Fire Pettine

[Sasquatch]

8 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

Not adequately.

• Kept 4 DBs in the game against their 1 WR set the entire first half.
• Kept lining up in a heavy box against one particular offensive alignment and then when the TE went into motion, didn't have the second level group shift to a heavy box, kept just letting 2 DBs sit in space without a gap assignment while one gap went unsatisfactorily covered by a safety 12 yards off the ball.
• Kept just lining up in a light box ocasionally, there was a 3rd and 2 that made me want to scream. 
• At one point he benched Goodson for Campbell. I really loved playing our nickel look against their 21 personnel after being punched in the mouth all game. 

 

My question is WTF was Pettine thinking?  I’d really like to know, or try to understand.

[AlexGreen#20]

1 hour ago, Outpost31 said:

Pettine was said to not be afraid of getting after his own players.  I’ll take someone who knows how to adapt and puts the players he has above the players he wants to have.  
 

Someone who schemes for his players, not who tries to get his players fit his scheme.

And also who stands on sideline and runs an attacking 4-3.

I really don't think that's the issue with Pettine. We've ran pretty darn different defenses the last two years based on what we had. 

+++

We had problems this year getting beat by teams playing their 12 personnel because we didn't want to play our 3-4. which would have Lancaster and Goodson on the field at the same time.

The 49ers took it up a notch and played their 22 personnel, begging us to take Kevin King off the field for one of Gary (in a role he would have to cover in, or moving Preston to ILB), Adams (requires moving Preston to ILB), Kingsley (requires moving Preston to ILB), Fackrell at ILB against a read heavy team, Burks, Summers, Campbell, or one of the other bad safeties that we have. 

We weren't willing to do it.

[AlexGreen#20]

2 minutes ago, Sasquatch said:

My question is WTF was Pettine thinking?  I’d really like to know, or try to understand.

49ers first really successful play was the 30 yard deep in to Samuel.

Their 21 personnel against our base defense. We're playing what looks like a quarter-quarter-half. They motion the FB out to the top of the formation leaving Goodson lined up over Samuel.  Goodson got fried alive on that. So we're already trying to keep Goodson out of this game. 

+++

49ers start their 3rd drive, and come out in their 22 personnel. 1 WR, 2 TEs, 1 RB, 1 FB. 

What do you do? Do you just keep the same group and try and figure something out with the DBs? Basically move King to the high safety role, move Savage to the Strong Safety, and move Amos to LB?

Do you bring somebody in? We're already doing our best to keep Goodson out of the game, now we need to have Goodson, Lancaster AND some other guy?

If you bring in the other guy, who is it?

Our starters are already dizzy from all the motion and reads they're having to make. Do you trust Burks? Do you trust Summers? Do you try Fackrell at ILB? Do you put one of Adams/Keke/Gary in and essentially move Preston Smith to ILB? If you do any of these moves what does it do to your coverage setup? You're not playing any man to man at that point.

This wasn't an easy week by any stretch. But we could have done significantly better.

[Sasquatch]

13 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

49ers first really successful play was the 30 yard deep in to Samuel.

Their 21 personnel against our base defense. We're playing what looks like a quarter-quarter-half. They motion the FB out to the top of the formation leaving Goodson lined up over Samuel.  Goodson got fried alive on that. So we're already trying to keep Goodson out of this game. 

+++

49ers start their 3rd drive, and come out in their 22 personnel. 1 WR, 2 TEs, 1 RB, 1 FB. 

What do you do? Do you just keep the same group and try and figure something out with the DBs? Basically move King to the high safety role, move Savage to the Strong Safety, and move Amos to LB?

Do you bring somebody in? We're already doing our best to keep Goodson out of the game, now we need to have Goodson, Lancaster AND some other guy?

If you bring in the other guy, who is it?

Our starters are already dizzy from all the motion and reads they're having to make. Do you trust Burks? Do you trust Summers? Do you try Fackrell at ILB? Do you put one of Adams/Keke/Gary in and essentially move Preston Smith to ILB? If you do any of these moves what does it do to your coverage setup? You're not playing any man to man at that point.

This wasn't an easy week by any stretch. But we could have done significantly better.

Seems complicated enough for me, never mind what the players are trying to breakdown in mere seconds.  If the Packers personnel and/or scheme was incapable of devising a strategy to punch back on defense, how do other teams do it - or at least keep it competitive - with similar or less talented personnel?  Is Shanny that much of a genius, or did we just drop the ball.  Sorry for the follow-on questions, but you seem to understand this stuff as well or better than anyone.

[Gopackgonerd]

52 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

Not adequately.

• Kept 4 DBs in the game against their 1 WR set the entire first half.
• Kept lining up in a heavy box against one particular offensive alignment and then when the TE went into motion, didn't have the second level group shift to a heavy box, kept just letting 2 DBs sit in space without a gap assignment while one gap went unsatisfactorily covered by a safety 12 yards off the ball.
• Kept just lining up in a light box ocasionally, there was a 3rd and 2 that made me want to scream. 
• At one point he benched Goodson for Campbell. I really loved playing our nickel look against their 21 personnel after being punched in the mouth all game. 

 

The touchdown before the half made me mad and looking back at it made me even more angrier. We pretty much gave them it there. It was a weird light box to the left, Tramon was inside over the WR and was overmatched, Z was outside of Tramon and went around the outside and blocked by Kittle , idunno what the hell savage was doing there, he took himself out of the play. God our saftey play was horrendous sunday.

Edited January 22, 2020 by Gopackgonerd

[AlexGreen#20]

12 minutes ago, Sasquatch said:

Seems complicated enough for me, never mind what the players are trying to breakdown in mere seconds.  If the Packers personnel and/or scheme was incapable of devising a strategy to punch back on defense, how do other teams do it - or at least keep it competitive - with similar or less talented personnel?  Is Shanny that much of a genius, or did we just drop the ball.  Sorry for the follow-on questions, but you seem to understand this stuff as well or better than anyone.

Combination of a lot of things:

1. Shanny is pretty damn smart. I haven't seen a run gameplan that impressive since Jim Harbaugh was running the show down there, all due respect to the other Harbaugh who ran an incredible run game this year. 

2. We played like crap. Even regardless of all the things that went wrong schematically, our execution was awful. Lancaster, Lowry, Adams, Fackrell, Savage, and Amos all had absolutely brutal days just in far of not getting combo'd and making tackles in the open field. 

3. Our talent does not match up well with theirs at all. We have a pretty darn good top 11 guys. But our biggest weakness was our 3T, our 5T, and our 2nd ILB. By playing the personnel that they did, they put all of those guys on the field, and then made us decide, do we still want to play with that group at a size disadvantage, or do we want to add ANOTHER scrub to the field. That killed us. Pettine wants to play dime and doesn't want to play heavy. Their team is built around making us play heavy. 

Becuase ILB is one of the easiest positions to find playable bodies at, most teams are typically willing to add another body to the middle of the field to muck things up. We didn't have another body.  Every possible option was bad. 

4. There isn't much disguise in our defense. We're very much a defense that what you see is what you get. This 49ers offense isn't great at seeing through the disguises, but once it has the defense marked, it is brutally efficient. We weren't good enough to see the play action package that they had for us. It could have been so much worse. 

[AlexGreen#20]

19 minutes ago, Gopackgonerd said:

The touchdown before the half made me mad and looking back at it made me even more angrier. We pretty much gave them it there. It was a weird light box to the left, Tramon was inside over the WR and was overmatched, Z was outside of Tramon and went around the outside and blocked by Kittle , idunno what the hell savage was doing there, he took himself out of the play. God our saftey play was horrendous sunday.

You're talking about the one at 50 seconds left in the 2nd quarter.

There was another one at 3:32 in the 2nd quarter that had me foaming at the mouth. 

[Pugger]

5 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

Combination of a lot of things:

1. Shanny is pretty damn smart. I haven't seen a run gameplan that impressive since Jim Harbaugh was running the show down there, all due respect to the other Harbaugh who ran an incredible run game this year. 

2. We played like crap. Even regardless of all the things that went wrong schematically, our execution was awful. Lancaster, Lowry, Adams, Fackrell, Savage, and Amos all had absolutely brutal days just in far of not getting combo'd and making tackles in the open field. 

3. Our talent does not match up well with theirs at all. We have a pretty darn good top 11 guys. But our biggest weakness was our 3T, our 5T, and our 2nd ILB. By playing the personnel that they did, they put all of those guys on the field, and then made us decide, do we still want to play with that group at a size disadvantage, or do we want to add ANOTHER scrub to the field. That killed us. Pettine wants to play dime and doesn't want to play heavy. Their team is built around making us play heavy. 

Becuase ILB is one of the easiest positions to find playable bodies at, most teams are typically willing to add another body to the middle of the field to muck things up. We didn't have another body.  Every possible option was bad. 

4. There isn't much disguise in our defense. We're very much a defense that what you see is what you get. This 49ers offense isn't great at seeing through the disguises, but once it has the defense marked, it is brutally efficient. We weren't good enough to see the play action package that they had for us. It could have been so much worse. 

As the saying goes - you can't make chicken salad out of chicken droppings.  We have good players but not enough of them to match up with teams like SF.   Unless the middle of this defense is fixed it won't matter who our DC is.

[Sasquatch]

4 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

Combination of a lot of things:

1. Shanny is pretty damn smart. I haven't seen a run gameplan that impressive since Jim Harbaugh was running the show down there, all due respect to the other Harbaugh who ran an incredible run game this year. 

2. We played like crap. Even regardless of all the things that went wrong schematically, our execution was awful. Lancaster, Lowry, Adams, Fackrell, Savage, and Amos all had absolutely brutal days just in far of not getting combo'd and making tackles in the open field. 

3. Our talent does not match up well with theirs at all. We have a pretty darn good top 11 guys. But our biggest weakness was our 3T, our 5T, and our 2nd ILB. By playing the personnel that they did, they put all of those guys on the field, and then made us decide, do we still want to play with that group at a size disadvantage, or do we want to add ANOTHER scrub to the field. That killed us. Pettine wants to play dime and doesn't want to play heavy. Their team is built around making us play heavy. 

Becuase ILB is one of the easiest positions to find playable bodies at, most teams are typically willing to add another body to the middle of the field to muck things up. We didn't have another body.  Every possible option was bad. 

4. There isn't much disguise in our defense. We're very much a defense that what you see is what you get. This 49ers offense isn't great at seeing through the disguises, but once it has the defense marked, it is brutally efficient. We weren't good enough to see the play action package that they had for us. It could have been so much worse. 

Thank you!  I don’t think that’s said enough in this forum.  There’s an awful lot of good information shared in here - along with the hot takes, awful takes, jokes, hazing, and occasionally a few trolls. 

It’s often said you have to beat the the man in front of you - win the one-on-ones.  I honestly didn’t see us winning the matchups as I watched this game and assumed it had to be the scheme.  Turns out it was several factors as you pointed out.  I feel I can now move on from this game.  Thanks again for helping me sort it out.
 

[AlexGreen#20]

1 minute ago, Sasquatch said:

Thank you!  I don’t think that’s said enough in this forum.  There’s an awful lot of good information shared in here - along with the hot takes, awful takes, jokes, hazing, and occasionally a few trolls. 

It’s often said you have to beat the the man in front of you - win the one-on-ones.  I honestly didn’t see us winning the matchups as I watched this game and assumed it had to be the scheme.  Turns out it was several factors as you pointed out.  I feel I can now move on from this game.  Thanks again for helping me sort it out.
 

You're welcome. I'll post a video at some point. Though QB School just did most of the offensive plays. 

[Leader]

3 hours ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

Our talent does not match up well with theirs at all. We have a pretty darn good top 11 guys. But our biggest weakness was our 3T, our 5T, and our 2nd ILB. By playing the personnel that they did, they put all of those guys on the field, and then made us decide, do we still want to play with that group at a size disadvantage, or do we want to add ANOTHER scrub to the field. That killed us. Pettine wants to play dime and doesn't want to play heavy. Their team is built around making us play heavy.

Good post. The context of the comment was the defense, so just asking to confirm this refers to the D and not the roster overall.

My read on your thoughts was we were kinda screwed in the personnel matchup. We could have tweaked some alignments (and probably should have) but the personnel groupings (and options) on D  werent terrific based on the mix of talent we had. I think we kinda got a feel for that at stretches during the season - we were an uneven team overall - but when you get matched up with the best.....the flaws show up more. 

Listen SF is riding out on front of their board right now. They're hanging ten. They sucked for a good while, reworked / cleaned up their cap/roster and have reloaded. **** it happens. They're dogs and it appears to be their day. We're just gonna have to respond / match it.

We won 14 games and have to get better (or get a more fortunate paring.....) to win that 15th, 16th.

Okay. I can live with that.

[Gopackgonerd]

5 hours ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

You're talking about the one at 50 seconds left in the 2nd quarter.

There was another one at 3:32 in the 2nd quarter that had me foaming at the mouth. 

Yuck. Was putting Z in the middle there pretty much useless this game? It seemed like it

[coachbuns]

6 hours ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

49ers first really successful play was the 30 yard deep in to Samuel.

Their 21 personnel against our base defense. We're playing what looks like a quarter-quarter-half. They motion the FB out to the top of the formation leaving Goodson lined up over Samuel.  Goodson got fried alive on that. So we're already trying to keep Goodson out of this game. 

+++

49ers start their 3rd drive, and come out in their 22 personnel. 1 WR, 2 TEs, 1 RB, 1 FB. 

What do you do? Do you just keep the same group and try and figure something out with the DBs? Basically move King to the high safety role, move Savage to the Strong Safety, and move Amos to LB?

Do you bring somebody in? We're already doing our best to keep Goodson out of the game, now we need to have Goodson, Lancaster AND some other guy?

If you bring in the other guy, who is it?

Our starters are already dizzy from all the motion and reads they're having to make. Do you trust Burks? Do you trust Summers? Do you try Fackrell at ILB? Do you put one of Adams/Keke/Gary in and essentially move Preston Smith to ILB? If you do any of these moves what does it do to your coverage setup? You're not playing any man to man at that point.

This wasn't an easy week by any stretch. But we could have done significantly better.

Look at the names you mentioned ..  Goodson, Lancaster, Burks, Summers, Fackrell, Adams, Keke, Gary.  What the hell?  Talent, talent, talent is needed but that being said, I'm not convinced whatsoever Pettine is the answer.  I think his scheming is stale and doesn't fit the Packers defensive personnel.  Time to fix both.

[coachbuns]

6 hours ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

Combination of a lot of things:

1. Shanny is pretty damn smart. I haven't seen a run gameplan that impressive since Jim Harbaugh was running the show down there, all due respect to the other Harbaugh who ran an incredible run game this year. 

2. We played like crap. Even regardless of all the things that went wrong schematically, our execution was awful. Lancaster, Lowry, Adams, Fackrell, Savage, and Amos all had absolutely brutal days just in far of not getting combo'd and making tackles in the open field. 

3. Our talent does not match up well with theirs at all. We have a pretty darn good top 11 guys. But our biggest weakness was our 3T, our 5T, and our 2nd ILB. By playing the personnel that they did, they put all of those guys on the field, and then made us decide, do we still want to play with that group at a size disadvantage, or do we want to add ANOTHER scrub to the field. That killed us. Pettine wants to play dime and doesn't want to play heavy. Their team is built around making us play heavy. 

Becuase ILB is one of the easiest positions to find playable bodies at, most teams are typically willing to add another body to the middle of the field to muck things up. We didn't have another body.  Every possible option was bad. 

4. There isn't much disguise in our defense. We're very much a defense that what you see is what you get. This 49ers offense isn't great at seeing through the disguises, but once it has the defense marked, it is brutally efficient. We weren't good enough to see the play action package that they had for us. It could have been so much worse. 

Very well said.  Listened yesterday to Bill Michaels radio show and it was stated, " 49ers are the worst possible matchup vs the Packers.  Any other team in the NFL and the Packers have a reasonable chance to beat them.  Niner's offense and defense just not a good fit when playing Green Bay".   Unfortunately, Seattle was 6" short of having SF be a #5 seed.   Add couple guys through free agency and the draft,  settle in on offensive scheme and decide if Pettine is the guy .. next season could be good again.

[coachbuns]

7 hours ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

I really don't think that's the issue with Pettine. We've ran pretty darn different defenses the last two years based on what we had. 

+++

We had problems this year getting beat by teams playing their 12 personnel because we didn't want to play our 3-4. which would have Lancaster and Goodson on the field at the same time.

The 49ers took it up a notch and played their 22 personnel, begging us to take Kevin King off the field for one of Gary (in a role he would have to cover in, or moving Preston to ILB), Adams (requires moving Preston to ILB), Kingsley (requires moving Preston to ILB), Fackrell at ILB against a read heavy team, Burks, Summers, Campbell, or one of the other bad safeties that we have. 

We weren't willing to do it.

And it showed ... twice.  It's a 2 edged sword ... is it the interior talent and/or is the scheme stale and outdated?  Probably both and if they played that team 10 times they'd get beat 9.  Maybe it's just a really bad matchup (it is) but it was do or die.  Hard to watch.