Jump to content

Change Defense


king_jlind

Recommended Posts

Maybe I’m the only one who thinks this but why are we trying so hard to emulate the Shehawks. I feel as if we have the pieces to successfully move back to a 3-4 defense. This would also give players like Soloman a better chance than the constant changing of positions he’s doing. A small change to a 3-4 would also mean we can still play our base Cover 3. The only difference is we can disguise the 4th rusher. 

RE DEFO

NOSE DJ Jones

LE Solomon/Armstead

ROLB Dee Ford

RILB Fred Warner

LILB KWON

LOLB Nick Bosa

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Justone2 said:

Really there ain't much of a change between the 4-3 under and the 3-4 base.

Agreed. Nickel is the base defense nowadays and in both scheme's you still rushing with a four man front in the nickel and dime so it's not much of a difference. The issue with Thomas isn't the scheme, it's what they're asking him to do in the scheme. He's not the pass-rushing DE that envisioned him being. He's basically a 3-Tech. Problem is, we have a outstanding 3-Tech already in DeFo. Changing the scheme won't fix that or the holes in the secondary. It won't make a difference imo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Justone2 said:

Really there ain't much of a change between the 4-3 under and the 3-4 base.

Pretty much. And then given the fact that you're in a nickel or dime sub 60% of the time or more, base alignments are very overrated

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, king_jlind said:

I’ve been hearing that Dee Ford may not have a position on base downs. That’s too much money a pay a situational player. 

Ford is the Leo. That's where he'll play 100% of the time. Some ppl are questioning his fit because he's a poor run defender. That's just something he'll have to work on and improve. But the other 10 guys can stop the run. As long as he's getting after the QB at a high rate and helping us get off the field on 3rd downs, he'll earn every penny of that contract.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, king_jlind said:

I’ve been hearing that Dee Ford may not have a position on base downs. That’s too much money a pay a situational player. 

if you were listening to the locked on 49ers podcast, they were more spitballing as it pertains to the wide 9.  3-4/4-3 doesn't matter. Ford and (presumably Bosa) the other end will be hand in the dirt when their on the field. I suspect the key rotational piece on the line will be Solly. They're going to want to have these guys subbing out on a regular basis and base down is the best to do that. Just so happens, base is the best package for DJ Jones, Solly and Arik Armstead. If I'm the DL coach, thats when I'm looking to either get one of Bosa or Ford off the field. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, king_jlind said:

Maybe I’m the only one who thinks this but why are we trying so hard to emulate the Shehawks. I feel as if we have the pieces to successfully move back to a 3-4 defense. This would also give players like Soloman a better chance than the constant changing of positions he’s doing. A small change to a 3-4 would also mean we can still play our base Cover 3. The only difference is we can disguise the 4th rusher. 

RE DEFO

NOSE DJ Jones

LE Solomon/Armstead

ROLB Dee Ford

RILB Fred Warner

LILB KWON

LOLB Joey 

Who is Joey lol? You mean Nick for Nick Bosa?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, John232 said:

Just so happens, base is the best package for DJ Jones, Solly and Arik Armstead. If I'm the DL coach, thats when I'm looking to either get one of Bosa or Ford off the field

The problem with this is that teams will just start throwing on first down. Teams would see that we don't have a pass rushing threat in the game and would be able to pick us apart. 

I'm all for rotating the DL but part of the reason you need multiple pass rushers on your team is to ensure you can have at least one pass rusher in the game at all times. Teams throw more than 50% of the time now

I am fine with our front, we are finally getting enough guys to run it properly if we can get a SAM worth a damn 

I want to run less cover three and use more cover 2 and man coverage. That is where the defense needs to evolve, on the back end 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, king_jlind said:

I’ve been hearing that Dee Ford may not have a position on base downs. That’s too much money a pay a situational player. 

As others have said, he's the LEO in a 4-3 under. He's the only natural and true LEO on the roster. He'll be out there on base downs. 

That being said, I have to tl;dr diatribe this comment for a minute, because I loathe this line of thinking for the bolded. It's so archaic to me. First, let me start by saying, no doubt that Ford is hitting 80-90% snap counts. He's not going to be off the field much, mostly for injuries and breathers, to be sure, and nothing performance related, no matter how bad against the run he is. The fact of the matter is, with the modern day offenses and the proliferation of the passing game, particularly on 1st and ten, it's much harder to predict traditional running situations, so you would really not feel comfortable in too many situations taking him off the field. 

That being said, "too much money to pay a situational player"? Here's the thing...we are paying him for what he does in a particular situation. If I were to ask this forum "how much of Ford's contract do you think that we are paying for his pass rushing and how much do you think that we are paying for his ability to hold an edge and stop the run?", I don't think I'm going to get many responses saying, "yeah, I think we are giving him 13 million to rush the passer and 4.5 for stopping the run". No way. We are paying him what we are paying him to get to the quarterback, create pressure and potentially turnovers. If anything, we were probably like "yeah, we'll give you 19.5 million for rushing the passer, but we are going to subtract 2 million for the way you play the run" lol. If he's getting 14 sacks in a season, nobody on here or in the front office is going to care that we are paying him that much money without ever having seen him on the field in base defense against the run. Nobody. Because he's doing the job we are actually paying him for. He doesn't need to play 15%  more (superfluous) snaps against the run (and probably poorly) to make him worth that salary. 

Secondarily, paying Ford all that money doesn't suddenly make him a better run defender. That's not a condemnation or a critique on him as a player. Just an acceptance of the player he has shown to be thus far and is unlikely to differentiate from. Your goal is to win football games. In order to win football games, you would want your best players on the field for any given situation (note the "for"). Is Dee Ford a better player than Armstead and Solly? Yeah, for sure. That doesn't make him a better run defender from the edge than either of those guys. So why would you want him in there in those situations over those two guys? Those two guys present us with the best possible option of having that down go in our favor (again, talking specifically about a running play).  Just because you are paying him that much money? By doing that you are actually making your team worse in that particular situation, which is the exact opposite of what you were hoping for when you traded a high future pick and gave him all that money. It's self defeating. Baseball latched on to this notion forever ago. This is one of the reasons that Joe Maddon has been so successful as a manager. Like, Brandon Belt is a better player than Steven Pearce. No doubt about that. But if you were facing a left handed pitcher, you'd rather start Steven Pearce at first base, despite the fact that Belt makes a ton more money. Belt's career against LHP .256 / .339 / .431 and an OPS+ of 90, which is 10% lower than a league average player. Pearce, meanwhile, hits .266 / .352 / .500, with an OPS+ of 117, or 17% above league average. That's a 27% difference in their performance against left handed pitchers, despite the fact that Belt is the superior player. So if you're going up against a left handed pitcher that day, wouldn't you want to have the roster in place to give you the best chance to win that game? I would, regardless of what Belt makes. It simply does not help the team any to play Ford in situations where he's flat out not good and could be detrimental to the team, when we actually have other options who are much better against the run. We are in a very unique and enviable position where we can mix and match and maximize defensive efficiency on this team by having guys with very specific, good and bad skillsets.

Now again, we are never going to do all that simply because modern day offenses simply don't allow for it. But on a philosophical level, I'm just so adamantly opposed to the ideology being espoused in that post. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Keep the 30% base D as is. Buck is perfect at 3t...

Bosa will be perfect at LEO.. These two guys get to FEAST just based off of the 43 Under scheme, which makes them very hard to put extra blockers towards. 

 

AA gets the 5t and DJJ at 1t... rotation coming from Thomas at the 1t or 3t as needed. Thomas moves inside next to Buck in 70% Nickel. 

 

Bosa at LEO... wut???? YES... it's the only move for this 43 Under! so, what happens to Dee???

This is where Dee Ford should see his 30% base D snaps as the SAM.. and then slide into ER when we go to 70% Nickel. Get more aggressive and send him as that SAM on at least half of those snaps.. and of course all of the ER snaps. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, oldman9er said:

Keep the 30% base D as is. Buck is perfect at 3t...

Bosa will be perfect at LEO.. These two guys get to FEAST just based off of the 43 Under scheme, which makes them very hard to put extra blockers towards. 

 

AA gets the 5t and DJJ at 1t... rotation coming from Thomas at the 1t or 3t as needed. Thomas moves inside next to Buck in 70% Nickel. 

 

Bosa at LEO... wut???? YES... it's the only move for this 43 Under! so, what happens to Dee???

This is where Dee Ford should see his 30% base D snaps as the SAM.. and then slide into ER when we go to 70% Nickel. Get more aggressive and send him as that SAM on at least half of those snaps.. and of course all of the ER snaps. 

That's why I was hoping we'd go after Justin Houston. Houston@Leo and Ford as the SAM in base would have be such a great look. Also would have assured me that Q. Williams was our pick@#2 overall. But still may possible...Shane Ray is still out there and would be nice fit@SAM in base and a bookend opposite Ford in nickel. Might be a good value signing. Or Nick Perry maybe...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, N4L said:

The problem with this is that teams will just start throwing on first down. Teams would see that we don't have a pass rushing threat in the game and would be able to pick us apart. 

I'm all for rotating the DL but part of the reason you need multiple pass rushers on your team is to ensure you can have at least one pass rusher in the game at all times. Teams throw more than 50% of the time now

I am fine with our front, we are finally getting enough guys to run it properly if we can get a SAM worth a damn 

I want to run less cover three and use more cover 2 and man coverage. That is where the defense needs to evolve, on the back end 

Yeah, I didn't mean as a straight block rotation. Just in terms of optimizing a rotation. We can pretty much safely always have someone elite at rushing the passer on the edge and still have a really good rotation. We don't want to be playing our lineman at a BUckner pace.

 

Totally agree on the cover 2. I think if we do move to cover 2, I'll see why they decided not to go in on safety in free agency..not that it's a good justification, just makes way more sense than sticking with cover 3 and not addressing one of our most chaotic positions. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, John232 said:

I think if we do move to cover 2, I'll see why they decided not to go in on safety in free agency..not that it's a good justification, just makes way more sense than sticking with cover 3 and not addressing one of our most chaotic positions. 

This is exactly what I keep saying. It makes sense logically why they didn't make FS a priority, knowing the coverages would change and the need for a true center fielder would be lessened. At least that's how I'm justifying it as a fan lol 

Our defense looked completely lost with their assignments throughout the entire year, and especially in the redzone. It makes perfect sense to change the way we cover people to some degree, because we haven't shown that we are capable of actually running a zone defense 

This front office has actually spent a fair amount of capital on the secondary. We drafted a few guys in the later rounds the last two years. Haven't been overly aggressive with it, but the last two years we've spent a third on a corner and then taken more guys later. You'd hope a legit pass rush would change the way our secondary looks 

No one talks about my guy marcell Harris, but that dude balled out at the end of the season. #41 was all over the place flying around. He seemed like a steal.

Then again, that's what everyone said about Colbert last off-season. Hard not to like a guy who flies around and looks like he is moving 120% faster than everyone else though. Harris looked really really good last year imo. Was always around the ball. The guys name hasn't come up here once all off-season lol 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...