49ers 20 - Arizona 17: The Day After
by Fooch on Sep 11, 2007 3:06 PM PDT
in News
14 comments
I think we've all sufficiently calmed down from an epic finish to an ugly victory. It took me an hour to completely unwind from that finish. There was some good, some bad a whole lot of ugly, but in the end the 49ers pulled out the key W.
Before we begin looking ahead to a tough, but very winnable Week 2 matchup at St. Louis, it's time for some constructive criticism of the team. Firs though, some kudos to the defense. The defense looked significantly better than they had all preseason. They managed to force Matt Leinart out of the pocket and get penetration into the backfield. Patrick Willis played like a man possessed as he was all over the field making plays. Nate Clements and Walt Harris held the Boldin/Fitzgerald duo to a mere 42 yards combined. While Edgerrin James finished with 92 yards, he definitely had to work for them as his longest run was only 9 yards. Outside of a couple missed tackles, the linebacker corp looked like a strength.
The offense is another story entirely. I think it is safe to say that the offense realizes it needs to carry more of its end of the bargain going forward. Obviously they stepped up in the 4th quarter, but this is not going to be happening every single week. The 49ers defense gave the offense several opportunities to put this game away early and they simply could not take advantage.
- Alex Smith - The difference between 57 minutes of Alex Smith and final 3 minutes of Alex Smith was dramatic. Most of the game Smith would drop back to pass and roll to the left or right and back throwing wobbly passes off his back foot. During the final drive, Smith was stepping up into the pocket in the face of a quality pass rush and firing the ball with precision. We definitely need more of 4th quarter Alex.
- Offensive line - Just seemed overwhelmed for much of the game as Alex Smith got popped needlessly several times. After Frank Gore rushed for the touchdown, he couldn't seem to find any more significant holes. The line is supposed to be a strength of this team, but maybe they need some time to gel. They've got a rookie and guys that missed tie due to injury last year.
- Frank Gore - Aside from th 21 yard reception he had, Frank Gore seemed to struggle receiving the ball out of the backfield. Maybe it's the hand, maybe not. Thoughts? I'm not sure if there is blame to be handed out to the line for his poor rushing performance, or if he was also shaking off a little rust. At times he shot into the holes, other times he couldn't get more than a couple yards.
- Wide Receivers - I still wish Lelie had seen the field more and I certainly wish Darrell Jackson cuts down on his drops...although that one at the end of the game was a tough catch for anybody. The receivers looked solid in hauling in receptions on the last drive, so we'll see which group comes to play next week.
- Vernon Davis - A complete non-factor in terms of receptions. When I get home this afternoon I'm going to rewatch the game to see what his contributions were. Sometimes it's difficult to keep track of the tight end when he's not hauling in passes. I recall a solid block, but can't remember much else. Anyone recall offhand? One plus was that we didn't seem going all TO on Smith...at least that I can recall.:)
- Jim Hostler - For 3+ quarters, the play-calling was unimaginative and it actually felt like preseason calls. A couple of runs followed by a short, incomplete pass. Or, if the team had a penalty, they'd go for a cheapy screen pass on 3rd and 15. Not the kind of imaginative play-calling we were hoping for. Maybe Hostler was just trying to get his sea legs. We'll just hope that's the case because the play-calling was definitely better late in the game. Did we have ANY deep passes for the incomplete bomb to DJack? The deepest involved a 10 or 15 yard overthrow. And on 1st and 1, I think we all agree Frank Gore should be slamming it up the middle until you get first down. Obviously Alex Smith made a magnificent play on 4th and 1, but he should not have been in that position.
Obviously that covers just about every offensive position. The team definitely realizes there is plenty of room for improvement. Normally when you win a stunner it's easy to overlook the negatives that forced you into a comeback situation in the first place. The one plus about playing so atrociously is that it's virtually impossible to NOT realize how badly you performed. We have some smart guys on this team and they are not going to rest on any laurels they may think they have. I fully expect an improved offensive performance this weekend.
0 recs |
14 comments
Email
Print
Comments
From what I've read...
It could just be wishful thinking on my part, but it makes sense in my head.
by sfgfan on Sep 11, 2007 3:19 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
It does make some sense
by marcello on Sep 11, 2007 3:29 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
competitive edge
I certainly hope that's the reason for the vanilla offense yesterday. As far as I'm concerned, once the regular season starts there's no point in holding back plays. Every game is worth as much as the next and you don't wanna blow a perfectly winnable game.
by Fooch on Sep 11, 2007 3:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nolan
by sfgfan on Sep 11, 2007 3:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
OT, sort of
He did all of the play-calling, allowing Nolan to sit back and manage the game. According to my numbers, Manusky called six-man rushes on first-and-15 and first-and-20, and second-and-10. He brought five pass-rushers on eight second-down plays and three third-down plays. In all, he brought extra pass-rushers 17 times in the game.
--But even more than the play-calling, Nolan said Manusky and the defensive staff did a fine job of preparing the players for what the Cardinals want to do on offense. Even when something went awry, the 49ers showed they were well-prepared.
Praise for Manusky, and rightfully so. I think he came into the week preparing the 49ers to shut down the pass, as the run defense will take care of itself. I mentioned this in my recap of the game (in the recap thread) but I'll say it again: it's better to give up a few 5 or 8 yard gains on the ground than 20+ yard gains through the air. When they needed to, they were able to lock down Edge and Co.
"The first thing the committee brought to my attention was they thought it was incomplete without one player in that committee, and that was B.Y.," Nolan said.
Awesome show of team camaraderie in making him a captain. He hustled his tail off last night, and honestly, he's a "gimme" as a captain.
This goes in line with my theory that they didn't want to open up the playbook because they didn't have to. I'm expecting the playbook to be opened up a bit next week at St. Louis.
by sfgfan on Sep 11, 2007 3:37 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Frank the Tank
L. Tomlinson - 25/51/1
L. Johnson - 43/44/0
S. Jackson - 58/3/0
S. Alexander - 105/12/1
F. Gore - 55/21/1
Three of these guys sat out every preseason snap and two of them didn't even practice until last week. These guys are just not in stride.
I think Gore's performance was what should be expected considering this was his first game action since the Pro Bowl. Look for him to ruin the Rams who gave up 186 rushing yards and 13 rushing 1st downs to a Panthers team whose running backs ranked 22nd in the NFL (see below).
by Nineraguan on Sep 11, 2007 5:53 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Not so fast
Tomlinson - The Bears were stacking 8 guys in the box the entire game. They decided they would not let LT beat them on the ground, now thru the air is a different story. I'm pretty sure the Bears could consistently shut down any running back with 8 in the box.
Johnson - Didn't get to watch the game but he only had 10 carries and 4.3 yards/carry is pretty solid. Without a QB and with the OL problems LJ is going to have some trouble coming anywhere close to his numbers last year.
Jackson - Jackson actually rushed for like 27 yards against Carolina last year. They might just know how to shut him down.
Alexander - He looked pretty solid late in the game and eclisped the 100 yard mark.
Gore - Being in his third year I wouldn't expect him to know how to prepare for the first game without seeing any action in the preason, he's no LT, yet. So out of the 5 he probably the only one rusty.
I'm not sure where your getting your info but Gore and LT are the only guys on that list that didn't play in the preseason.
by methodrampage on Sep 12, 2007 8:11 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Jackson
Jackson's fumbles are the only thing that could have been a result of not playing in the preseason. You'd think, though, that if you're a top 5 back in this league, holding onto the rock has to come naturally to you.
by sfgfan on Sep 12, 2007 9:24 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Jackson
by methodrampage on Sep 12, 2007 10:28 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Play-calling
Watching the game on TV you're limited to see the coverages and who gets open, but I hear that there were plenty of plays where Davis was open. Or he was being kept in to block.
The thing is, he's a weapon, so at least some of the time you've got to use him.
How about a few more designed rollouts and designed quarterback runs to take advantage of overactive linebackers? How about passing on first down instead of handing it to Gore to go up the middle? If Jackson keeps dropping the ball, how about giving Lelie or even Jacobs some more playing time?
The question I have is whether this is Hostler's nature, or if Nolan, being so defense-minded, wanted the offense to be conservative? Smith was rushing a lot of those dump offs, but the reason he was rushed was because the Cardinals knew exactly what was coming.
by Bob In Pacifica on Sep 11, 2007 6:17 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Conservative?
This is a direct challenge to the defense. It says, "We don't need no stinkin' blockin' fullback. Come and get us if you can."
We saw how that worked out.
Without a fullback to help out on the pass blocking, the play has to be quick - a three step drop and fling it.
In the "good old days" (when I was less recollection-challenged), the Niners bread-and-butter was the quick slant over the middle. How many times did Rice, Taylor, et. al., turn a vacated area into a big gain? If there was someone waiting in the middle, Montana had the good sense to throw it low to prevent his receiver from getting killed. Take the four or five yards, and line up again. (Young learned that skill only after he got Taylor killed once). DeBerg, on the other hand, specialized in throwing these as one-hoppers, LOL.
In my view, a 49er offense that doesn't combat the rush with quick passes will have a long season. Let's hope they figure this out.
My first post here. Greetings, all! Go Niners!
by Roger from SF on Sep 12, 2007 3:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Welcome...
by Fooch on Sep 12, 2007 6:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I disagree with a point above
The disagreement-- first-and-1 is a bizarre situation (and I'm a little unclear why it was first-and-1 and not second-and-1, but I guess that's why I'm not an NFL referee) but the point really holds for second-and-1, too, which is obviously way, way more frequent.
And that's this: let's suppose you throw an incompletion. Well, then it's only third (or in this case, second) and 1. You're probably going to convert that. So why not take a deep shot on second-and-very-short? It's almost like a free play; you can probably cash in the first down when you have to. Also, you have a decent chance of making the first on a dump-off or scramble.
So I'm a big fan of the deep pass on second-and-1 in any event. Think of it this way-- would you rather have second-and-1 or first-and-10? I'd rather have the former. So why not behave more aggressively when you're in a more advantageous position? Far too many teams are single-minded about getting first downs in those situations. The goal isn't to get a first down-- it's to get a touchdown!
All of the above is even more so-- far, far more so-- in a first-and-1 in 4-down territory. Now instead of one free play, you have at least two and arguably three. Second-and-1 is such an advantageous position that a mere 3-5 yard gain isn't worth giving it up. Take the deep shot on first AND second down. If you're really fortunate, you may even catch the defense with their pants down (as they did on the Jackson almost-catch) expecting a run to pick up the first. If it doesn't work out, you shrug your shoulders and run or short-pass on 3rd down to pick up the first.
Honestly, if I was a defensive coordinator, and the other team had first-and-1, I'd tell them to let the offense have the first down if they run the ball. It's that sucky a situation for the defense.
by Zagarna on Sep 11, 2007 9:19 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
welcome and quality point
I just went back to my TiVoed copy of the game (and checked out the Play-by-Play to check out that face mask that led tot he 1st and 1. It was a 5-yard penalty that they added on to the 4 yards Battle catch and replayed first down.
Looking at a replay of that sequence of plays, it looks like the first down play broke down before Smith could look downfield and ended up with the incomplete dump off to gore. 2nd down was the incomplete bomb to Jackson. 3rd down they lined up with 3 receivers and a single RB, and threw a quick pass to Arnaz Battle who had run a little hitch pattern just past the first down marker. So not the worst set of plays, but on that third down play, at least go play action to Gore if you're gonna throw for the first down. I definitely don't think time was an issue. On 4th down they still had 1:34 to go, which is a lifetime when you're already on your opponents side of the field (AZ 46).
Of course it obviously all worked out just fine in the end!
by Fooch on Sep 11, 2007 9:40 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
