The more the dust settles, the more it looks like Capers wasn't the issue.

quote:

Originally posted by Henry:

quote:

Originally posted by FLPACKER:


..you only use a "spy" on passing downs & you don't keep Hawk on the field. You commit 5 to the QB and play 6 in coverage. You play McMillan instead of Walden in that situation, if all you are having Walden do is stay 3 yards past the middle of the field & keep Kaepernick in the pocket...he does not have the ability to play at that part of the field with any success.

So you play McMillan as a LB on passing downs and still have 6 in coverage? I just want to be clear.

So who are the other 4 you commit to the QB and what if Kaepernick options to Gore with McMillan playing LB? McMillan, a safety.

...the other 4 that you commit to the QB are your best pass rushers. Would you rather have Mcmillan or Walden trying to tackle Gore or Kaepernick in the open field. The use of a Spy is pretty standard strategy vs. a running QB, used vs. Vick many times over the years, my beef is who we had as our Spy.Dont' you put someone in that position who is comfortable playing in that part of the field, in space? I just don't see Walden as that guy.

quote:

you only use a "spy" on passing downs & you don't keep Hawk on the field.

In this day & age of the NFL EVERY down is a "passing down". While I'm all for getting Hawk off of the field as much as possible, the solution is not quite as "binary" as you would like to think.

The only similarities between Vick and Kaepernick is that both QBs can/could run. Vick couldn't read defenses worth a lick and was more a thrower than an accurate passer IMO. CK on the other hand appears to be the exact opposite = he has a brain. This guy seems to understand the game/offense and knows how to run it. It certainly doesn't hurt his cause being surrounded by an above average supporting cast either = OL, RB,TE and WRs.

I read in another thread that Balt had an "adequate" deffense to get the job done. I agree with that thought. They gave up 484 yards. 182 on the round for a 6.3 yard average. CK had 62 of those yards for a 7 something average so it's not like Balt had all the answers to SFs running game either.

quote:

Originally posted by Shoeless Joe:

quote:

you only use a "spy" on passing downs & you don't keep Hawk on the field.

In this day & age of the NFL EVERY down is a "passing down". While I'm all for getting Hawk off of the field as much as possible, the solution is not quite as "binary" as you would like to think.

...I am aware of that. We used the "spy" on third & 10, etc, obvious passing downs. Again my point was that it appears that Walden did not possess the skill set to accomplish what the whole objective of the "spy" was....keep the QB from running. Kaepernick ran right by Walden with ease. Perhpas it would have been the same with any other player we put in that role....but can anyone really rationalize that Eric Walden was the BEST player we had to play in the middle of the field (where he never plays) and try to contain a very fast athlete in space, doesn't it make more sense to have a player in that role that plays in that area of the field on a regular basis? Scheming in the NFL is all about matchups. If I'm SF & I see Eric Walden "spying" Kaepernick, I tell him to run anytime he can get out of the pocket, total mismatch

The thing is, yeah, Walden was the best candidate, which should tell you/us a few things.

"upon further review"....we only used a "spy" 4 times in the game, all in the second Quarter. Twice we used CM, twice Walden. 3 of the 4 plays were positive for us (incomplete passes) on one of Walden's plays Kaepernick ran by him for a 15 yard gain. ..."Source": Jersey Al. It now dawns on me that Capers motivation to use these 2 players was out of deception rather than skill set. he dropped the OLber to the middle to Spy, using the same player deployment he would if they were to rush the QB. Tried to make it more difficult for Kaepernick to presnap diagnose what we were doing.

I guess we all will just defer to your superior football knowledge.

Wouldn't that be Al's "superior" football knowledge?

I think I threw up a little just typing that. Anybody got a tic tac? I need an Orange Fanta, stat.

As one of the X4 geeeenius' told us, Capers was probably holding back for next week.

Didn't San Fran say they held back certain offensive plays and packages for the playoffs? Doesn't seem so far fetched that a DC would do the same thing.

quote:

Originally posted by Grave Digger:
Didn't San Fran say they held back certain offensive plays and packages for the playoffs?

Did they?

Anyway, there is a difference. Green Bay was playing on the road versus a team in a win or out of the playoffs situation who was also a divisional rival. The Pack was playing for a week off.

San Fran was at home (playing at the same time) playing a mailing it in Arizona club. I will note that they were also in a must win situation for a bye week but also were playing under much better circumstances. They could have had some looks they held back because they could.

I refuse to believe Capers would have held anything back in that game in the Metrodome.

Unless your safeties are Ronnie Lott and Troy Polamalu you aren't beating the 2012 49ers with Hawk, Jones, and Walden starting at LB. You can disguise the scheme all you want. In the end though the disguise is being done to try and hide/support their lack of ability as much as to try and confuse Kaepernick.

Other than Haywards corner blitz to me the the plan looked like disguise and react. That's not going very far because Hawk/Walden/Jones aren't "react and make a play" guys. They're "react and limit the damage as best as possible" guys.

If I have any issue with the Capers it's that he didn't scrap everything and simply attack like a mad man and results be dammed. Because playing things by the book was never going to get it done with the bodies he had to work with.

quote:

Originally posted by Herschel:
The thing is, yeah, Walden was the best candidate, which should tell you/us a few things.

Exactly. Walden sucks. He's there because of injury. Less than ideal.

quote:

If I have any issue with the Capers it's that he didn't scrap everything and simply attack like a mad man and results be dammed. Because playing things by the book was never going to get it done with the bodies he had to work with.

This. The Ravens gambled regularly, including on the last play...

quote:

Originally posted by Grave Digger:
I guess we all will just defer to your superior football knowledge.

...now you are starting to come around

quote:

Originally posted by chickenboy:
Did they?

Yes. That's not an opinion, I can't remember the exact quote, but the gist was that they had not opened up the playbook with Kaepernick during the season. They were saving things for the playoffs.

quote:

Originally posted by Grave Digger:
Yes. That's not an opinion, I can't remember the exact quote, but the gist was that they had not opened up the playbook with Kaepernick during the season.

I would love to see that quote.

What I suspect and would only have been logical is when Smith got hurt, they simplified the Smith playbook while obviously increasing the use of the CK-specific plays (they were using CK here and there before the injury).

I also suspect that like any team that has to go to the backup QB, they continually added stuff as the season progressed. I suppose you could spin that as they saved stuff, but you could also spin it that it increased as he got more comfortable.

Bottom line is I don't think the 49ers deliberately put themselves in tough situations by saving stuff for the playoffs.

Note that this debate started with a comment that the Pack's dreadful defensive performance against Minny in the finale causing them to lose home field was partly due to Capers saving stuff for the postseason.

Still searching for the quote, but here is one article I read about it:

http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/20...ns-preview-breakdown

quote:

Jim Harbaugh, Greg Roman, and the Niners' offensive staff kept the Pistol stuff close to their vest until the playoffs -- they never ran more than 17 plays (31 percent) out of the Pistol in any game before the postseason, and over the final two regular season weeks, pretty much eliminated it all together (five times against Seattle Week 16, two times against Arizona Week 17).

quote:

This particular personnel grouping and formation serves as a good talking point because one of the reasons the Niners have been moving to the Pistol so much over the last two games (34 of 75 plays from scrimmage in their NFC divisional-round victory over the Green Bay Packers (45.3-percent)

When I'm not as busy at work I will find a quote.

I think it's clear that Capers saved stuff, just look at Charles Woodson. They could have easily played him in week 17, but they held him and all the packages/plays that came with him back. They got run over week 17 and then magically week 1 of the playoffs they stuffed him!

quote:

Originally posted by ChilliJon:
Unless your safeties are Ronnie Lott and Troy Polamalu you aren't beating the 2012 49ers with Hawk, Jones, and Walden starting at LB.

I realize that's an opinion, but do you really believe that? That bascially if those two teams play 100 times, SF wins everytime and the defense is incapable of playing well with its LB personnel (which also includes Matthews, who you left out to make your point)?

I expect there to be differences in opinion on what to do with Capers. But I'm just surprised at how for some it's become factual that Capers was powerless to contain the SF offense.

Sure, he may not have the ideal players. And sure, San Fran may have shown some surprise looks and not tipped its hand on tape. But isn't that life as an NFL defensive coordinator? If you had the best players and knew what the other team would run one would think it would be easy job.

I don't doubt San Fran with Kapernick is a tough match-up. Frankly, even though they won, I don't think the Ravens defense really was effective at all. They made just enough stops and benefited from strong special teams/offensive game by Flacco to barely hang on.

But I think the excuse making for Capers is going a bit overboard. If this was an isolated incident...fine. But the guy also presided over that awful performance against Warner and Arizona in the playoffs. They had a historically bad season in 2011 capped off by that Giants playoff game. And even in 2012, it took him 8 quarters to design a scheme to contain Adrian Peterson.

We can question the talent all we want; and praise the opposing offenses all we want; but at a certain point when is it acceptable to question if Dom can adjust his schemes to be effective against these high powered offenses of today?

The Niners had to do something new, something unexpected to beat Green Bay.

I'm disappointed in our players & coaches to not adjust the entire game.

Isn't it funny how teams need to react to the Packers now?

It took the Green Bay Packers to make the Niners pull out all the stops

The Packers are a great team, difficult to defend, difficult to defeat & I'm proud of them.

quote:

We can question the talent all we want; and praise the opposing offenses all we want; but at a certain point when is it acceptable to question if Dom can adjust his schemes to be effective against these high powered offenses of today?

{sigh....}

Seriously. Give DOM every forty-niner defensive player & give Vic Fangio every Packer defensive player. What do you think would happen?

quote:

Originally posted by Boris:
It took the Green Bay Packers to make the Niners pull out all the stops

If what you mean by pulling out all the stops is that the 49ers effectively game planned for an opponent, then I agree, they pulled out all the stops.

quote:

Originally posted by Rockin' Robin:
but at a certain point when is it acceptable to question if Dom can adjust his schemes to be effective against these high powered offenses of today?

I believe in Dom and TT. But if you point is that since Dom couldn't adjust and we have had awful perfomances the past couple of years on D in the playoffs. When do you start questioning TT for the roster and having inferior players?

quote:

Originally posted by Boris: Seriously. Give DOM every forty-niner defensive player & give Vic Fangio every Packer defensive player. What do you think would happen?

Interestingly Vic was Dom's coordinator in Carolina and Houston.

Regardless, despite the Niners obvious talent level on defense, I'd take Vic in a mili-second right now. Look at his resume? Coached up those great linebackers in New Orleans? Obviously Dom loved him enough to bring him to Houston. Nice stint with the Ravens defense and then with Harbaugh (Stanford/SF).

I wonder if any of those clubs had record setting defensive performances (and not the positive type) like Dom's clubs have had in recent years?

@RR, if SF and GB played 100 times, yes, GB is going to prevail in a decent number of those games only becasue at some point repetition drives home assignments, gap and edge discipline, tendencies, etc. But we can't take that view. This was one game. The talent level of SF's offense vs. the talent level of GB's defense.

Capers could scheme all he wanted but in this one game, he doesn't have the horses to adjust on the fly for all the options SF had at their disposal to exploit the lack of LB talent GB brought to the table. Which SF eventually did.

Clay was in kind of a no win situation. If he get's upfield and doesn't get to CK, CK simply pulls it down and has an open lane for a big gain (The first 49er TD). So he has to balance making a play vs giving one up. Not easy to do.

I would take Fangio over Capers. I would have also taken Horton over Capers.
I can't prove they'd be better off; it's just my opinion based on what I've seen.

I will note that two years ago the Packers and 49ers played and Green Bay won 34-16. Rodgers thew for nearly 300 yards with 3 TDs, and the team rushed for 110 more.

That 49er defense featured many of the same players from this year. The LB corp was basically the same -- no Aldon Smith, but they had Franklin as a T that year. They had Clements instead of Rodgers and I don't think Whitner was on the team.

But by and large, very similar personnel to their dominant defenses of the past two years...just a different coordinator. So while I think players are very important, I also think coaching can make a huge difference.

quote:

Frankly, even though they won, I don't think the Ravens defense really was effective at all.

That's half correct. They held them to 6 total points in the first half and not just because the BAL O was holding on to the ball. SF was getting nowhere on O. I don't know what happened after the blackout, BAL relaxed too much or started wearing down, SF made better adjustments, etc. But they were a different team afterwords.

quote:

Originally posted by DH13:
SF was getting nowhere on O.

Really? I'll have to look back at the stats, but I thought SF was moving it pretty well in the first half. They basically had it inside the 15 a couple of times and had to settle for FGs. Then they had the nice drive that ended with James fumbling at around the 25. So three good drives netted 6 points for them...the difference was Baltimore was cashing in with 7 on those opportunities.

Spagnuolo looked like a genius when he had Osi Umenyoira, Justin Tuck and Michael Strahan.....and looked like a fool when he had the talent in St. Louis and New Orleans. Great players can make coaches look better than they really are.

Give Capers the same players as SF and I'd take Capers any day. Willis and Bowman are arguably the 2 best ILB's in the NFL and are easily the best duo in the NFL. Hawk and Jones may be the worst duo in the NFL. In general, the only played in the front 7 that the Packers have the better player is CMIII over A Smith, and A Smith isn't exactly a bad player.

quote:

Originally posted by Rockin' Robin:
I would take Fangio over Capers. I would have also taken Horton over Capers.
I can't prove they'd be better off; it's just my opinion based on what I've seen.

I will note that two years ago the Packers and 49ers played and Green Bay won 34-16. Rodgers thew for nearly 300 yards with 3 TDs, and the team rushed for 110 more.

That 49er defense featured many of the same players from this year. The LB corp was basically the same -- no Aldon Smith, but they had Franklin as a T that year. They had Clements instead of Rodgers and I don't think Whitner was on the team.

But by and large, very similar personnel to their dominant defenses of the past two years...just a different coordinator. So while I think players are very important, I also think coaching can make a huge difference.

The 2010 49ers had slapped a stamp on the Singletary era and dropped the mail in the out box by the time they met in week 12. It's also tough playing inspired D when Troy Smith is your starting QB.

quote:

Originally posted by Rockin' Robin:

quote:

Originally posted by DH13:
SF was getting nowhere on O.

Really? I'll have to look back at the stats, but I thought SF was moving it pretty well in the first half.

I'll give you that but does it really matter when you can only score 2 field goals? As has been scoured here several times, it's not yards, it's scoring that matters on D. BAL had done well enough to hold mighty SF to only 6 pts in the first half. After the lights came on, not so much.

On Turning Point they're showing what a good jump the Baltimore blitz was getting and it appears they had a key on the center raising his butt as he snapped.

Ed Reed got such a good jump on that one snap that he almost beat the ball to CK.

The C doesn't raise his butt. He dips his head and then raises it right at the snap. It only happens in the Shotgun or Pistol. Never when CK lines up under C. That's what everyone keys on. It's been that way all year.

watch the 49ers when CK is in the gun.

quote:

It's been that way all year

(nfl.com consistently crashes my browser) Would you happen to have any other links? I'd be interested in reading them.

1:05 mark going back to week 4 when CK came in for garbage time against the Jets. Another video of the NFC Title game with the same thing here.

Thx. Any idea if that's just a bad habit or a set up to draw offsides? Seems like a strange thing to me and an easy way to to get a jump on the play.

Some teams do this as a que to the QB the snap is coming when in the gun. The C can decide on his own to not do it if he thinks the D is bringing pressure. Matt Birk did the same thing for the Ravens in the SB when Flacco was in the shotgun.

When you watch the final 49er fade pattern to Crabtree you see the Ravens D just unload as soon as the C starts to bring his head up.

Doesn't always work for the D though. On the Ravens opening drive Brooks reads Birk and jumped offsides on 3rd and 9 on an incomplete pass and gave the Ravens an extra down.... next play was touchdown Boldin.

quote:

Originally posted by titmfatied:

quote:

It's been that way all year

(nfl.com consistently crashes my browser) Would you happen to have any other links? I'd be interested in reading them.

Update your JAVA. It's important! Also use Chrome

I don't think Capers is nearly as bad as he is made out to be, and I don't think he has been given much opportunity with a full deck, but I would sure like to see him step up a little more with what he's got.