Shadowhawk wrote:[quote="QuickLightning']Here's your stats to back up the point.
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap100000 ... -formation
They ran 9% of their plays from the Pistol in Seattle and only 2 snaps against Arizona... that figure jumped up to 45.3 in Green Bay and 54.9% in Atlanta. I think it is pretty obvious looking at those numbers they were trying to set Green Bay up to game plan for a more generic offense.[/quote]
Nope, sorry. Because the Yahoo article is making the claim that Roman began to scale back the playbook to set up potential playoff teams AFTER the New England game. But you have made the case in multiple posts on this thread that they started limiting their use of the pistol IN the New England game:
[quote="QuickLightning']Up to 30.9% of the plays, according to the article. Peaking in week 14 against Miami then dropping back down for NE, Seattle and Arizona respectively as they approached the playoffs.[/quote]
[quote="QuickLightning']I was reading earlier (after the divisional round of the playoffs) that they ran something like 10% of their plays from the pistol in the Seattle, New England and Arizona games[/quote]
So if they stopped using the pistol as much in New England but didn't start "scaling back the playbook" until Seattle, it follows that not using the pistol as much isn't proof that that were "scaling back the playbook." And as I said in my first post on this thread, there are many reasons why San Francisco might not want to use the pistol in a particular game--defensive personnel, familiarity with mobile quarterbacks, etc. That doesn't mean they were scaling back the playbook, only that they were adjusting their gameplans for each specific opponent. And as many people on this thread have said multiple times, it would be beyond foolish for an offensive coordinator to start going to a vanilla offense when there was still a chance that they might not earn the first round bye or even win the division.
Look, you're going to believe this theory because it takes the sting out of an ugly loss. We're not going to believe it because we are of the opinion that Seattle's 42-13 victory meant a hell of a lot more than you want to admit. But answer me this: we've had dozens of 49er fans on this board offering every excuse imaginable for your team's loss. If it's so obvious that they dumbed down the playbook to rope-a-dope potential playoff teams, why is it that NOBODY thought to make that case before when they tried every other excuse you can think of?[/quote]
Who said they started scaling back the playbook in Seattle? I think they started in New England...and they won there.
Some of you seem to think scaling back the offense means "let Seattle win". Thats not what ANYONE is saying. They are just saying that they intentionally didn't use portions of the playbook that they wanted to save for the playoffs. The % of time they spent in the pistol bears that out.
Why is this so difficult to believe?
There is no guarantee that if the entire offense had been in play that the score would have been any different. None. You guys all seem to read it as an excuse even though Roman wasn't even talking about Seattle when he made the comment.
49er fans only buy this because it gives an excuse?
1) No it doesn't. There is no excuse.
2) Seattle fans don't WANT it to be true because it spoils their 42-13 mantra.
I guess, you know.....Harbaugh is such a jerk. When he isn't tossing dwarves he's skinning kittens. It would logically follow that his OC is a downright liar.