Zone coverage

[Pugger]

Putting up 28 points in 21 minutes (compared to 38 minutes for the Niners O) against that defense is no easy feat. We just didn't have the defensive horses to contain SF's offensive. That is one heck of a group they have assembled and not many teams out there will have an easy time of stopping them.

[Pugger]

Haven't seen tape or read McGinn's take on the tape yet, but the results sure seem to suggest that the Packers leaned toward playing the run this time around and the pass defensed suffered. Easy conclusion to draw and it may not prove to be right.

However, along those lines, I was disappointed in the use of new OLB Mike Neal on defense. He was in nickel pass rush with Jones and played some OLB but not often with both Matthews and Perry on the field.

I thought Neal's presence on the field would allow them to be big while also playing some kind of nickel or at least keep the safeties back. Perhaps put Matthews deeper or in the middle somewhere. Neal and Perry at OLB is like having twin 4-3 DEs on the field. In a four or five man front, they should be able to hold the fort.

The one positive in pass defense was that unlike last year's run defense, it did not hemorrhage so badly that big plays put the game out of reach. But that is not saying much.

Considering how terrible our pass O was and the fact we gave them a free TD on Lacy's fumble I would say we've come along way since last January. We lost by 6, not 14 like last time. It wasn't enough this time but let's see how things shake out in January if we are lucky enough to play them again.

[3irty1]

The years you're describing as our worst years for hemorrhaging yards up the middle was 2010 and 2011. Those years correspond perfectly with the years that Desmond Bishop and Charlie Peprah were playing on the same side of the same seam of the same Defense. Bishop was a baller but he also ran like a fat kid and Peprah was only marginally better.

Go look at the game again and you'll see its not like Boldin is just blowing past LB's, Safeties, and even Corners. He's exploding out of cuts, relying heavily on subtle pushoffs, leverage, and perfectly timed throws in order to magically get open at will. This is something savy vets excel at and we seem particularly slow to adjust to (see Reggie Wayne last year vs the Packers).

[run pMc]

Sam Shields is a good CB, but playing zone doesn't come naturally for him and he struggled. He wasn't the only one. I suspect this had a lot to do with the secondary losing the game -- play zone, but Boldin is a smart powerful vet who found soft spots in the zone, and he broke tackles the Packers should have made.

Had they cut Boldin's production by 25% they would have won. I'm thinking better coverage could have done that.

I don't think it will be 2011 bad -- the front 7 looks decent, and getting Burnett and Hayward should help. I have no idea if Banjo will get more snaps vs. WAS or if he can replace McMillian/Jennings...but better health should help. Not to pick on Jarrett Bush, but he should be a ST ace only. Hyde got picked on a little bit as a rookie but I think he'll come around by mid-season.

Yes, Nick Collins is still missed.

[pbmax]

A deep safety, or even two deep safeties are not a zone. Second play of the game, 2nd and significant yardage, Packers played man underneath and with the corners. Aikman noted this, it was the exact thing that caused some contain problems in the playoff game. That pay was stopped for four or so I think.

So before everyone starts blaming everyone on zone, be sure the plays you are talking about actually had a zone defense called. They mixed them up pretty good, but there was a lot of man.

[RashanGary]

A deep safety, or even two deep safeties are not a zone. Second play of the game, 2nd and significant yardage, Packers played man underneath and with the corners. Aikman noted this, it was the exact thing that caused some contain problems in the playoff game. That pay was stopped for four or so I think.

So before everyone starts blaming everyone on zone, be sure the plays you are talking about actually had a zone defense called. They mixed them up pretty good, but there was a lot of man.

Pb, it's kind of the same thing we're used to with this group of players though. Our guys can play good man defense, especially shields (who might be a great man defender.) They struggle in zone, especially shields (who may be a poor zone defender.)

They mixed it far more than they did at the end of last season, and that's a good sign. I have a feeling had Hayward been playing, we may have gotten an interception or a few more nice breakups. They were especially effective over the middle of the field with Boldin.

I thought we played better zone than in the past. Kaepernick made good throws all game, very few misthrows if any. We just played a really great team and I think a great QB. There's room for improvement. I hope this is the season we see it. I like that they mixed coverages more. i liked that our best two inside DB's are coming back. We'll just have to see how it all comes together. As it stands right now, we can hang in any game and win any game with a break or two. It would be nice to develop an identity though, something we can hang our hat on like the 8man box defense we played in 2010 with Collins alone in the deep middle.

[swede]

Pb, it's kind of the same thing we're used to with this group of players though. Our guys can play good man defense, especially shields (who might be a great man defender.) They struggle in zone, especially shields (who may be a poor zone defender.)

They mixed it far more than they did at the end of last season, and that's a good sign. I have a feeling had Hayward been playing, we may have gotten an interception or a few more nice breakups. They were especially effective over the middle of the field with Boldin.

I remember a throw to Boldin with three defensive backs in the area but turned away from the LOS. It was pickable, had anyone been playing the ball.

[pbmax]

Put this in the Redskins discussion thread but also thought it belonged in a 49ers review thread.

How To Stop The Read Option: Eight Man Front, Cover 3 Backend

[pbmax]

Smart Football @smartfootball 1h
How the game changes: Whenever SF got into a pistol set Packers checked to a run-focused front/coverage. Shotgun used to mean pass only

[Maxie the Taxi]

Question: If you're going to play an 8-man front, why not occasionally blitz all 8 men? Sure, you'd lose containment and risk a big run. But isn't that preferable than having all 8 always containing the QB and thereby allowing the QB all day to throw?

[Upnorth]

Question: If you're going to play an 8-man front, why not occasionally blitz all 8 men? Sure, you'd lose containment and risk a big run. But isn't that preferable than having all 8 always containing the QB and thereby allowing the QB all day to throw?

To much oppertunity on screens pitches and outs to turn into big big gains.

[Maxie the Taxi]

To much oppertunity on screens pitches and outs to turn into big big gains.

True, but there is also the chance that the screen would be disrupted before the QB could get the ball off. Plus, the odds of a sack or a turnover go up by a lot. Plus, the offense would have to anticipate an all-8 blitz and call the screen in advance. If the D doesn't blitz all 8 all the time, it has the advantage of forcing the action, forcing the offense to guess. Sure, every now the D might be gashed with a well-timed screen, but the alternative is too have the QB know all 8 men are going to contain on every play.

[pbmax]

That might be a focus next time but the focus this time was run d.

Need to limit possessions and force a TO. A running attack or short passing game that limits the 3 and outs would be ok too.

I think you could run the above D with the SS in more of a midway position. Robber maybe.

If you are getting passed on in that D, I would also like to see Hawk out, Neal in and Matthew in the middle.