SF scheme beating the Packers

[94Smith]

Your lack of a run game cost you the first half of the Packers game. No doubt if Carson was healthy, you would have won. Lynch looked tired, old, and not in game shape. Homer, had lots of quickness, but was more of a scat back. Lynch averaged 2.2 ypc in his games back. That's horrible. Love the nostalgia and the boost to morale, but he simply does not have it anymore.

 

[Washington49er]

How many times did Jimmy G throw the ball? How many touchdowns did he throw?

How healthy was SFs Oline and Running backs?

How healthy was SFs early 1st round Defensive line?

Actually, how healthy is SF compared to Seattle?

How anyone can compare our team to theirs, is beyond me. But go ahead, blame scheme when Russell Wilson got sacked 48 times this year. We didn't have enough of an OLine left to pass block , let alone run block for an old warhorse running back and a late round, undersized rookie.

16 guys on season ending IR, mostly D. Had two starting Tackles out quite a few games, starting kicker, starting TE out couple of games, starting center out a few games.

49ers have had just as many if not more injuries this season as the Hawks.

 

[SantaClaraHawk]

Running the ball and great defense... I wonder where York and John Lynch got that idea from...

The difference is that they've hit on many high draft picks over the last decade, while we've squandered ours.

The reality is our roster really isn't that talented. Russ being brilliant and coaches (getting the most out of average players) oftentimes saved the day.

However I do believe with a healthy Carson and Penny, we win the GB game despite our lack of talent on defense.

Whoa whoa whoa. York got that idea from Jim Harbaugh.

The 49ers built their teams around running and defense BEFORE Seattle went on their run. You guys just did it better an d incredible secondary

Sorta. The 9ers had Gore. They had Willis, Bow and Cowboy. But still, by 2013, you saw how the winning gameplan was basically expecting Kaep to throw to Crabtree or run it himself, get down into the EZ, and have Phil Dawson score another FG.

They don't do this now. They don't rely on one person, even if it's the QB1. They go for the run b/c they still have three healthy guys to execute it. If JimmyD were to throw an INT, if Gould were to miss either/both of his FG attempts, they're still winning. And they do this by never relying on just one guy.

 

[cymatica]

The 9ers are running (literally) the conservative offense that no longer works for SEA.

Jimmy G threw for a whole eight times but mostly put it in the RBs hands. One of the top RBs gets carted off, no problem, give it to the other top RB in there (Mostert) or the starter (Brieda) and if Coleman can't come back next week, just activate Wilson who's "only" gotten four TDs this year.

Meanwhile, set up your front 4 (or really 11) mini-LOB to stuff any run attempt, spot Uncle Sherm on spying Adams even outside his LCB spot, incent Erin to throw in his direction and game literally over.

They can do this because they have the personnel. They have the personnel largely from enduring multiple losing years without a franchise QB and a coach whose made the playoffs almost every year for the past decade. The fans are nowhere near accepting this level of pain...so how can we rebuild?

How many times does it have to be explained that it has nothing to do with rush vs pass attempts. They are not running anything similar to anything Seattle has done. They are creative in their run game, they give different looks, they use motion all the time to create space, they use 2 back sets. Yes they have the personel to run it, but they take advantage of their personel with a smart plan. Seattle refused to change anything with backup oline and backup rbs, constantly running up the middle from the same formation, and same look. More often than not, we see games won through Wilson magic rather than a good plan. Why can't they ever make it easy on the players and attack an opponents weakness? They always make it look harder than it should be with the players they have.

 

[chris98251]

San Francisco had a completely different type of run game and a completely different type of back they use, they have a stable of slashers and really 3rd down type backs and stretch draw plays with a blocker they cut off of either a fullback or TE and let them create in the open.

We have a one back set mostly using power runners that pick gaps depending on how the line gets leverage.

 

[RolandDeschain]

San Francisco had a completely different type of run game and a completely different type of back they use, they have a stable of slashers and really 3rd down type backs and stretch draw plays with a blocker they cut off of either a fullback or TE and let them create in the open.

We have a one back set mostly using power runners that pick gaps depending on how the line gets leverage.

No, no. Running is running and running means conservative. Just ask plenty of people around here, they can't all be mistaken.

It's IMPOSSIBLE to be aggressive and attacking and fierce with a run game.

:roll:

 

[cymatica]

San Francisco had a completely different type of run game and a completely different type of back they use, they have a stable of slashers and really 3rd down type backs and stretch draw plays with a blocker they cut off of either a fullback or TE and let them create in the open.

We have a one back set mostly using power runners that pick gaps depending on how the line gets leverage.

These are the types of players and scheme that would accentuate Wilson's strengths. Using a mobile QB, with a designed scramble offense, with big slow olinemen makes zero sense.

 

[cymatica]

According to Frank Clark, their run scheme was very tough to defend, he specifically mentioned their scheme.