Bucky Brooks on why SF struggling on offense

Not a lot of new information here but it does have a decent breakdown of how defenses are playing SF this season. Particularly, how SEA played them.

Obviously a big drop off between Crabtree's production (54 points) from last year and Boldin's (12) so far this year.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap200000 ... rs-in-2013

That's actually a pretty good breakdown/analysis. Heard Brooks on the radio a few times, sounds and looks like he does his homework.

Good read. Thanks for the link.

As most of us said, the Boldin signing was a stretch. He is not a #1.

Not having Crabtree has hurt Kaepernick, but we still body slammed the Whiners last December with Crab playing ( and Randy Moss).

That is a good article; I was coming to post a link to it if it weren't already here

What I'll be interested to see is when Crabtree comes back how much that 'fixes' things for the Niners offense. I mean, this article did show how defenses have adjusted to help neutralize Kaep himself, more than serious concern over the receivers.

So does it make sense when the Niners have all hands on deck with their WR corps finally that teams will continue to try to take away his runs and force him to play straight-up from the pocket?

I think they still struggle for the same reason that Seattle has in the first half... Teams are taking away the deep ball and loading up the box whenever possible to stop the run.

Forces quick passes and underneath stuff to the fullback (which SF has tried to utilize).

Watched the SEA vs SF and CAR vs SF games last night and they played them almost identical to us from what I saw but the big difference was that CAR played much better in space against Kaep. He simply didn't get the edge on their defenders when scrambling.

If Kaepernick can't find a little "touch" on his passes and Roman doesn't mix in some WCO, I have a feeling SF struggles continue.

I think there is a history of former pitchers and right fielders struggling to develope a nice touch for their short passing game. It didn't stop a guy like John Elway. But in his early years, Elway certainly struggled with taking sufficient heat off his fastballs to make his short passes catchable.

FlyingGreg":rtqugbn2 said:

As most of us said, the Boldin signing was a stretch. He is not a #1.

Click to expand...

????

He wasn't supposed to be a #1. He was supposed to be a #2 until Manningham got back and then flex around with McDonald to help make up for the loss of Walker.

Bolden was a poor fit to replace / compliment Crabtree.

He is big and turtle like slow at this stage. It's similar to having 2 tight ends. K is still a first read pass / no pass QB. He does not seem to have progressed.

The team to be or stay competitive really needs some speed. Who knows if Crabtree will have lost a step or 2.

Happypuppy":1rtkag2q said:

Bolden was a poor fit to replace / compliment Crabtree.

He is big and turtle like slow at this stage. It's similar to having 2 tight ends.

Click to expand...

LOL.

Again:

He was supposed to be a #2 until Manningham got back and then flex around with McDonald to help make up for the loss of Walker.

Click to expand...

And just for clarification as there seems to be a repeated misinterpretation here:

The 49ers traded a 6th round pick for Anquan Boldin in the beginning of March.
Crabtree tore his ACL in late May.

Boldin was never supposed to be a "replacement" for Crabtree, and if most people here were saying that trading for Boldin was a "stretch" in trying to replace Crabtree as a #1, most people here are time travelers.

When they gave a 6th for Boldin, Crabtree was fine, Manningham was supposed to be out until about right now, Williams was scheduled to come back off injury, Moss was toast and gone, and there was still hope for AJ Jenkins. They were hoping Williams or AJ would emerge as the #2 WR behind Crabtree. Boldin was envisioned as basically an H-BACK (Walker's role), as the questions coming out of the draft about McDonald were related to his blocking, and they thought he might take a year or two of seasoning.

They had Boldin shifting around along the line, in the backfield, and over to the slot, which was a pretty good use of his skillset given his size and advanced age (later, we even saw some remnants of this at the beginning of the season). Then Crabtree went out, Williams didn't develop, Jenkins was traded b/c he sucks, and they were stuck jamming Boldin into the #1 receiver role, which he was never supposed to be in. They were hoping Marqueis Gray could develop on the PS and then be moved up to the H-Back role that Boldin was initially slotted for. Then Gray got claimed by the Browns, so they claimed Chris Harper from the Hawks to develop him for the H-Back role that Boldin and then Gray was slotted for. Then they cut Harper because he wasn't developing and Derek Carrier is currently on the PS being developed for that role. :lol:

Boldin had a big Week 1 against the Packers obviously, but nobody has confused him for a #1 receiver, and he in no way was intended to be a #1 receiver or replacement for Crabtree (which would be impossible, given that Crabs didn't get hurt until three months after they traded for him).

In the long run, Boldin is Boldin, but he was definitely worth the 6th round pick. He's nothing special, but given what's happened, the 9ers are still 6-3, and I'd be absolutely terrified about what would have happened if they hadn't have been lucky enough to have signed him for one role and been able to move up into another when disaster struck. He's a competent #2 WR for one year, But when they traded for him they were intending for him to be even less than that. Sadly (for me, great for all of you )he has been forced into being the defacto #1 with the #2 slot still essentially empty through the first 10 weeks of the season.

Hope this clears everything up.

In no way did I imply that Boldin was traded for / acquired to replace Crabtree. Contrary to your post, there were plenty of Niner fans who thought Boldin would be able to step in and play the #1 in his absence (not many, but there were).

Before you even ask, no, I will not go back and find those posts.

Point of my post (and the article) was to highlight how defenses have adjusted to Kaeperdink and the SF offense without Crabtree and Walker on the field.

^^^ Sorry if I was unclear, E.C.

My post wasn't directed to you. And incidentally, thanks for the link, which I hadn't seen.

(haven't read it yet -- in my Pocket on my phone; great app btw -- but I like Brooks and am looking forward to it)

I was posting in response to Happypuppy who wrote "Bolden was a poor fit to replace / compliment Crabtree," and Flying Greg who wrote "As most of us said, the Boldin signing was a stretch. He is not a #1."

Sorry if I gave the impression that what I was saying was in response to you, as the OP.

Notice who he uses for his examples of how to beat SF?

^^^ The three teams that have beaten SF????


Read the article, E.C.

Really good breakdown by him, IMO. Really like his work. Thanks for the link.

Popeyejones":nhqbyjz2 said:

^^^ The three teams that have beaten SF????


Read the article, E.C.

Really good breakdown by him, IMO. Really like his work. Thanks for the link.

Click to expand...

I do not fart in your general direction, sir.

Popeyejones":1yucflm9 said:

^^^ The three teams that have beaten SF????


Read the article, E.C.

Really good breakdown by him, IMO. Really like his work. Thanks for the link.

Click to expand...

Yes, but Seattle set the table for how it's done. Per John Clayton: "The book was out there in week 2 when Seattle put the perfect game plan on there." He also said that's it's about shutting down Anquan Boldin with press man coverage and that Kap might be unfairly blamed for the struggles because there is no real option after "Q."

Popeyejones":domad6jn said:

FlyingGreg":domad6jn said:

As most of us said, the Boldin signing was a stretch. He is not a #1.

Click to expand...

????

He wasn't supposed to be a #1. He was supposed to be a #2 until Manningham got back and then flex around with McDonald to help make up for the loss of Walker.

Click to expand...

SF is paying Boldin $6 million to be a #3 WR/#2 joker TE? You say he's there to help make up for the loss of Walker, but Walker is making less money than that. I agree he wasn't acquired to replace Crabtree, but they obviously hoped he'd be a stud #2. Wouldn't have taken on his contract otherwise.

DavidSeven":2mgsjnjh said:

SF is paying Boldin $6 million to be a #3 WR/#2 joker TE? You say he's there to help make up for the loss of Walker, but Walker is making less money than that. I agree he wasn't acquired to replace Crabtree, but they obviously hoped he'd be a stud #2. Wouldn't have taken on his contract otherwise.

Click to expand...

Before getting to the meat of it, just for clarification: the intent was for him to be a joker TE/#2 until Manningham came back, and then either stay in that role or be a joker TE/#3 depending on what Manningham was able to do.

The problem with Walker obviously isn't the money he's making this year, it is the money he is scheduled to make in 2014, 2015, and 2016. It's the same for Dashon Goldson, Isaac Sopoaga, and Ricky Jean Francois.

Starting last off-season the 9ers had to start clearing out cap room for the next off-season and the off-season following that. When you do that (letting players go you'd rather resign -- who want signing bonuses and long term deals) because you need to to clear out for the future, you end up having extra money that you can use on a one year rental (or maybe two year, like Avril for the Hawks) as long as it doesn't extend into when you need those dollars cleared.

Some people in the national media got this. Others didn't, and they asked why the 9ers would trade a 6th round pick and pay off the last year of Boldin's contract when everyone knew that the Ravens were going to cut him. It was because the 9ers had the money to do so given that they had to move on from some players because of future year concerns, and for the situation they were in 1 year at 6 million is actually MUCH more valuable to them than if he got cut and wanted two years at 9 million or three years at 12 million (at which point they're not even negotiating with him, as the contract would extend into when they need cap space cleared).

Decisions like this will play a big role for the Seahawks in the next three years. The team will lose some starters in preparation for it this upcoming off-season (as the 9ers did; the 9ers are a year ahead of the Hawks in this cap stuff), and then it will really start to hit in the next two years after that.

It's why it's really that the Hawks win the Super Bowl this year or next year, because they're about to lose a lot of their competitive advantage. Same story with the 9ers last year, which is why it stung so much that they came up a few yards short.

Popeyejones":3pazrorb said:

Decisions like this will play a big role for the Seahawks in the next three years. The team will lose some starters in preparation for it this upcoming off-season (as the 9ers did; the 9ers are a year ahead of the Hawks in this cap stuff), and then it will really start to hit in the next two years after that.

It's why it's really that the Hawks win the Super Bowl this year or next year, because they're about to lose a lot of their competitive advantage. Same story with the 9ers last year, which is why it stung so much that they came up a few yards short.

Click to expand...

What does this have to do with the original topic? We Seahawk fans follow our team. Most of us understand what is going on.