The 49ers Turnovers: Can An Aggressive Defense Carry This Over?

by David Fucillo on Feb 2, 2012 8:00 AM PST in San Francisco 49ers News

As the 49ers move past the 2011 season and get ready for 2012, one comment I've noticed more and more frequently (here, twitter, everywhere) is the idea that the 49ers huge turnover margin is not sustainable. Both the 49ers offense and defense did an incredible job in the turnover department, and some view that as a sign the 49ers will return to earth in 2012.

The issue of fumble recoveries is one where luck often plays a huge role. However, the 49ers combined fumble recovery numbers were not particularly over the top. There were some definite lucky plays, with arguably the most notable being Dashon Goldson's recovery when Justin Smith stripped Jeremy Maclin. However, the actual work of stripping the ball is not necessarily some random chance happening. The 49ers defense plays some seriously aggressive football and turnovers are a benefit of that. Of course, Dashon Goldson and Tarell Brown colliding is also part of that, but you take the bad with the good.

On the other side of the ball, the 49ers committed an NFL record-low ten turnovers all season (five interceptions, five fumbles lost). As JIm Harbaugh and Greg Roman work to further implement the offense, it will be interesting to see if further comfort in the offense opens up Alex Smith to taking a few more chances. Assuming he returns in 2012, the full offseason mantra remains stuck in my head and I remain convinced he can continue to improve to some degree.

2011 was an epic season in a lot of ways and the turnover margin was as epic as anything. And yet, I don't think it is necessarily some wildly unsustainable number. It may not be another record-breaking year, but the way this team is set up on offense and defense would seem to put the team in position to at least approach the strong turnover performance in 2012. Am I way off base?

Tweet Comment 20 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Due to the comparisons to the old Ravens SB team you can look at them and the following years. Defense remained stout vs the run, but you never quite get the same amount of turnovers. Their success after that season always haulted due to an anemic passing game. Biggest fear for this niners fan.

1. Kelechi Osemele, OT/G, Iowa State
2.Xavier Rhodes CB FSU/ Vinny Curry OLB/DE Marshall/ LaMichael James*, RB, Oregon
3. Brandon Boykin, CB/KR/PR, Georgia/ Alex Okafor*, DE, Texas
4. DeMarlo belcher WR Indiana
5. Casey Hayward, CB, Vanderbilt
6. Marvin Jones WR Cal
7.T.J. Barnes*, DT/NT, Georgia Tech

by rlott#42 on Feb 2, 2012 8:18 AM PST reply actions 2 recs

yup

as much as I want Smith and Kaep to be the man, there is really no confidence that they can be the guy to keep it going. Same with our receivers outside of Davis. Don’t be rash like the Ravens and just change to change, but we do need a more efficient passing attack.

Follow @FLPReliableCPR

by mcwagner on Feb 2, 2012 11:59 AM PST up reply actions

I think

Losing Jamal Lewis for the whole year had a bit to do with that offense not being able to sustain their success. Going from 2200 yards, 4.3 y/c, to 1800 yards, 3.7 y/c is quite a dropoff.

Also the health of the defense had alot to do with their dropoff. All of the 2000 season the 11 defensive starters lost a combined 3 games to injury. In 2001, they lost 17 games to injury.

Ironically enough, the 2001 passing offense was actually a little bit more potent then the 2000 squad….must put your “biggest fear for this niners’ fan” at ease a little bit to know the fears might be a little jaded.

by Dukeston1 on Feb 3, 2012 3:53 AM PST up reply actions

Practice makes perfect.....but there is some luck involved in turnovers, and

I still say we need more “play maker” types on defense.

Players on Defense who can change the course of a game……Pass Rushers / C.B.’s

Pair Aldon Smith with another young legit Pass Rusher…..and then imagine the havoc those two would cause and how much more scary would the 9ers D be!

We need more than just Aldon Smith going into the 2012 season.

by BigMar on Feb 2, 2012 8:37 AM PST reply actions

More?

Feel lucky if everyone returns.

Support Ron Paul for President

by bignerd on Feb 2, 2012 12:12 PM PST up reply actions

Willis, J. Smith, A. Smith, Bowman, Goldson, Rodgers with Brown and McDonald getting 1/2 stud grades for 2011. I was shocked to find out Brooks had 7 sacks this season. I even forgot Whitner and his Mr. T knocking chumps out act.

Support Ron Paul for President

by bignerd on Feb 2, 2012 12:28 PM PST up reply actions

I sure hope

you don’t mean every1…as in Norris~Chilo

by Doni S on Feb 2, 2012 12:50 PM PST via mobile up reply actions

I don't see them repeating similar numbers

These TO numbers are off the charts. D will still be dominant and O will protect the ball, but the numbers will be closer to earth.

by Mood_Indigo on Feb 2, 2012 8:58 AM PST reply actions

If I remember correctly...

…we recovered 70% of total fumbles (i.e., by ourselves and the other team combined). Any time a team recovers more than 50% of its fumbles, they are a candidate for regression.

I also bet we’ll see some regression with the INTs, too, on both sides of the ball. Carlos Rogers will grab fewer INTs and Alex Smith will throw a few more.

by Bigmouth on Feb 2, 2012 9:15 AM PST reply actions

yeah

most likely we revert to more regular turnover statistics.

The offense needs to get revved up, otherwise we risk becoming Baltimore Ravens, Part II

by jviet on Feb 2, 2012 9:19 AM PST up reply actions

Live by the turnover, die by the turnover

I think you’re right- we’re unlikely to get that rate of recovery again, ditto for catching and throwing picks.

I’d say that means we need more offense!

by (site decorum) on Feb 2, 2012 9:30 AM PST up reply actions

I see us exceeding last year number i see us being the number 1. defense no doubt about

it we are one the most talented defenses in the NFL,people keep waiting 4 the other shoe 2 drop or bringing up statistics of teams falling of the next season i’m not buying it.I just think were that good we got one of the best DC in vic n ive got confidence that trent n jim will stock-pile this team with more hungry talented players from the draft n free-agency call me blind or blind-faith i just believe that.

by Jayubb415rebirth on Feb 2, 2012 9:18 AM PST reply actions

This is how I see it.

Turnover statistics will regress because our offense will be more agressive and take more chances. This will lead to more TDs but also more INTs.

by Leoniner on Feb 2, 2012 9:57 AM PST via mobile reply actions

Yeah, there's no chance we have that turnover margin.

That’s why we’ll need to improve a lot this offseason if we want to be back where we were this year.

by Odekerk on Feb 2, 2012 10:06 AM PST reply actions

Goldson, Whitner, J. Smith and Willis

those guys create turnovers, they hit hard. Don’t see that changing next season. As long as all four of them are back I’d expect a large amount of turnovers, they create an average of a fumble a game.

The interceptions is where I can seen the numbers dropping. Goldson, Brown and Rogers had 16, or an average of one a game. Could easily see that number dropping dramatically, to 7 or 8 total as opposing teams get more film on our DBs.

by reedkrase on Feb 2, 2012 10:47 AM PST reply actions

unless

our offense wakes up and forces teams to pass and pass deep. Its a team game and long drives and big scores help a defense by making the other team one dimensional. No one can run on us, I don’t see that changing EVER

Follow @FLPReliableCPR

by mcwagner on Feb 2, 2012 12:02 PM PST up reply actions

I don't think we'll cause less fumbles next season

But it would definitely surprise me if we recovered as big a percentage of fumbles as we did this year — and we recovered some big ones. Without the Eagles fumble, we would have been 12-4 and visiting New Orleans — not quite sure how that one would have turned out.

Every time Jamie Dukes says something enlightening and informative about football Jerry Rice and I mount up on our flying grizzly bears and claim pirate treasure from the moon. That's how often it happens.

by Ougadas on Feb 2, 2012 12:36 PM PST reply actions

I think our int's

will remain more or less the same, as our pass rush won’t change; fumbles recovered is liable to see a drop-off though; we’re a run-stuffing d, so overall, I think we’ll still be a top-notch defense…only this time around, our schedule has added a little extra tough sledding for us; we’re gonna find out just how good our d is against elite offenses on their turf…

by Doni S on Feb 2, 2012 1:00 PM PST via mobile reply actions

I think the biggest

reason the defense won’t have quite the same numbers is because of the type of offenses they face next year. They face GB(1), NO(2), NE(3), Det(4), NYG (9) , 5 of the top 10 scoring offenses in the nfl. Who knows how the offseason changes these teams, but it seems pretty likely that they will still be pretty potent next year as well.

by Dukeston1 on Feb 3, 2012 4:26 AM PST reply actions

I think we will cause roughly the same amount of fumbles...

but we will probably only recover 40-50% of them, and then maybe the INTs drop by 5 or 6 total, while Alex Smith throws 4 or 5 more. However, if we can score at least 7-8 more TDs on the season and hold teams to fewer total passing yards (while staying stout against the run and dominant in the red zone on D), it will even out. Maybe Smith can top 3500 passing yards and just a better offense will counter the likely drop in turnover margin. If everything else on D stays the same but the offense improves, we should be fine.

by Kevin SF Giants NYC on Feb 3, 2012 7:36 AM PST reply actions