Are 49ers kinda getting the nod over us as SB favs...

Status
Not open for further replies.

BlueTalon

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 3, 2007
Messages
8,944
Reaction score
1,591
Location
Eastern Washington
NinerLifer":14cksaoh said:
BlueTalon":14cksaoh said:
What I remember about it was that he blew exactly .80 at the scene, and then blew over 8.0 at the station. According to his attorney, that means his BAC was trending up as his body metabolized the alcohol, which means his BAC was under .80 when he was driving. And that this argument has been successfully used in California to defeat a DUI charge.

My guess is he'll plead down to reckless driving.
That's not the sequence of events as described in the articles I posted on the precious page.
Oh, well then that settles it. If it appeared in a newspaper, it must be true. They never get anything wrong.

NinerLifer":14cksaoh said:
It has also been reported that if he pleads guilty to anything that he will be suspended for 2 games. It has also been reported that Goodell doesn't need Lynch to be found guilty of anything in order for him to still decide to suspend Lynch

And unfortutely for Lynch I am sure (thanks to Sherman's reminding everybody) that Goodell remembers that the Seahawks have already used their get out of jail free card, and would like nothing more than to send a message to Seattle about the legal system.
I smell hope mixed with fear.
 

Lady Talon

New member
Joined
Feb 17, 2013
Messages
757
Reaction score
0
Giedi":196sfe1w said:
Lady Talon":196sfe1w said:
Giedi":196sfe1w said:
Michael will be a pretty good back from the videos the members here posted. I fully expect him to be productive from the start. It's in pass protection that new backs have problems in. 49ers have a decent pass rush, and that can be a problem on third and longs. Marshawn was a big key to winning that 49er v. seahawk game last year. He pretty much ran over the left side of the 49ers defensive line. RJF still has the cleatmarks on his back to show for it. I daresay if Michael is in the game on third and longs, I can see the 49ers doing a lot more blitzing than usual.

If Michael starts, no guarantee there as Turbin holds the #2 spot atm, then your DC will have to come up with a better answer for Percy Harvin (and Russell Wilson at home) then he showed capable of last year, before he succeeds with heavy blitzing in the Clink. The reason Lynch ran over your team is we had a lead and kept riding him, like we quite often did when we had 2-5 score leads last year. Your secondary is the weakest link of your defense, pass rush is only half the answer if you can't set the tone with your secondary, especially with Wilson's out of pocket agility.
Seattle has an outstanding offense when its on the field. Key is - when it's on the field. Ball control teams like the 49ers do give outstading offenses problems simply because they can't get back on the field. A ball control power running attack will tend to do that. Atlanta game is an example. Laofa and I had a lengthy discussion about how to win away games, and it boils down to defense.

The Seattle offense and the 49er offense do look the same. It's a long 16 game season, and again the Michael pick is an exciting pick for the Seahawk franchise. I think he can be heir apparent to Lynch when he decides to hang it up. Pete learned a lot from Seifert when he was with the 49er organization. Thats why I think both offenses are so similar and pretty much top of the line, with both QB's pretty much setting the standards for future NFL QBing for the next few years. With both offenses so even, I think its defense where the games between the two teams will turn. At this point the Seattle defense has more question marks than the 49er defense.

We were a ball control offense. I have a suspicion you shouldn't count on the Hawks rushing more then anyone else in the league this particular year. Obviously, we won't abandon power running, but we certainly have a dynamic receiver now, instead of relying solely on Russell Wilson's ability to extend plays waiting for receivers to beat single coverage whilst stacking the box. In the past, our QB and WR combinations hardly struck fear into a defense. Those days are over.

Because your defense has handled Avril and Bennett in the past means your fans can assume it will continue to do so. Handling them on teams with two of the leakiest secondaries in the league is not the same thing as handling them when your quarterback is going to have problems with one of the best. Until you indeed do shut them down personally as role players on a top scoring defense with a top secondary, it's as much speculation as assuming Micheal can step in for Lynch immediately with zero production dropoff.
 

NinerLifer

New member
Joined
Jan 23, 2013
Messages
690
Reaction score
0
rlkats":9gka9t27 said:
Wouldn't it be funny as hell if my miners and the hawks are 3rd and 4th in the division. Then all of this is pointless lol.

If the Rams and Cards both had miracle seasons and each of us ended up sitting in the 3rd and 4th spots by seasons end, we should all agree now that we gather up back here in a thread "Come here to laugh at ourselves" and look back at how rediculous we all were for thinking the contrary.

And mention over and over again how lucky they both were as well! :th2thumbs:
 

Giedi

Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2013
Messages
377
Reaction score
0
Lady Talon":kx33e70y said:
Giedi":kx33e70y said:
Lady Talon":kx33e70y said:
We were a ball control offense. I have a suspicion you shouldn't count on the Hawks rushing more then anyone else in the league this particular year. Obviously, we won't abandon power running, but we certainly have a dynamic receiver now, instead of relying solely on Russell Wilson's ability to extend plays waiting for receivers to beat single coverage whilst stacking the box. In the past, our QB and WR combinations hardly struck fear into a defense. Those days are over.

Because your defense has handled Avril and Bennett in the past means your fans can assume it will continue to do so. Handling them on teams with two of the leakiest secondaries in the league is not the same thing as handling them when your quarterback is going to have problems with one of the best. Until you indeed do shut them down personally as role players on a top scoring defense with a top secondary, it's as much speculation as assuming Micheal can step in for Lynch immediately with zero production dropoff.
I think you will be a good offense, as good as the 49ers are. Wilson and the pistol concepts will make that happen. What makes the pistol work (aside from a fine passing QB) is a great run game. You guys have that with Lynch, and like I said, I like the Michael pick - he's going to be a beast this year. We don't have an O Line issue, but you may have, but in both games against the 49ers - your O Lines basically played very solid. You not taking O Linemen till the 7th says you are very confident of your O Line players.

Now on defense, of course everything is speculation. The 'Hawks generally play a bend but don't break defense, and that doesn't require as physically talented a crew as disruptive turnover focused defenses are. In the red zone, Kam is a linebacker and Pete uses the back end of the endzone as an additional DB and begins to blitz when teams get into the redzone. I can see this working with Avril and Bennet - who I see as more one dimensional pass rushers than balanced players. Again, just an opinion. Avirl and Bennet with Kam as the 8th man on that red zone front 7 strengthens that run defense in the red zone. Very tough to score on schematically if they play to their strengths.

But again, with good defense, and good ball control. Assuming everything is equal, if the 49ers can't score TD's - fieldgoals may just do it. Of course, that was the winning formula in 2011 and the 49ers swept the Seahawks. Wilson changed that equasion in 2012, and the 49ers have to come up with something else to deal with Wilson, because it's no longer enough just to play good defense and ball control against the Seahawks, you have to score points.
 

Blitzer88

Active member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
12,820
Reaction score
0
Location
Seattle, WA
Well they have done more than us the past few seasons so they probably get the nod ahead of us as much as I hate saying that. We have to prove that we can stay good and not just be a one year wonder like the Lions a couple season ago.
 

NinerLifer

New member
Joined
Jan 23, 2013
Messages
690
Reaction score
0
Blitzer88":dcu2eicn said:
Well they have done more than us the past few seasons so they probably get the nod ahead of us as much as I hate saying that. We have to prove that we can stay good and not just be a one year wonder like the Lions a couple season ago.

Coincidentally the Lions season that you mention came to mind with your surprise season last year, and all the hype it is causing this offseason so far. Pretty much identical situation that then saw them plummet to mediocrity.

Doubt it happens in your case...though with the addition of Avril you might have cursed yourselves. ;)
 

HawksFTW

New member
Joined
Mar 5, 2007
Messages
4,142
Reaction score
0
NinerLifer":24wy0px5 said:
Blitzer88":24wy0px5 said:
Well they have done more than us the past few seasons so they probably get the nod ahead of us as much as I hate saying that. We have to prove that we can stay good and not just be a one year wonder like the Lions a couple season ago.

Coincidentally the Lions season that you mention came to mind with your surprise season last year, and all the hype it is causing this offseason so far. Pretty much identical situation that then saw them plummet to mediocrity.

Doubt it happens in your case...though with the addition of Avril you might have cursed yourselves. ;)


No offense, but do you even watch football?
 

pinksheets

Active member
Joined
Apr 21, 2011
Messages
3,254
Reaction score
19
Location
Seattle
Yeah, I don't even see the link being made there. Variable A - strong season the surprises many nationally and Variable B - expectations raised because of previously strong season....

so those two variables make this situation like Detroit's? What about San Fran's "surprise" season in 2011? What about their expectations heading into 2012? You're projecting out a lot based on the smallest of similarities. Do you warn all men with beards to stay away from the Romans?
 

Beachie

New member
Joined
May 4, 2013
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
The two best teams in football are the Hawks and the Niners. Colin Cowherd thinks the Hawks are the best team in the NFL. But I like the Niners draft a lot.
 

camdawg

Active member
Joined
Jan 29, 2010
Messages
237
Reaction score
53
Giedi":1wgm495v said:
I think you will be a good offense, as good as the 49ers are. Wilson and the pistol concepts will make that happen. What makes the pistol work (aside from a fine passing QB) is a great run game. You guys have that with Lynch, and like I said, I like the Michael pick - he's going to be a beast this year. We don't have an O Line issue, but you may have, but in both games against the 49ers - your O Lines basically played very solid. You not taking O Linemen till the 7th says you are very confident of your O Line players.

I think we'll be better than the 49ers on offense. Right now, today, Russell Wilson is a better passer than Colin Kaepernick, and reads defenses better. I think Lynch, today, is a better back than Gore, who has more wear on his tires. I like our backup RBs better than yours. I think we have a little more receiver depth than you do, but you can make the argument your starting receivers are better, especially if you're counting Vernon as a receiver.

People would have to have incredibly high standards to say the Seahawks have issues on our offensive line. We don't have Iupati or 2005 Steve Hutchinson at guard.....but I don't think anyone would suggest that means we have issues. We have two Pro Bowl caliber guys at this point (Okung and Unger), and pretty solid starters with them. Not quite as good as the 49ers line, but certainly above league average.

Giedi":1wgm495v said:
Now on defense, of course everything is speculation. The 'Hawks generally play a bend but don't break defense, and that doesn't require as physically talented a crew as disruptive turnover focused defenses are. In the red zone, Kam is a linebacker and Pete uses the back end of the endzone as an additional DB and begins to blitz when teams get into the redzone. I can see this working with Avril and Bennet - who I see as more one dimensional pass rushers than balanced players. Again, just an opinion. Avirl and Bennet with Kam as the 8th man on that red zone front 7 strengthens that run defense in the red zone. Very tough to score on schematically if they play to their strengths.

But again, with good defense, and good ball control. Assuming everything is equal, if the 49ers can't score TD's - fieldgoals may just do it. Of course, that was the winning formula in 2011 and the 49ers swept the Seahawks. Wilson changed that equasion in 2012, and the 49ers have to come up with something else to deal with Wilson, because it's no longer enough just to play good defense and ball control against the Seahawks, you have to score points.

Very high standards here if the Seahawks are a "bend but don't break defense". We gave up 13 yards a game more on defense than you did, but two less points per game as well. We actually generated more turnovers on defense than you did (31 to 25). So I'd say we're at least as good as being a "disruptive turnover based defense", if not better, than the 49ers. For as much as Seahawk fans complain about our lack of sacks, you guys only had two more than we did (38 to 36).

Perhaps we don't "bend" as much as you think? 8)
 

NinerLifer

New member
Joined
Jan 23, 2013
Messages
690
Reaction score
0
pinksheets":albxjd8s said:
Yeah, I don't even see the link being made there. Variable A - strong season the surprises many nationally and Variable B - expectations raised because of previously strong season....

so those two variables make this situation like Detroit's? What about San Fran's "surprise" season in 2011? What about their expectations heading into 2012? You're projecting out a lot based on the smallest of similarities. Do you warn all men with beards to stay away from the Romans?

As a matter of fact I wasn't certain that the Niners 2011 season wouldn't go down as a fluke as well, until they followed it up one better in 2012 in order to prove they are legit.
 

hawk45

Active member
Joined
Sep 27, 2009
Messages
10,009
Reaction score
16
It wouldn't strike me oddly at all if the Niners were regarded as more likely to make the SB than the Hawks, they are that solid and have followed up solid season with even more of a solid season. It's a close race, but we haven't proven we can do it 2 years in a row like they have, no matter how much I feel that the Hawks will do just that.

That said, the idea of the Hawks D as bend but don't break is laughable. The 05 Hawk D was bend but don't break. This Hawk D is shut your best receivers down and stop your run game. The only mark against the Hawk D that I'll take as legit is that they had terrible breakdowns in the 4th quarter last year on critical possessions, something I attribute to lack of pass rush at those critical times. Hopefully we'll see that this has been addressed, time will tell.
 

Lady Talon

New member
Joined
Feb 17, 2013
Messages
757
Reaction score
0
Giedi":2lpq0uuw said:
I think you will be a good offense, as good as the 49ers are. Wilson and the pistol concepts will make that happen. What makes the pistol work (aside from a fine passing QB) is a great run game. You guys have that with Lynch, and like I said, I like the Michael pick - he's going to be a beast this year. We don't have an O Line issue, but you may have, but in both games against the 49ers - your O Lines basically played very solid. You not taking O Linemen till the 7th says you are very confident of your O Line players.

Now on defense, of course everything is speculation. The 'Hawks generally play a bend but don't break defense, and that doesn't require as physically talented a crew as disruptive turnover focused defenses are. In the red zone, Kam is a linebacker and Pete uses the back end of the endzone as an additional DB and begins to blitz when teams get into the redzone. I can see this working with Avril and Bennet - who I see as more one dimensional pass rushers than balanced players. Again, just an opinion. Avirl and Bennet with Kam as the 8th man on that red zone front 7 strengthens that run defense in the red zone. Very tough to score on schematically if they play to their strengths.

But again, with good defense, and good ball control. Assuming everything is equal, if the 49ers can't score TD's - fieldgoals may just do it. Of course, that was the winning formula in 2011 and the 49ers swept the Seahawks. Wilson changed that equasion in 2012, and the 49ers have to come up with something else to deal with Wilson, because it's no longer enough just to play good defense and ball control against the Seahawks, you have to score points.

I don't agree with you on the bend but don't break style. Not for the Hawks. Our losses were all 4th quarter road meltdowns. Either playing soft zone or being weak to quick downhill running RBs or just not having the personell available to put up a credible pass rush. None of those reasons save the soft zone were part of a plan. Much of it in my opinion had to do with predictable defensive sub packages as well as the inability of our DC to get it those weaknesses solved on the fly. As others have pointed out, as far as sacks and turnovers, as well as yardage given up, we weren't all that far removed from SF's defense statistically.

I do think we have a fairly average O-line. Our skill players allow us to get away with it to a degree. RW is one of the most elusive QBs I've seen and makes up for some O-line mistakes. Lynch loves contact and isn't adverse to dragging an 8 man box for 5 yards a rush. Rice, Tate, Miller, etc finally got with the program and figured out how to bail a good thrower out of trouble. Now we have Percy Harvin, who will require another man to spy on him. Between needing to spy Lynch, Wilson, and Harvin, it puts far more pressure on the remaining 8 men to deal with their responsibilities then it does on our O-line.

I would venture to say SF's offense isn't as much ball control anymore as you would think. With Alex Smith yes, with CK, no. Harbaugh went for the big play/quick scores (and a lot of 9er fans were relieved to see that) and left his D on the field more often with CK. Couple that with a defense that rarely subs and it really got your D burned points wise in more games then just the Seattle loss. New England for one, NFC Championship and the Superbowl as well.

I would guess you'll use your draft picks to sub in this year, but expecting dominance from young DL at least as much of a question mark if not more of one then Avril or Bennett completely dominating.
 

Giedi

Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2013
Messages
377
Reaction score
0
camdawg":4ut4dzze said:
Giedi":4ut4dzze said:
I think you will be a good offense, as good as the 49ers are. Wilson and the pistol concepts will make that happen. What makes the pistol work (aside from a fine passing QB) is a great run game. You guys have that with Lynch, and like I said, I like the Michael pick - he's going to be a beast this year. We don't have an O Line issue, but you may have, but in both games against the 49ers - your O Lines basically played very solid. You not taking O Linemen till the 7th says you are very confident of your O Line players.

I think we'll be better than the 49ers on offense. Right now, today, Russell Wilson is a better passer than Colin Kaepernick, and reads defenses better. I think Lynch, today, is a better back than Gore, who has more wear on his tires. I like our backup RBs better than yours. I think we have a little more receiver depth than you do, but you can make the argument your starting receivers are better, especially if you're counting Vernon as a receiver.

People would have to have incredibly high standards to say the Seahawks have issues on our offensive line. We don't have Iupati or 2005 Steve Hutchinson at guard.....but I don't think anyone would suggest that means we have issues. We have two Pro Bowl caliber guys at this point (Okung and Unger), and pretty solid starters with them. Not quite as good as the 49ers line, but certainly above league average.

Giedi":4ut4dzze said:
Now on defense, of course everything is speculation. The 'Hawks generally play a bend but don't break defense, and that doesn't require as physically talented a crew as disruptive turnover focused defenses are. In the red zone, Kam is a linebacker and Pete uses the back end of the endzone as an additional DB and begins to blitz when teams get into the redzone. I can see this working with Avril and Bennet - who I see as more one dimensional pass rushers than balanced players. Again, just an opinion. Avirl and Bennet with Kam as the 8th man on that red zone front 7 strengthens that run defense in the red zone. Very tough to score on schematically if they play to their strengths.

But again, with good defense, and good ball control. Assuming everything is equal, if the 49ers can't score TD's - fieldgoals may just do it. Of course, that was the winning formula in 2011 and the 49ers swept the Seahawks. Wilson changed that equasion in 2012, and the 49ers have to come up with something else to deal with Wilson, because it's no longer enough just to play good defense and ball control against the Seahawks, you have to score points.

Very high standards here if the Seahawks are a "bend but don't break defense". We gave up 13 yards a game more on defense than you did, but two less points per game as well. We actually generated more turnovers on defense than you did (31 to 25). So I'd say we're at least as good as being a "disruptive turnover based defense", if not better, than the 49ers. For as much as Seahawk fans complain about our lack of sacks, you guys only had two more than we did (38 to 36).

Perhaps we don't "bend" as much as you think? 8)

Against Atlanta - both offenses scored 28, but the 49er defense was still better than the 'Hawks by 6 points, and keep in mind *both* Justin and Aldon were hurt, and the starters played about 90% of the snaps throughout the year. Clemons was hurt too, but other than Clemons, I don't recall any other significant 'Hawk injuries. Defense clearly is the issue for the 'Hawks, however I don't think you adequately addressed it in the offseason. Again, just my opinion.

Here are the facts. Your draft consisted of 27 % picks in the first four rounds (3 out of 11), the 49er draft consisted of 54% of the picks in the first four rounds (6 out of 11). You traded your first round pick on a top of the line WR, the 49ers used a 6th round pick. First 4 rounds the 49ers used 3 picks for offense and defense. Seattle used only one pick on defense and two on offense (first four rounds). On balance the draft - if you just weigh the draft positions by rounds (regardless of need or talent), the 49er draft was better than the 'Hawk draft from a defensive perspective.

Bend but don't break vs. Disruptive defenses. Both can win superbowls. Classic case of a bend but don't break (I think) was the Pittsburg Steel curtain, rarely blitzed just lined up in a 4-3 and killed offense. Disruptive defenses would be the likes of the 3-4 Raider defenses of old, with *the Mad Stork,* Alzado, and Howie. They won 3 superbowls with that kind of defense. I read Pete as a more read and react guy and it makes sense, he's a very conservative defensive coach. I could be wrong however, since he hasn't coached in SF for a while.
 

Lady Talon

New member
Joined
Feb 17, 2013
Messages
757
Reaction score
0
Giedi":1523k5qy said:
Against Atlanta - both offenses scored 28, but the 49er defense was still better than the 'Hawks by 6 points, and keep in mind *both* Justin and Aldon were hurt, and the starters played about 90% of the snaps throughout the year. Clemons was hurt too, but other than Clemons, I don't recall any other significant 'Hawk injuries. Defense clearly is the issue for the 'Hawks, however I don't think you adequately addressed it in the offseason. Again, just my opinion.

Jones had been on IR since 12/28. Red was dealing through a plantar fascia injury. So we had to take a situational rookie DE and plant him in Clemons spot and expect him to anchor the run (a weakness for Irvin all season) with nobody to relieve him AND Red but a player that hadn't played a NFL football down in 5 years and whose name rhymes with Chupacabra. Now, I like Irvin, but he isn't a world beater, and rookie Dlineman take quite awhile to get used to regular season games much less get thrown out of position and expected to hold 3 downs against a good O line in a Divisional playoff game.

Small wonder it didn't work? If anything, gambling that Clemons wouldn't get hurt and not adequately addressing depth was more the problem with the defense in that loss. We did address that in the offseason with Avril and Bennett. Whether or not they'll be world beaters remains to be seen.

As for the 6 points, lol. Seattle was the only west Coast playoff team to visit an east coast stadium with a 1 pm ET kickoff time. There's just no excuse for that in the playoffs, IMO. Out of three regular season 1PM ET starts the 9ers endured in 2012, their only win was at the Jets.

Despite all that, 28 seconds and 2 points short of a road playoff win after being down 27-7 in the 3rd quarter is hardly anything to be ashamed of, considering our dline issues.
 

MizzouHawkGal

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 16, 2012
Messages
13,477
Reaction score
844
Location
Kansas City, MO
Giedi":1i6te6e0 said:
camdawg":1i6te6e0 said:
Giedi":1i6te6e0 said:
I think you will be a good offense, as good as the 49ers are. Wilson and the pistol concepts will make that happen. What makes the pistol work (aside from a fine passing QB) is a great run game. You guys have that with Lynch, and like I said, I like the Michael pick - he's going to be a beast this year. We don't have an O Line issue, but you may have, but in both games against the 49ers - your O Lines basically played very solid. You not taking O Linemen till the 7th says you are very confident of your O Line players.

I think we'll be better than the 49ers on offense. Right now, today, Russell Wilson is a better passer than Colin Kaepernick, and reads defenses better. I think Lynch, today, is a better back than Gore, who has more wear on his tires. I like our backup RBs better than yours. I think we have a little more receiver depth than you do, but you can make the argument your starting receivers are better, especially if you're counting Vernon as a receiver.

People would have to have incredibly high standards to say the Seahawks have issues on our offensive line. We don't have Iupati or 2005 Steve Hutchinson at guard.....but I don't think anyone would suggest that means we have issues. We have two Pro Bowl caliber guys at this point (Okung and Unger), and pretty solid starters with them. Not quite as good as the 49ers line, but certainly above league average.

Giedi":1i6te6e0 said:
Now on defense, of course everything is speculation. The 'Hawks generally play a bend but don't break defense, and that doesn't require as physically talented a crew as disruptive turnover focused defenses are. In the red zone, Kam is a linebacker and Pete uses the back end of the endzone as an additional DB and begins to blitz when teams get into the redzone. I can see this working with Avril and Bennet - who I see as more one dimensional pass rushers than balanced players. Again, just an opinion. Avirl and Bennet with Kam as the 8th man on that red zone front 7 strengthens that run defense in the red zone. Very tough to score on schematically if they play to their strengths.

But again, with good defense, and good ball control. Assuming everything is equal, if the 49ers can't score TD's - fieldgoals may just do it. Of course, that was the winning formula in 2011 and the 49ers swept the Seahawks. Wilson changed that equasion in 2012, and the 49ers have to come up with something else to deal with Wilson, because it's no longer enough just to play good defense and ball control against the Seahawks, you have to score points.

Very high standards here if the Seahawks are a "bend but don't break defense". We gave up 13 yards a game more on defense than you did, but two less points per game as well. We actually generated more turnovers on defense than you did (31 to 25). So I'd say we're at least as good as being a "disruptive turnover based defense", if not better, than the 49ers. For as much as Seahawk fans complain about our lack of sacks, you guys only had two more than we did (38 to 36).

Perhaps we don't "bend" as much as you think? 8)

Against Atlanta - both offenses scored 28, but the 49er defense was still better than the 'Hawks by 6 points, and keep in mind *both* Justin and Aldon were hurt, and the starters played about 90% of the snaps throughout the year. Clemons was hurt too, but other than Clemons, I don't recall any other significant 'Hawk injuries. Defense clearly is the issue for the 'Hawks, however I don't think you adequately addressed it in the offseason. Again, just my opinion.

Here are the facts. Your draft consisted of 27 % picks in the first four rounds (3 out of 11), the 49er draft consisted of 54% of the picks in the first four rounds (6 out of 11). You traded your first round pick on a top of the line WR, the 49ers used a 6th round pick. First 4 rounds the 49ers used 3 picks for offense and defense. Seattle used only one pick on defense and two on offense (first four rounds). On balance the draft - if you just weigh the draft positions by rounds (regardless of need or talent), the 49er draft was better than the 'Hawk draft from a defensive perspective.

Bend but don't break vs. Disruptive defenses. Both can win superbowls. Classic case of a bend but don't break (I think) was the Pittsburg Steel curtain, rarely blitzed just lined up in a 4-3 and killed offense. Disruptive defenses would be the likes of the 3-4 Raider defenses of old, with *the Mad Stork,* Alzado, and Howie. They won 3 superbowls with that kind of defense. I read Pete as a more read and react guy and it makes sense, he's a very conservative defensive coach. I could be wrong however, since he hasn't coached in SF for a while.
I am with HawksFTW in that I have serious doubts about you actually watching football given the above post.
 

Giedi

Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2013
Messages
377
Reaction score
0
KCHawkGirl":1vy4hhqh said:
I am with HawksFTW in that I have serious doubts about you actually watching football given the above post.
That's fine, everybody is entitled to their opinions. You know the saying, Opinions are like arm pitts. Everybody has them, and they all stink.
 

MizzouHawkGal

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 16, 2012
Messages
13,477
Reaction score
844
Location
Kansas City, MO
Giedi":2aio4rqy said:
KCHawkGirl":2aio4rqy said:
I am with HawksFTW in that I have serious doubts about you actually watching football given the above post.
That's fine, everybody is entitled to their opinions. You know the saying, Opinions are like arm pitts. Everybody has them, and they all stink.
Good that you're not offended but I said what I said because the 70's-early 80's Pittsburgh defense was the antithesis of bend/don't break. Like the current NY Giants their scheme is built on pressure from their front 7 what made Pittsburgh stellar is not only did they have a superior front 7 but a secondary as good as the LOB. Pete believes in a shutdown secondary consisting of long rangy CB's combined with LB's with wicked speed and multiple edge rushers built on speed. Very similar to Pittsburgh but with the emphasis on the secondary rather than the front 7. In otherwords Seattle's scheme is about as far from bend/don't break as Kansas is in opposite direction.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top