Pettine: Stays or Goes

[Bossman641]

I could go either way but I think the bigger issues are Lowry and Lancaster.

[Joemailman]

I could go either way but I think the bigger issues are Lowry and Lancaster.

I agree. I like Lowry better as a rotational player rather than a starter. Lancaster is JAG at best. The apparent failure of Mt Adams hurt this team.

[Bossman641]

What this team desperately needs is to hit big on a late round dl or lb. Who's the last one who turned out, mike daniels? Failures of Burks and looming large.

[pbmax]

The 49ers passed 8 fucking times the entire game. Pettine couldn't scheme to stop that? I know that the D still lacks talent but holy hell.

Making a journeyman running back look like Jim Brown should be grounds for dismissal.

What they said.

Also what they asked.

[pbmax]

Yeah, knee jerk reaction after an ass kicking like that is to fire somebody, anybody! But me thinks our expectations were too high. The better question may be 'did the team improve this year', I would think everybody would agree yes. So we almost have to let it ride to see if the improvement continues. I am already looking forward to next season.

I don't think getting run over like that means expectations were too high.

That was unprepared. Had no answer. 49ers looked like Greg Roman's offense out there. I guarantee we hear this week about a lot of unscouted looks.

Packers prepared for the 49ers to run the same game as last time. 49ers prepared for that adjustment.

[pbmax]

I could go either way but I think the bigger issues are Lowry and Lancaster.

I agree, but the bigger issue is what the 49ers did to the edges.

[pbmax]

I agree. I like Lowry better as a rotational player rather than a starter. Lancaster is JAG at best. The apparent failure of Mt Adams hurt this team.

Yes, he or Keke. Lancaster stays just because he is the backup nose tackle.

[ThunderDan]

I need some time past the ass whooping to decompress before I start thinking about this. Hopefully, the Packers take a little bit of time also.

Need to access the increase in talent verse the improvement in the D. Was it because of the players or using the players inside a specific scheme?

[esoxx]

Wade Phillips

[Gotarace]

Still Shell Shocked...Do we have the Horses? Was it the Coaching Scheme? Was it the Failure to Execute? Looked like the Niners were running through Blocking Dummies...Tough to watch but I need more time to sort through the Carnage before asking for Pettine's Head.

[3irty1]

I don't think Pettine is some kind of stud coordinator who can build a quality defense exclusively out of role players, but for short term success I think he's the best option.

At this point I believe the best investment in the defense is an investment in the offense. Yes I think this the day after being humiliated by a 49ers using only a one-dimensional high school offense.

When the Packers are playing well its a team built to pass and stop the pass. Perhaps this is an outdated 2010's approach or perhaps this is still the way to go because ostensibly the major advantage of this team is Aaron Rodgers. Kickass rushing attacks were bound to come back into fashion as defenses have been trending smaller and faster but I do still think the strategy you want, which is also the strategy we have the best chance of employing, is still a team that can pass and stop the pass.

Running the ball will always be somewhat of an underdog strategy simply because it shortens the game so much by running down the clock. If you're the better team, you want a longer game to maximize your opportunities to realize your advantage. So if you can only be good at one thing, you want to throw it. If you can be good at two things, you want to stop others from throwing it for the same reason. It's inconceivable to me that the Packers of say 2011, could be boat raced by that 49ers team because you can't throw it 6 times in a half and expect to keep up in a shootout. That team's entire run-stopping defense between the 20's was basically its offense. Our team is still built to win shootouts, but it tends to forget its guns at home.

I'm not suggesting we need a historically good offense like 2011 every year, but we do need to be a credible threat to do the things we were doing in 2011. I don't know if Aaron Rodgers can still sling it like that but we won't know until he's got the types of receivers who can get behind a defense again. Also we're just so heavily invested in Rodgers that we pretty much have to go forward as if he's as likely as anyone to win the MVP next year.

[Fosco33]

Too bad Aranda took the Baylor job. I’d take a chance on young up and comer - Leonard even?

[pbmax]

Too bad Aranda took the Baylor job. I’d take a chance on young up and comer - Leonard even?

Same defense. Both from Rex Ryan Ravens.

[pbmax]

I don't think Pettine is some kind of stud coordinator who can build a quality defense exclusively out of role players, but for short term success I think he's the best option.

At this point I believe the best investment in the defense is an investment in the offense. Yes I think this the day after being humiliated by a 49ers using only a one-dimensional high school offense.

When the Packers are playing well its a team built to pass and stop the pass. Perhaps this is an outdated 2010's approach or perhaps this is still the way to go because ostensibly the major advantage of this team is Aaron Rodgers. Kickass rushing attacks were bound to come back into fashion as defenses have been trending smaller and faster but I do still think the strategy you want, which is also the strategy we have the best chance of employing, is still a team that can pass and stop the pass.

Running the ball will always be somewhat of an underdog strategy simply because it shortens the game so much by running down the clock. If you're the better team, you want a longer game to maximize your opportunities to realize your advantage. So if you can only be good at one thing, you want to throw it. If you can be good at two things, you want to stop others from throwing it for the same reason. It's inconceivable to me that the Packers of say 2011, could be boat raced by that 49ers team because you can't throw it 6 times in a half and expect to keep up in a shootout. That team's entire run-stopping defense between the 20's was basically its offense. Our team is still built to win shootouts, but it tends to forget its guns at home.

I'm not suggesting we need a historically good offense like 2011 every year, but we do need to be a credible threat to do the things we were doing in 2011. I don't know if Aaron Rodgers can still sling it like that but we won't know until he's got the types of receivers who can get behind a defense again. Also we're just so heavily invested in Rodgers that we pretty much have to go forward as if he's as likely as anyone to win the MVP next year.

Its a fair set of points, but you have to do something to arm Pettine or his replacement against this 49er team and its eventual copycats.

My disappointment isn't scheme. It's prep. They looked like a team than had never seen an option before.

You hire Barry Alvarez to yell at them about staying home and doing your job/assignment and show some Nebraska/Osbourne tape. Then spend some money on an ILB who can make them pay for running that.

Probably need a better DT too.

[call_me_ishmael]

I could go either way but I think the bigger issues are Lowry and Lancaster.

Yep. Exactly.