OLB | ILB | CB | S | K/P | KR/PR
81 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I hope we take a serious look at Miller
He could be our X factor in the pass rush. Imagine him and LaBoy coming at the same time, totally focused. Lawson and Brooks on running downs.
Jay Cruise
Ab Workouts Mind Body Spirit Arthritis Treatment
Von Miller
If Von Miller falls to the niners in the seventh pick, that would be the direction to go. Not only would he help Willis out, but give the defense some fresh legs. Also if SF could pick up Woodley in FA, imagine the flexability of the niners LB core to rush the QB & stop the run.
by Str8Balr on Feb 5, 2011 12:51 AM PST via mobile up reply actions
Forget about Franchising Manny if NFLPA gets their way
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=AjmUCleB7PJjJnN8VfoBnL1DubYF?slug=jc-franchisetag020311
at least we could make a run at Manning or Ngata!!!
I do not think they want to franchise manny anyways.
to franchise manny he would get over ten million for one year, I think.
Manny is good but he is not worth 10 million a year. his next contract will probably be under 30 million for 5 years.
"You know whats funny? I always thought uhm dogs lay eggs and I learned something new today" Peter Griffin
by HUNGRY HUNTER on Feb 3, 2011 3:58 PM PST up reply actions
I thought the NFLPA didn't like the franchise.
Kellen Moore is awesome
Katie Mcgrath is our savior
my dog <3
whether or not they like it
teams can go ahead and franchise players this year. some players don’t like being franchised because they want long term deals but i don’t see any way that it’s not included in the next CBA.
Unfortunate
Ngata and Peyton are now going to be franchised.
Kellen Moore is awesome
Katie Mcgrath is our savior
my dog <3
If Peyton Manning is franchsied this year
I expect him to walk in 2012. It’d be a huge insult to him.
Its an insult to all players.
The Pats NT was pissed when he was franchised.
Kellen Moore is awesome
Katie Mcgrath is our savior
my dog <3
he got franchised
and then had an extension done a couple weeks later.
It really isn’t an insult to all players. It wasn’t an insult to Franklin when he was franchised because he’d only had one good season to base his production on. No reason for him to be insult. I doubt Jeff Reed was insulted when the Steelers franchised him.
I doubt Darren Sproles was upset when he was franchised last season since he basically quadrupled his income. There are many legitimate reasons to use the tag. Some teams use it because they can’t get a deal done with a player, but that’s actually pretty rare.
Sorry if I sound Facetious
But it can’t be an insult to ALL players. Franklin was franchised last year and got a sizable raise, albeit for one season. I never heard anything about him saying or inferring it was an insult. I highly doubt we’d franchise Lawson, but if we did, I really don’t think we’d hear anything from him either. Especially as he’d be getting a 1-yr, $10MM deal. Basically an $8MM raise. If that’s an insult, I’m sure 99.9% of us would be screaming to be insulted.
Don't mind me, I'm on a roller coaster. . .
www.twitter.com/@yougomango
The only NFL team who would franchise Franklin would be the 49ers..
that’s a HUGE compliment to Franklin.
Bite my shiny metal sig
by drummer on Feb 3, 2011 11:01 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
I really all depends on how it shakes out
ignoring the qb position, CB and OLB are arguably the biggest needs and both positions can be impacted immediately by a rookie.
I see more FA talent floating around at CB than I do at OLB (few good 3-4 OLB exist) but I have almost no faith in this organization paying top dollar for someone like Asomugha or Grimes (or even Bailey). Who knows if Clements force us to cut him so that position could be even weaker than ever.
At OLB I want Lawson and LaBoy resigned but that certainly doesn’t solve the problem.
My guess is that unless Patrick Peterson falls to #7, we go with Von Miller or Quinn in that order.
LaBoy is worth keeping around at a pass rusher.
He is really pretty good at it. 5 sacks for a 3rd down player who was only in 13 games for a defense that came up short as an entire unit in the passing game…Just turn him loose, rush him from both sides intermittently on 3rd downs.
As far as a stud, every-down OLB…we don’t have one. They each do certain things well and others not good at all. Lawson would be a beast if he wasn’t so lanky and could get to the cube more. Maybe Leavitt can get more from him if we keep him around. I think it’s time to take pass rusher seriously though and shoot for a top 3 round player. I’d prefer Miller but Ayers, Houston, etc. would be nice too although I don’t think we’ll be in position for Ayers as he’ll likely go late 1st or very early 2nd.
Trust me, I have no idea either.
Nitwitter
can there be an option
to vote for all 3?
Woodley miller and lawson. goodbye haralson
by foosball4949 on Feb 3, 2011 1:47 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
can we...
officially call the manny lawson experiment dead already? he’s exactly the kind of player that personifies the “mediocre at best” performer that’s kept this teem hovering around .500 for the last 4 seasons. he’s had basically 4 seasons to show something as a pass rusher, and it’s never materialized. people make this same argument in the great alex smith debate, but for some reason it rarely comes up when discussing guys like lawson or sopoaga or mcdonald or spencer or clements, etc. showing “flashes” 5% of the time just doesn’t cut it, at least if a team ever wants to be better than a perennially average team.
in the specific case of lawson, it’s especially poignant because of how crucial OLBs are for getting a pass rush from the 3-4 defense. he’s never shown himself to be a 10-sack guy, which is what they need. in the 3-4, they don’t need some athletic freak who can cover TEs and RBs, play CB if the top 4 CBs on the depth chart get hurt, and play decently against the run. that’s a nice skill set and all, just not one particularly well-served at 3-4 OLB. time to cut bait i think.
by (Florida) Danny Tuccitto on Feb 3, 2011 2:26 PM PST reply actions
I cant agree, we havent been a defense that used complex bliyz schemes, in none of the 4 years.
What would Lawson do if he’s allowed to use more moves or allowed to rush as often as 10 sack guys in the league. There are 10 sack olbs, but only Pitt has 2. Keep Many and actually use him differently, his forced fumbles are up there and he plays behind Soap. The more successful olbs in regards to sacks play behind Smith. I think we all can agree that Manusky is no LeBeau, and with the horrific talent in the dbackfield, blitzing is definitely a chance of giving up 6 in one play.
Don't make me "JEEBUS" you!!!!
let me put it like this...
back in early 09, i did an analysis of where sacks come from in the 3-4 vs. the 4-3 based on the 2008 season. that year, there were 16 3-4 OLBs that met the minimum requirement of at least 4 sacks in the season. the average qualifying 3-4 OLB averaged about 8.5 sacks. not the steelers’ awesome OLBs, not “sackmaster OLBs named demarcus ware.” even if we want to give lawson the benefit of the doubt here and go with the median instead of the mean because there were only 16 qualifying OLBs, the median was 7.0. in comparison, lawson’s played the last 3 seasons as a 3-4 OLB, and he’s averaged 4.0 sacks, with his max sack output being 6.5, which is right about at the median if we want to give him the benefit of the doubt. so his best sack season as a 3-4 OLB is a median sack performance by NFL standards. and even if we limit it to LOLBs, which you pointed out has been lawson’s position, LOLBs averaged about 6.5 sacks.
so, my point here is that the guy’s had 3 years of opportunity, and his own sack performance doesn’t match the average 3-4 OLB or the average 3-4 LOLB; not the best, not the ones who play on superstar-laden defenses, the average. further, not only does his performance overall not measure up, his best performance is average-at-best.
p.s. clay matthews had 13.5 sacks this year at LOLB, so while it’s true that ROLBs get more sacks in the 3-4, it’s not like there’s some law of nature that says LOLBs are limited to 4 sacks a year.
by (Florida) Danny Tuccitto on Feb 3, 2011 6:22 PM PST up reply actions
Those stats don’t mean anything until the amount of attempts at rushing a passer IS factored in. If player A has 300 attempts and player B has 125, player A has to get more sacks because he’s a starter in this league. Olbs who rush more often has a chance at rhythm sacks, or I should say rhythm pressures. You subtract the league leaders attempts by half and there may be zero 10 sack defenders. You also cannot factor in the scheme, which is the largest determining factor in sacks and or pressure.
Don't make me "JEEBUS" you!!!!
lawson...
has been a starter for the past 3 yrs. if anything about his usage suppresses his sacks, it’s that he’s busy covering TEs and RBs and passing downs. that’s idiotic from a coaching standpoint, but i suppose it is what it is. but, the point still holds to some extent because he does rush the passer often enough to get enough opportunities to register more than 2.5 sacks. i mean, come on. the niners defended 586 dropbacks by opposing QBs this season. that’s not a tiny sample. lawson was a starter, so let’s say he was in on 75% of all passing plays, which i think is low, but i’ll be generous. that leaves him with about 400 plays where he’s on defense against a dropback. let’s say the idiotic coaches had him drop back into coverage on 50% of those plays, which again is probably very generous here. that leaves 200 sack opportunities, and the guy can only manage 2.5 sacks? i mean, what is the argument for keeping this guy around given his (lack of) productivity in the most important skill required from a 3-4 OLB?
re “subtracting the league leaders attempts by half,” well, yeah, if we just changed reality, we could come up with a lot of alternate sack totals for 3-4 OLBs. for example, man, if clay matthews blew out his knee in wk 4, he wouldn’t have had double-digit sacks. what’s the point of that statement? the fact is he didn’t, so that’s what we have to work with.
finally, re factoring in the scheme, i assume you’re talking about something like 3-4s that blitz more vs. 3-4s that blitz less, with the idea being a blitzing 3-4 gives the OLBs more of an opportunity to get sacks. i’d argue the opposite. a blitz, by definition, is when extra guys (sometimes from unexpected places) are devoted to rushing the passer. if we accept that 3-4 OLBs except those named manny lawson basically rush the passer on the vast majority of rush downs, then “extra guys” translates “non-OLBs.” or, put differently, if there’s a QB in the league that doesn’t know the 3-4 OLB is rushing on a passing down, then he’s an idiot. the defenders whose sack totals are going to benefit from a blitzing 3-4 scheme are the guys playing positions that aren’t already assumed to be rushing. troy polamalu comes to mind in this regard.
by (Florida) Danny Tuccitto on Feb 3, 2011 11:05 PM PST up reply actions
Wake rushed 445 times
Ended up hitting the QB 34 times (record high).
Clay ended up dropping back 140 times. Wake dropped back 85. So Wake played 530 snaps.
After 9 games Lawson rushed 111 times. Say he continued to rush at the same rate Lawson would have rushed for 198 times. If he wanted to hit the QB at the same rate at Wake he would have to hit the QB 16 times. Because he only sacked the QB 3 times he would have to get a QB hit 13 more times.
Kellen Moore is awesome
Katie Mcgrath is our savior
my dog <3
Once you factor in Lawson using the same rush every tome, one has to think its either a, he only wants to rush in one style or b it was coaches preference, I don’t think Lawson has been utilized correctly by the staff. It’s more than enough to bring him back with either a better de in front of him or a better pass rushing Olb opposite him. His ability in coverage and the run game is reason enough to keep him. This is just my opinion, but I really think he’d be more productive in a better system with better coaching.
Don't make me "JEEBUS" you!!!!
and i'll also add that...
let’s not get caught up in the 10-sack threshold here as if it’s some magic number. i was just throwing it out there as a general benchmark. if i were to say “he’s never shown himself to be an 9-sack guy,” my argument doesn’t change whatsoever. in fact, he’s never even been a 7-sack guy, so perhaps i was being nice by making the “good pass rusher” bar arbitrarily high.
by (Florida) Danny Tuccitto on Feb 3, 2011 11:11 PM PST up reply actions
extension
I definitely don’t think he’s worth overpaying. I wouldn’t be surprised if somebody offered stupid money, and in that case I don’t think he’s worth keeping. But I don’t think it’s so clear cut that he’s mediocre at best. I could very well be wrong but I just keep thinking otherwise with Manny as compared to guys like Alex, Sopoaga, etc. Maybe it’s because he actually does consistently excel in certain phases oof the game.
by David Fucillo on Feb 3, 2011 4:01 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
good point...
if lawson were to play OLB in a 4-3, my argument would be entirely different.
by (Florida) Danny Tuccitto on Feb 3, 2011 11:08 PM PST up reply actions
Go ahead and make the hypothetical argument..
I’m interested in your take on it.
Bite my shiny metal sig
it's not...
groundbreaking. he’s much better suited for the 4-3 than the 3-4 because DEs are the primary sack guys in a 4-3, so it’s more valuable for a 4-3 OLB to be versatile/athletic/etc. ala lawson.
by (Florida) Danny Tuccitto on Feb 3, 2011 11:42 PM PST up reply actions
and...
i’ve made a similar argument in the past about justin smith. hiding your best, highest-paid pass-rushing DL in the relatively inconsequential position of 3-4 DE is pretty ridiculous (read idiotic) to me. he should be a RDE in a 4-3 for sure in my opinion.
by (Florida) Danny Tuccitto on Feb 3, 2011 11:44 PM PST up reply actions
Justin Smith was only a high sack guy for one season in Cincinnati. He might be the best on the roster but his best isn’t near the best. I doubt the gains with Lawson offset the loses to Franklin, Willis and 4th hole that would be defensive linemen x.
It's Whore-baugh, remember?
well...
yeah, i meant it in relative terms, not absolute. no one’s going to mistake justin smith for bruce smith. the one thing i will say is that perhaps he’s a better pass-rusher than you’re giving him credit for. getting 7, 6, and 8.5 sacks at 3-4 DE is kind of astonishing to me. put that in the context of the performances of the niners’ 3-4 OLBs, and it kind of further supports my “average-at-best” argument re lawson.
by (Florida) Danny Tuccitto on Feb 3, 2011 11:58 PM PST up reply actions
But you are implying he produced x in the 3-4 defense and suggesting he could produce x * 1.5 in a 4-3 defense. I agree it is reasonable conclusion but his history in the 4-3 to suggest he won’t be significantly better. I wasn’t paying much attention in 2007 but thought Nolan tried to switch a 4-3 front and use Justin Smith as DE on passing downs?
Still the bigger issue is the 49ers don’t have the defensive line to switch to the 4-3. It’s essentially the same problem with the 3-4 and the OLB position, the 49ers still need to devote significant resources to improve the personnel. I don’t see the net gain in making the switch.
It's Whore-baugh, remember?
ok...
i can buy the idea that they don’t have the DL for the 4-3, but also don’t have the OLBs for the 3-4. so then it sounds like, of my 2 options (i.e., switch to 4-3 or get rid of the 3-4 deadweight), the first one’s out. time to start shedding the dead weight like lawson, sopoaga, haralson, mcdonald, etc.
by (Florida) Danny Tuccitto on Feb 4, 2011 12:22 AM PST up reply actions
so the moral is...
that the niners either need to get rid of guys like this or switch to a 4-3. apparently, people in this thread seem pretty attached to lawson for some reason, like he’s got some terrell suggs inside him yearning to be free.
by (Florida) Danny Tuccitto on Feb 3, 2011 11:53 PM PST up reply actions
Could this post be anymore subjective?
Some of us will do our jobs well and some will not, but we will be judged by only one thing -- the result. -Lombardi
We should just rename it to:
2011 NFL Draft: Von Miller A Smart Pick For 49ers At Seven?
Some of us will do our jobs well and some will not, but we will be judged by only one thing -- the result. -Lombardi
That post was subjective
This post objectively pointed out that 16.5 sacks from OLBs in a 3-4 defense means the position needs to be fixed.
So better name would be: 2011 NFL Draft: Why Von Miller is a Smart Pick for the 49ers at Seven.
Coaching needed to be fixed. It was.
Going after the QB 111 times opposed to the league average of 300 certainly didn’t increase their odds for sacks to go up.
Some of us will do our jobs well and some will not, but we will be judged by only one thing -- the result. -Lombardi
So you wouldn't change our OLB corps?
I’m sure coaching will help some, but the personnel could use an upgrade
I wouldnt. Id change Soap first. LaBoy, Brooks and Haralson played off of smiths Hip, Lawson is screwed, itsjust him and 111 rushes vs 300 should yield different sacj numbers, but, he is close in forced fumbles.
Don't make me "JEEBUS" you!!!!
Once again where did you get these numbers?
Kellen Moore is awesome
Katie Mcgrath is our savior
my dog <3
I want to make sure I'm following you
We have a need to improve our OLB. However, with the players we currently have, they can work out much better if we have a better scheme to use them. If our coaching improves, then we can concentrate on much more pressing needs. We would be able to survive with these players and build depth in later rounds in later years.
by mcwagner on Feb 3, 2011 4:28 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
woodley
id like to see him on the team and im not as down on lawson as some so for the right price keep him too.
dont know the steelers situation salary wise, he’s still young so they might franchise him or lock him up long term. he may not want to leave either but you never know with pitt. id get creative with a deal like the vikings did with steve hutchinson. and add in a clause that says if team matches gets “X” amount of extra cash or whatever it was.
"Hello. My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die."
im gonna be all up on you like a spider monkey!
i can just see delonte west winning a game of poker against lebron, throwing down the cards he yells, "who's your daddy!"...."oh, sorry man"
by remembering9ergods on Feb 3, 2011 2:51 PM PST reply actions
Lawson
I actually think Lawson could be more solid in the pass rush with a better scheme and potentially better coaching. He’s fine in run support and pass coverage, but his numbers weren’t impressive last year as a pass rusher. But considering he led the team in sacks the year before I think he’s worth retaining. I suppose it’s a bit of a gamble, but I think he’s got the talent to add solid pass rush skills to his arsenal.
Why not add a guy like Cameron Jordan at the other defensive end position opposite Justin Smith to potentially open up some more pass rushing lanes? If the 49ers bring more blitzes (both in quantity and in complexity), maybe they could scheme their way to a better pass rush. Talent is important but scheming can make a huge difference.
so basically...
I choose to disagree with Ninjames about Manny Lawson. I could end up being wrong, but I think we could see improvement from him as a pass rusher in a new defensive scheme.
by David Fucillo on Feb 3, 2011 3:17 PM PST up reply actions
I agree he is worth keeping
but I think he may play better with a better olb on the other side, maybe?
that is an interesting thought of different DE to make more rushing lanes for him.
we would really miss lawson though if his replacement was not as good in run support, setting the edge and in pass coverage. two paryl harrylsons on the field at once will not be good.
"You know whats funny? I always thought uhm dogs lay eggs and I learned something new today" Peter Griffin
by HUNGRY HUNTER on Feb 3, 2011 4:02 PM PST up reply actions
I agree with you in keeping Manny Lawson and at an affordable price
and I agree that under the right scheme he can be a productive pass rusher and he has showed the ability to do everything else quite well.
You talk about adding Cameron Jordan from Cal and helping Justin Smith, well I think the same principle can be used for Manny Lawson. Say we draft Von Miller and he turns out to be a dominant Pass Rusher well that only benefits Manny, If the focus of the offense moves towards Miller then it opens up the lanes for Manny and you will see the Sack totals go up.
In addition to the fact that we have seen Pat Willis’ pass rushing skills improve in his 4 years in the league and I can only assume that he will go to another level in that respect that Manny will only benefit from having two other studs in the Linebacking core
Just so we're all clear here
I want Manny Lawson back in 2011. I want him the starter at the LOLB position. I have not indicated otherwise.
I agree with most of all of that. I want to retain Lawson.
I really like Cameron Jordan, but spending a 1st on him is not the best road to go down, IMO. I like FA defensive lineman considering that they are developed already.
And I would also like to retain LaBoy. He will most likely be inexpensive again, and he has the potential to be like a poor man’s Clay Mathews. I like Brooks as well. And who knows what Thaddeus Gibson is bringing… he is coming from that Steelers pedigree of linebackers.
Personally, I really like the options that are already on the roster. Getting an OLB probably shouldn’t be addressed before the 4th Round, IMO.
Some of us will do our jobs well and some will not, but we will be judged by only one thing -- the result. -Lombardi
Laboy...
He may even have the potential to play as well as Mathews.
Some of us will do our jobs well and some will not, but we will be judged by only one thing -- the result. -Lombardi
A better DE is needed, when I get to my PC, ill do my trade back mock, using Miller as bait.
Don't make me "JEEBUS" you!!!!
free agent defensive ends are the only way to go IMO.
Some of us will do our jobs well and some will not, but we will be judged by only one thing -- the result. -Lombardi
Agree 100%.
I like Manny Lawson. He’s done a lot, and maybe he’s not getting the sacks but he’s done pretty well putting some pressure on the QB. He’s not amazing but I would call him more “solid” than “medicore.” With so many other holes we need to fill, most notably at QB and CB, I don’t see why we should replace an already decent OLB with the #7 overall pick.
The fact is we had very little by way of scheme on any side of the ball, defensively or offensively. Just because Lawson underperformed some people’s expectations does not make him a prime target of the cleaning-house mentality we’ve got right now.
Scheme
I don’t see how scheme makes a pass rusher better. If you are a beast pass rusher you can get to the quarterback in any scheme. Manny Lawson just doesn’t have the power coming off the edges and Haralson is too slow but strong. However, both are great at stopping the run. All we need are game changing pass rushers on defense plus a corner who can challenge the Fitzgeralds of the world. Woodley would be a great addition and a rookie with the 7th pick whether its Miller or Quinn to groom for the future. What good is a secondary if we can’t put pressure on the quarterback?
scheme
Depends on how teams use the blitz. Not necessarily how many times, but mixing it up, throwing different looks, that sort of thing. The 49ers blitz a linebacker or two a decent amount, but just sending a guy barreling in doesn’t mean you’re effectively blitzing.
by David Fucillo on Feb 3, 2011 3:29 PM PST up reply actions
Just wanted to point out one other fact that people need to consider.
I keep seeing all this “we haven’t had a double digit sack artist in a long time” type of thing.
I don’t think people realize just how rare that is. There were only 8 OLB’s in the league this year that actually did that.
I just want to post this link to illustrate how far-fetched some peoples expectations are:
http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?archive=false&seasonType=REG&statisticPositionCategory=LINEBACKER&d-447263-o=2&conference=null&d-447263-s=DEFENSIVE_SACKS&experience=null&d-447263-n=1&season=2010&qualified=true&Submit=Go&tabSeq=1&d-447263-p=1
Some of us will do our jobs well and some will not, but we will be judged by only one thing -- the result. -Lombardi
And to add...
not any of those guys shared time with another player. They all started throughout the course of the year….
PLAYERS don’t get to decide when they get to go in and out of the game. People want to argue that scheme doesn’t play a part? Or that rotation doesn’t? Well au contraire mon frairs…
Some of us will do our jobs well and some will not, but we will be judged by only one thing -- the result. -Lombardi
s'il vous plaît passer la moutarde de fantaisie mon ami, Nate Davis a été notre avenir
Do you have the numbers on how snaps each player played?
and
how many times each player rushed the passer?
"You know whats funny? I always thought uhm dogs lay eggs and I learned something new today" Peter Griffin
by HUNGRY HUNTER on Feb 3, 2011 4:11 PM PST up reply actions
sort of off topic
but why does patrick willis not rush the passer more?
he seems decent at his ability to rush the passer.
he is a great tackler and excellent in run support.
pass coverage is not one of his strengths, so this would seem logical to have him rush the passer more often???
"You know whats funny? I always thought uhm dogs lay eggs and I learned something new today" Peter Griffin
Free Agent OLBs
it’s a thin crop this year.
LaMarr Woodley and Tamba Hali are about it. Barret Ruud is a pretty good linebacker if we’re running a 4-3 next year.
free agency is a last resort in 2011...CBA goes beyond Mid-Summer
you better have people in place by then
Trust me, I have no idea either.
Nitwitter
i don't think it'll go beyond mid-summer
very rarely to union and management get deals done early. both sides have to posture and thump their chests and get into pissing contests before they get down to the serious business of negotiating.
The union and the league have set one negotiating session for before the SB (which will get nothing done), but have also scheduled several more. My guess is that the Sat meeting will be to re-inroduce everybody and figure out exactly what they’re arguing over
They have been thumping their chests for almost two years now... nothing has still been done.
I would like to remain positive, but after listening to Smith and Mawae today, I am not so sure.
Some of us will do our jobs well and some will not, but we will be judged by only one thing -- the result. -Lombardi
simple posturing, drew k
labor disputes are legendary for their propensity to generate unparalleled gum flapping
what did they have to say?
I have no confidence in Smith—I think he’s as much of a bs artist as Goodell is, maybe more. I also think that DeMaurice Smith’s personal style is much more combatative than Gene Upshaw’s was, which is going to make getting a deal done all that more difficult. I think another key aspect of this is the fact that DeMaurice Smith hasn’t played any football at a level higher than high school.
Upshaw also had a reputation for being more management friendly than union friendly (which isn’t true—Upshaw had been involved in the player’s union from the very earliest days), and I think DeMaurice Smith is trying to go the opposite route, which is causing some contention.
In a nutshell, it just sounded to me like there was inevitably going to be a lock out
and that this meeting Saturday is really just a formality.
I mean, he could be full of it, but Mawae sounded the same exact way.
Some of us will do our jobs well and some will not, but we will be judged by only one thing -- the result. -Lombardi
Here's the press conference.
http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-videos/09000d5d81e1718b/Live-NFLPA-Press-Conference
and here is Mawae:
http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-network-total-access/09000d5d81e1a28f/Kevin-Mawae-Let-us-play
Some of us will do our jobs well and some will not, but we will be judged by only one thing -- the result. -Lombardi
Again
you must take every single word that comes out of their mouths with a grain of salt. We are talking about a UNION deal, here. If these guys weren’t saying these things then there would be a perception that they weren’t really looking out for the best interests of the players.
It's a thin crop most yers
Defensive linemen are a thin crop most years.
It's Whore-baugh, remember?

by 







































