is not as good as SF's. Is that a blasphemous statement?

Maybe, but all the hype has gotten into these guys's heads IMO. I'm watching a superb disciplined hard hitting performance being displayed by the SF secondary on Arizona tonight. Absolutely rock solid. Yes, it's Arizona, and Fitz is out, but they have completely shut down not only their passing game but their running game as well in their house.

I think the "Legion of Boom" needs to get their crap together and start playing with a chip on their shoulder, starting this Sunday. They got a lot of proving to do again in my eyes. Can someone wake up Kam for us please?

kmedic wrote:is not as good as SF's. Is that a blasphemous statement?

Maybe, but all the hype has gotten into these guys's heads IMO. I'm watching a superb disciplined hard hitting performance being displayed by the SF secondary on Arizona tonight. Absolutely rock solid. Yes, it's Arizona, and Fitz is out, but they have completely shut down not only their passing game but their running game as well in their house.

I think the "Legion of Boom" needs to get their crap together and start playing with a chip on their shoulder, starting this Sunday. They got a lot of proving to do again in my eyes. Can someone wake up Kam for us please?

All I'm gonna say is.... There's a slight difference in talent level.

1: I assume the 49ers are creating tons of pressure on that sieve the Cardinals call an O-line, affecting the passes

2: If Fitz is out, that is one of the worst WR corps in the league. Yes, worse than ours.

3: They are playing against John freaking Skelton.

4: SF's offense helped them make Arizona one-dimensional early.

I think a lot of teams in the league would look good if they had this going for them.

If the Legion of Boom are the compeditors I think they are this game woke them up. They will get beter out of pride alone. The WR situation can't be a help in practice either.

I'd take our starting 4 DB's over any starting 4 in the league, without question. If you dont have a pass rush thats getting pressure you can have Deion, Revis and Champ Bailey back there and they'll still give up yards.

Now, if i had to choose our whole D or SF's whole D, i'd go with SF.

The 49ers are just a solid team. They don't beat themselves and they impose their will on the opponents. Hate saying it because I hate them and the band wagon fans they have, but that's a really good football team. I'm going to drink now and hopefully forget I just wrote that.

JSeahawks wrote:I'd take our starting 4 DB's over any starting 4 in the league, without question. If you dont have a pass rush thats getting pressure you can have Deion, Revis and Champ Bailey back there and they'll still give up yards.

Now, if i had to choose our whole D or SF's whole D, i'd go with SF.

I agree with you, J. Well said...

They are a class above all around, no question. They are one of the best teams in the league.

I think the LoB probably needed a dose of humility. I hope they can bear down and play like they are capable of the rest of the season

JSeahawks wrote:I'd take our starting 4 DB's over any starting 4 in the league, without question. If you dont have a pass rush thats getting pressure you can have Deion, Revis and Champ Bailey back there and they'll still give up yards.

Now, if i had to choose our whole D or SF's whole D, i'd go with SF.

I wasn't seeing a whole of pressure on Skelton tonight from the D-line. Frankly, I don't think SF's front four rushes the QB significantly better than our front four (ie. Irvin, Clem, Branch, and Jones). Being an elite secondary requires great discipline. The "Legion of Boom" may be younger and have more "talent" but they aren't as disciplined as SF's secondary, that's for sure. And to me that is just as if not more important.

The reality is after they sucked for so long, they accumulated lots of top picks and drafted wisely with them.

They have a lot of complimentary pieces that play well together, and let's face it - he's a whiny bitch but Harbaugh coaches them up well.

This is true. It seems like 80% of their starting lineup are first rounders, and the rest second rounders. Even their free agent pickups are former first rounders. Ridiculous.

SF's defense is top to bottom better than ours. That fact allows their secondary to be better. On it's own, I'm not so sure. But it's better in conjunction with the rest of their d.

JSeahawks wrote:I'd take our starting 4 DB's over any starting 4 in the league, without question. If you dont have a pass rush thats getting pressure you can have Deion, Revis and Champ Bailey back there and they'll still give up yards.

Now, if i had to choose our whole D or SF's whole D, i'd go with SF.

Well said.

But I like our situation, long term, better than I do SF's. I say this largely because we (likely) have our QBTF. While SF will eventually be (hopefully) wasting picks trying to find their's ...we will be using our picks to upgrade other positions. I think where SF really kicks our ass is offensive line. That's where we have some catching up to do.

Even without upgrading our D, if Wagner continues to progress and we get some Aldon Smith comparable play from Irvin, we will be close to SF's current D, if not equal, IMO.

I hope the Detroit game woke them up, and pissed the LoB off.

If we're comparing teams, San Fran has a better OL (they should, they've been working at it longer, and throwing more 1st round picks at it), and a better LB corps.

Thing is, a good LB corps is also part of the secondary on most plays now in the NFL. If your LB corps is weak in coverage, then your secondary is weaker in coverage.

Our LB corps is, right now, weak in coverage. KJ Wright isn't quite fast enough to pay in space, Hill is above average in coverage, and Wagner is still learning, but will probably be pretty good with his speed.

Maybe I'm reading into it too much but I didn't like how ET said after the Detroit game that "it should have been a blowout". Maybe it's just his way of coping with defeat but to me it seems that he (and likely his other secondary teammates) has a false sense of how good they really are. It was almost like he was shocked that they got taken to the woodshed like that. They better take a hard look in the mirror this week, hit the reset button, and start earning their stripes again.

Didn't san fran get stomped out by the vikings, didn't they get beat by the giants at home on a game they had circled on the calendar since training camp? i think 3rd down is a problem, but not one that won't be sured up this week. we'll be fine but this is good perspective.

i don't buy it, we torched that secondary with our rookie qb, let me correct myself... if not for the 234 dropped passes that game we would have torched that secondary... they are not better than our secondary in my opinion... maybe as good, but not better...and i don't think they are as good..... they were playing john skelton, how'd that secondary do against eli, nuff said....

Hey hawker I remember Niners secondary stopping Detroit and winning. Soooo explain that.

I would take our starting 4DBs all day. Our defense as a whole is a lot younger..... .... experience is valuable.

rlkats wrote:Hey hawker I remember Niners secondary stopping Detroit and winning. Soooo explain that.

And I remember the Seahawks secondary stopping New England and winning.

-The Glove- wrote:

rlkats wrote:Hey hawker I remember Niners secondary stopping Detroit and winning. Soooo explain that.

And I remember the Seahawks secondary stopping New England and winning.

Exactly. Stafford is no Brady. Detriot got the ball last, chewed up a bunch of clock, and our D did not come up with stop.

rlkats wrote:Hey hawker I remember Niners secondary stopping Detroit and winning. Soooo explain that.

They were also at HOME for that game. Seattle was on the road. Just saying. Home matters in the NFL.
(infact alot of their hardest games are at home-- Ie. Lions, Giants, , Bears-- The only challenging road game aside from Seattle is New England later on)
The 49ers really got handed by Minnesota. They lost by 11 and got destroyed by the G-Men at home. IMO the 49ers are NOT unbeatable, we can beat them. Both of their losses were by more than 2 scores. Seattle biggest lost was by a single score.

I foresee this team taking a big step forward the 2nd half of the year.

HawkMania wrote:

-The Glove- wrote:

rlkats wrote:Hey hawker I remember Niners secondary stopping Detroit and winning. Soooo explain that.

And I remember the Seahawks secondary stopping New England and winning.

Exactly. Stafford is no Brady. Detriot got the ball last, chewed up a bunch of clock, and our D did not come up with stop.

Yup. Our secondary isn't NOT good because they had a bad game, which I'd most likely blame on the scheme. Teams have bad games, even really good teams. I just hope the players and the coaches respond to it and fix the problems.

If you replaced SF's backfield with our backfield they'd be an even better defense than they are. We have the best backfield in the league, handsdown imo.

How do you guys think a coaches poll would go if asked if they could choose any team's backfield?

HawkMania wrote:

-The Glove- wrote:

rlkats wrote:Hey hawker I remember Niners secondary stopping Detroit and winning. Soooo explain that.

And I remember the Seahawks secondary stopping New England and winning.

Exactly. Stafford is no Brady. Detriot got the ball last, chewed up a bunch of clock, and our D did not come up with stop.

Stafford had a better game against us than Brady did. Brady threw five passes at Seattle's secondary that either were or should have been interceptions; Stafford only threw one that I remember.

I would take Seattle's secondary all day. Richard Sherman has had elite WR's thrown at him all day and has shut down every single one of them. Browner has improved and gotten his share of picks. ET has been all over the place and would have about ten picks if he didn't have the hands of Koren Robinson. Chancellor has had a huge amount of draining hits on people.

And if you want numbers, Seattle has allowed 9 passing TD's and 7 INT's to the 49ers' to 6 and 6. Seattle has held opponent QB's to a 78.6 QB rating, San Francisco to 72.7. Seattle has allowed 23 passes of 20 yards or more through eight games, San Francisco has allowed 18. Those are very good numbers for both teams and reflects very well on both secondaries; SF has the statistical edge, but it's not really a significant one.

In the end, DVOA has us ranked as the 4th best pass defense while San Francisco is ranked 7th. Our secondary is awesome. The fact that QB's have been forced to dink-and-dunk against us is an indication that our secondary is shutting down everything downfield. The fact that those QB's have still done well is a testament to them, not a diss on our secondary. (And a statement on the youth and inexperience of our linebackers. If we have a real problem, it's there.)

I think what makes 49ers stand apart from us is the absolutely beauty in their scheming in games and making adjustments. They scheme really well and the players are adapting to their schemes. Our team being young may not be ready yet to understand all the schemes that are thrown out to them. Its always a chess game, so making adjustments and having the schemes in place for every game is critical in my mind.

I'd also like to point out the 49ers secondary benefits a lot from having Willis, Bowman, and the 2 Smith's on their defense as well. I'd take our secondary over SF's, but SF's defense is superior.

Throwdown wrote:I'd also like to point out the 49ers secondary benefits a lot from having Willis, Bowman, and the 2 Smith's on their defense as well. I'd take our secondary over SF's, but SF's defense is superior.

Good point Bowman and Willis are extremely talented. KJ and Wagner are also very talented, it's just they are in year's 2 and 1 in their career's. Bowman is in year 3 and Willis is in year 6 IIRC. More experience means more consistent play. I like what we've got going forward. they just need more experience.

i wouldn't necessarily blame staffords success on our db's, alot of those passes were short over the middle stuff, every teams gives that up, the YAC was the problem with those... Stafford had 50+ attempts for 300 yrds if memory serves me..take away the long pass, that's less than 5 yrds per catch... you want to stop that , they would have to play a different scheme.. the last td pass i put on browner.. you cannot give up the middle slant on the goal line, that was bad.

did they have a great game, not even close by their standards, did niners db have a great game against the vikes, giants.. it happens... if you look at all 8 games, and i don't know the stats, i think you will find seattle db's are more cosistant as far as not giving up big plays and td's. JMO but i would take our unit as a whole over anybody's in the league..

Want to touch on a few points.

For one, I think the 49ers D, specifically the pass D, played a great game against the Giants. Eli and Hixon connected on two throws of 39 and 16 yards there were literally undefendable. Just unbelievable throws and catches. Even that TD to Cruz was phenomenal. Not too many players could defend that.

Besides that drive, the 49ers only gave up one other TD- a drive the Giants started in the 49ers redone after a turnover. The rest was 4 field goals, and even then the Giants had great field position all game.

Eli finished with these stats: 15/28 193 1 TD 0 INT 87.4 Passer Rating

Thought the 49ers secondary played lights out. The Giants even had a good running game going, so the threat of play action was there. Wasn't like they were anticipating pass the whole game, had to help out on the run.

BACK TO THE THREAD TOPIC

My opinion is kind of a paradox. For one, I think the Seahawks have younger, physically gifted talent players, which renders LoB as the most talented secondary in the league. But, I would still take the 49ers. If I had to choose an All Star secondary between these two teams, I'd pick:

FS: I'd take Dashon Goldson. It is well documented that I think Earl Thomas is one of the best defensive players in the game. But Goldson is the center point of not only 49ers secondary, but the entire Defense. He plays the run better than anyone, and has been amazing in coverage all year.

Corners: I'd take both Sherman and Browner individually over the 49ers corners based on their talent. But, Rogers and Brown's saviness is not far behind.

SS: Wash. Whitner has played well. I hear Kam Chancellor hasn't been really a presence. Still have respect for him as a monster, prototypical SS, but Whitner is good player.

I think the 49ers, as of right now, are a better unit, but that's just based on experience. Rogers, Brown, Goldson, and Whitner have all started for over 5 years.

SoHo9erFan wrote:Want to touch on a few points.

For one, I think the 49ers D, specifically the pass D, played a great game against the Giants. Eli and Hixon connected on two throws of 39 and 16 yards there were literally undefendable. Just unbelievable throws and catches. Even that TD to Cruz was phenomenal. Not too many players could defend that.

Besides that drive, the 49ers only gave up one other TD- a drive the Giants started in the 49ers redone after a turnover. The rest was 4 field goals, and even then the Giants had great field position all game.

Eli finished with these stats: 15/28 193 1 TD 0 INT 87.4 Passer Rating

Thought the 49ers secondary played lights out. The Giants even had a good running game going, so the threat of play action was there. Wasn't like they were anticipating pass the whole game, had to help out on the run.

BACK TO THE THREAD TOPIC

My opinion is kind of a paradox. For one, I think the Seahawks have younger, physically gifted talent players, which renders LoB as the most talented secondary in the league. But, I would still take the 49ers. If I had to choose an All Star secondary between these two teams, I'd pick:

FS: I'd take Dashon Goldson. It is well documented that I think Earl Thomas is one of the best defensive players in the game. But Goldson is the center point of not only 49ers secondary, but the entire Defense. He plays the run better than anyone, and has been amazing in coverage all year.

Corners: I'd take both Sherman and Browner individually over the 49ers corners based on their talent. But, Rogers and Brown's saviness is not far behind.

SS: Wash. Whitner has played well. I hear Kam Chancellor hasn't been really a presence. Still have respect for him as a monster, prototypical SS, but Whitner is good player.

I think the 49ers, as of right now, are a better unit, but that's just based on experience. Rogers, Brown, Goldson, and Whitner have all started for over 5 years.

Good, fair analysis. We need more of you's around here.