Can Stefanski conjure up a winning formula after the Bye for once?
-
Kevin didn't beat SF. Coach Schwartz beat SF, and Kevin did just about anything he could to prevent that!
The coaching staff, at least on the offensive side of the ball, stole some looks from the Ravens over the course of the BYE week. To help slow down the Niners pass rush and interior push, we ran some pin & pull, but with the addition of Y trap (Njoku) a look I haven't seen us use previously this season. We sprang Kareem for two good runs off that design.
As ugly as things were on offense, that would indicate a coaching staff utilizing concepts that worked against our defense, against a Niners Dline built similar to ours in terms of one gap aggressive play. Also means that Stef & co showed nuance and a creative touch.
As easy as it is to just say 'in spite of XYZ', that doesn't appear to be accurate.
It's still a headshaker to me how he could have even thought about rolling out our QB on 2nd and goal with an option to pass when what we clearly needed was to keep the clock running and cause SF to waste another TO. That should have been intercepted and game over for the Lucy Van Ski led Browns. Just plain stupid. No other word applies better.?
This is hindsight only because we won. I would have preferred a strong ball action fake and a simple 1a/1b design on 1st down, like spot-smash to a bigger body. Those early downs, when the S.F. DEF is playing your hand in wanting to attack downhill, are when you can (usually) get your cheapest yards through the air. A TE leak for a TD is a dagger, meaning you don't have to put your defense in a position to win the game all on their own.
And for as well as the defense played at times, we did, in terms of yardage, give up a game losing drive. Brownies were just fortunate enough to be on the positive end of a bad kicking situation for the first time in a long time.
Remember, Tressel-ball has also lost games before too.
Important to keep things in perspective.
-
We are 3-13 since 2021 after a win…gotta change that.
-
Kevin didn't beat SF. Coach Schwartz beat SF, and Kevin did just about anything he could to prevent that!
The coaching staff, at least on the offensive side of the ball, stole some looks from the Ravens over the course of the BYE week. To help slow down the Niners pass rush and interior push, we ran some pin & pull, but with the addition of Y trap (Njoku) a look I haven't seen us use previously this season. We sprang Kareem for two good runs off that design.
As ugly as things were on offense, that would indicate a coaching staff utilizing concepts that worked against our defense, against a Niners Dline built similar to ours in terms of one gap aggressive play. Also means that Stef & co showed nuance and a creative touch.
As easy as it is to just say 'in spite of XYZ', that doesn't appear to be accurate.
It's still a headshaker to me how he could have even thought about rolling out our QB on 2nd and goal with an option to pass when what we clearly needed was to keep the clock running and cause SF to waste another TO. That should have been intercepted and game over for the Lucy Van Ski led Browns. Just plain stupid. No other word applies better.?
This is hindsight only because we won. I would have preferred a strong ball action fake and a simple 1a/1b design on 1st down, like spot-smash to a bigger body. Those early downs, when the S.F. DEF is playing your hand in wanting to attack downhill, are when you can (usually) get your cheapest yards through the air. A TE leak for a TD is a dagger, meaning you don't have to put your defense in a position to win the game all on their own.
And for as well as the defense played at times, we did, in terms of yardage, give up a game losing drive. Brownies were just fortunate enough to be on the positive end of a bad kicking situation for the first time in a long time.
Remember, Tressel-ball has also lost games before too.
Important to keep things in perspective.
The coaching staff, at least on the offensive side of the ball, stole some looks from the Ravens over the course of the BYE week. To help slow down the Niners pass rush and interior push, we ran some pin & pull, but with the addition of Y trap (Njoku) a look I haven't seen us use previously this season. We sprang Kareem for two good runs off that design.
As ugly as things were on offense, that would indicate a coaching staff utilizing concepts that worked against our defense, against a Niners Dline built similar to ours in terms of one gap aggressive play. Also means that Stef & co showed nuance and a creative touch.
As easy as it is to just say 'in spite of XYZ', that doesn't appear to be accurate.
This is hindsight only because we won. I would have preferred a strong ball action fake and a simple 1a/1b design on 1st down, like spot-smash to a bigger body. Those early downs, when the S.F. DEF is playing your hand in wanting to attack downhill, are when you can (usually) get your cheapest yards through the air. A TE leak for a TD is a dagger, meaning you don't have to put your defense in a position to win the game all on their own.
And for as well as the defense played at times, we did, in terms of yardage, give up a game losing drive. Brownies were just fortunate enough to be on the positive end of a bad kicking situation for the first time in a long time.
Remember, Tressel-ball has also lost games before too.
Important to keep things in perspective.
Respectfully, your seemingly addictive desire for nuance seems to cloud your own perspective.
As I already mentioned in the post linked below, our defense is allowing a historic YPG. Keeping this up against the Niners, who outscored previous opponents by double digits with ease, I do not see how "Schwartz beat SF" is disputable.
Other than the Titans game, when Watson was 'feeling it,' our offense has been plain bad. That's on coach Fancy.
And I still agree with @texasag1969 that the 2nd down pass in the redzone was just abysmal. Typical fancy Stefanski play calling. Your nuance that throwing to the TE woulda worked in that situation might be true when Watson or a decent back-up was playing. We had a notorious INT-machine on the field, who seemed intent to prove it on that play as well. In the game topic, I suggested "3 knees and a FG." While 3 rushes would have been better, I maintain that my suggestion is superior to what coach conjured up.
It is indeed hopeful that the coaching staff are making tweaks and trying to improve. As it stands however, we are winning because of Schwartz and in spite of Fancy holds true for both the Niners game and the season so far IMO. Both based on stats, and observations.
-
Kevin didn't beat SF. Coach Schwartz beat SF, and Kevin did just about anything he could to prevent that!
The coaching staff, at least on the offensive side of the ball, stole some looks from the Ravens over the course of the BYE week. To help slow down the Niners pass rush and interior push, we ran some pin & pull, but with the addition of Y trap (Njoku) a look I haven't seen us use previously this season. We sprang Kareem for two good runs off that design.
As ugly as things were on offense, that would indicate a coaching staff utilizing concepts that worked against our defense, against a Niners Dline built similar to ours in terms of one gap aggressive play. Also means that Stef & co showed nuance and a creative touch.
As easy as it is to just say 'in spite of XYZ', that doesn't appear to be accurate.
It's still a headshaker to me how he could have even thought about rolling out our QB on 2nd and goal with an option to pass when what we clearly needed was to keep the clock running and cause SF to waste another TO. That should have been intercepted and game over for the Lucy Van Ski led Browns. Just plain stupid. No other word applies better.?
This is hindsight only because we won. I would have preferred a strong ball action fake and a simple 1a/1b design on 1st down, like spot-smash to a bigger body. Those early downs, when the S.F. DEF is playing your hand in wanting to attack downhill, are when you can (usually) get your cheapest yards through the air. A TE leak for a TD is a dagger, meaning you don't have to put your defense in a position to win the game all on their own.
And for as well as the defense played at times, we did, in terms of yardage, give up a game losing drive. Brownies were just fortunate enough to be on the positive end of a bad kicking situation for the first time in a long time.
Remember, Tressel-ball has also lost games before too.
Important to keep things in perspective.
As ugly as things were on offense, that would indicate a coaching staff utilizing concepts that worked against our defense, against a Niners Dline built similar to ours in terms of one gap aggressive play. Also means that Stef & co showed nuance and a creative touch.
The offensive brain-trust did what it could with what it had. It was one of the smarter offensive games I've seen from us.
-
We are 3-13 since 2021 after a win…gotta change that.
We are 3-13 since 2021 after a win…gotta change that.
Oh yes, need to string those wins together WWW W? Not W-LW-LW !
Maybe able to catch the AFCN this year. (Try expanding the 2023 schedule. )
-
Kevin didn't beat SF. Coach Schwartz beat SF, and Kevin did just about anything he could to prevent that!
The coaching staff, at least on the offensive side of the ball, stole some looks from the Ravens over the course of the BYE week. To help slow down the Niners pass rush and interior push, we ran some pin & pull, but with the addition of Y trap (Njoku) a look I haven't seen us use previously this season. We sprang Kareem for two good runs off that design.
As ugly as things were on offense, that would indicate a coaching staff utilizing concepts that worked against our defense, against a Niners Dline built similar to ours in terms of one gap aggressive play. Also means that Stef & co showed nuance and a creative touch.
As easy as it is to just say 'in spite of XYZ', that doesn't appear to be accurate.
It's still a headshaker to me how he could have even thought about rolling out our QB on 2nd and goal with an option to pass when what we clearly needed was to keep the clock running and cause SF to waste another TO. That should have been intercepted and game over for the Lucy Van Ski led Browns. Just plain stupid. No other word applies better.?
This is hindsight only because we won. I would have preferred a strong ball action fake and a simple 1a/1b design on 1st down, like spot-smash to a bigger body. Those early downs, when the S.F. DEF is playing your hand in wanting to attack downhill, are when you can (usually) get your cheapest yards through the air. A TE leak for a TD is a dagger, meaning you don't have to put your defense in a position to win the game all on their own.
And for as well as the defense played at times, we did, in terms of yardage, give up a game losing drive. Brownies were just fortunate enough to be on the positive end of a bad kicking situation for the first time in a long time.
Remember, Tressel-ball has also lost games before too.
Important to keep things in perspective.
....
Those early downs, when the S.F. DEF is playing your hand in wanting to attack downhill, are when you can (usually) get your cheapest yards through the air. A TE leak for a TD is a dagger, meaning you don't have to put your defense in a position to win the game all on their own.
I always liked the TE under the goal posts on play action, 1st or 2nd down. It's a play that seems to work no matter what team runs it.
Saying that, I don't see it done very often anymore.
-
The coaching staff, at least on the offensive side of the ball, stole some looks from the Ravens over the course of the BYE week. To help slow down the Niners pass rush and interior push, we ran some pin & pull, but with the addition of Y trap (Njoku) a look I haven't seen us use previously this season. We sprang Kareem for two good runs off that design.
As ugly as things were on offense, that would indicate a coaching staff utilizing concepts that worked against our defense, against a Niners Dline built similar to ours in terms of one gap aggressive play. Also means that Stef & co showed nuance and a creative touch.
As easy as it is to just say 'in spite of XYZ', that doesn't appear to be accurate.
This is hindsight only because we won. I would have preferred a strong ball action fake and a simple 1a/1b design on 1st down, like spot-smash to a bigger body. Those early downs, when the S.F. DEF is playing your hand in wanting to attack downhill, are when you can (usually) get your cheapest yards through the air. A TE leak for a TD is a dagger, meaning you don't have to put your defense in a position to win the game all on their own.
And for as well as the defense played at times, we did, in terms of yardage, give up a game losing drive. Brownies were just fortunate enough to be on the positive end of a bad kicking situation for the first time in a long time.
Remember, Tressel-ball has also lost games before too.
Important to keep things in perspective.
Respectfully, your seemingly addictive desire for nuance seems to cloud your own perspective.
As I already mentioned in the post linked below, our defense is allowing a historic YPG. Keeping this up against the Niners, who outscored previous opponents by double digits with ease, I do not see how "Schwartz beat SF" is disputable.
Other than the Titans game, when Watson was 'feeling it,' our offense has been plain bad. That's on coach Fancy.
And I still agree with @texasag1969 that the 2nd down pass in the redzone was just abysmal. Typical fancy Stefanski play calling. Your nuance that throwing to the TE woulda worked in that situation might be true when Watson or a decent back-up was playing. We had a notorious INT-machine on the field, who seemed intent to prove it on that play as well. In the game topic, I suggested "3 knees and a FG." While 3 rushes would have been better, I maintain that my suggestion is superior to what coach conjured up.
It is indeed hopeful that the coaching staff are making tweaks and trying to improve. As it stands however, we are winning because of Schwartz and in spite of Fancy holds true for both the Niners game and the season so far IMO. Both based on stats, and observations.
Respectfully, your seemingly addictive desire for nuance seems to cloud your own perspective.
As I already mentioned in the post linked below, our defense is allowing a historic YPG. Keeping this up against the Niners, who outscored previous opponents by double digits with ease, I do not see how "Schwartz beat SF" is disputable.
Other than the Titans game, when Watson was 'feeling it,' our offense has been plain bad. That's on coach Fancy.
And I still agree with @texasag1969 that the 2nd down pass in the redzone was just abysmal. Typical fancy Stefanski play calling. Your nuance that throwing to the TE woulda worked in that situation might be true when Watson or a decent back-up was playing. We had a notorious INT-machine on the field, who seemed intent to prove it on that play as well. In the game topic, I suggested "3 knees and a FG." While 3 rushes would have been better, I maintain that my suggestion is superior to what coach conjured up.
It is indeed hopeful that the coaching staff are making tweaks and trying to improve. As it stands however, we are winning because of Schwartz and in spite of Fancy holds true for both the Niners game and the season so far IMO. Both based on stats, and observations.
First off, we've had some good talks before and you appear vested in quality football discussion, so you don't have to add the 'respectfully' part bubs. I genuinely wouldn't believe you to offer up offense without it being pretty clear. I appreciate the gesture though. Plus, I'm not that insecure and am able to parse critique with insult. Just for future reference.
That said, there are worse things to be addicted to. And don't mistake my meaning, I'm not here to detract from the reality that Coach Schwartz and the Dawgs of War are currently the leading unit. Best foot forward, and they are that best. So you're absolutely correct that without them, we would be screwed.
But there were several nice offensive adjustments and wrinkles added in this past Sunday to squeeze just enough juice for points. That includes the counter from the Bryant sneak into the HB toss that Kareem housed for a TD.
The Brownies, with a 3rd string QB, put more points on the board than the Steelers and Cowboys starters... combined.
I'm under no illusion about where and what the offense is. The main crux of my post here is that saying 'in spite of', is just a bit too strong.
-
Stefanski earned this win.
I didn't agree with the color commentator's thoughts on when to go for it and when not. We went for it on 4th and 4 because we absolutely had to.
Stef took the FG attempts whenever he could / had to. He knew how good the SF D was and he relied on his D to control the game. And Schwartz's guys did the job. If the FG kick hooked 1 measly yard, we lose. As we've done countless times in that situation. 'Bout time a game winning opponent's kick goes our way.
I think Stef did a good job today. I didn't agree with every play call but that will always be the case, with all of us, no matter who the play caller is.
Greg Olsen is an idiot, we punted on a 4th and long 1, up by 3 at our own 40, defense forced an immediate punt. That’s the exact outcome you want (except for losing the timeout)
For some reason he kept ragging on the decision even after the 4th and 4 play.
Greg Olsen is an idiot, we punted on a 4th and long 1, up by 3 at our own 40, defense forced an immediate punt. That’s the exact outcome you want (except for losing the timeout)
For some reason he kept ragging on the decision even after the 4th and 4 play.
Olsen obviously had a miserable Sunday. I wonder how much cake he lost on that game...
-
Greg Olsen is an idiot, we punted on a 4th and long 1, up by 3 at our own 40, defense forced an immediate punt. That’s the exact outcome you want (except for losing the timeout)
For some reason he kept ragging on the decision even after the 4th and 4 play.
Olsen obviously had a miserable Sunday. I wonder how much cake he lost on that game...
Olsen obviously had a miserable Sunday. I wonder how much cake he lost on that game...
He also harped on the "bad call" of the defenseless player hit by SF saying his head & neck were not impacted at all. Wrong, as they were showing it in slow mo he kept insisting he was right despite clear evidence to the contrary staring him in the face. The right elbow does in fact hit the right side of the helmet in a downward angle to also at least land sideways in the neck area up against it. Judgement call but close enough that even if reviewed it would not be overturned. If it had happened to Olsen when he was playing and not called, he'd still be squalling about it.
-
Olsen obviously had a miserable Sunday. I wonder how much cake he lost on that game...
He also harped on the "bad call" of the defenseless player hit by SF saying his head & neck were not impacted at all. Wrong, as they were showing it in slow mo he kept insisting he was right despite clear evidence to the contrary staring him in the face. The right elbow does in fact hit the right side of the helmet in a downward angle to also at least land sideways in the neck area up against it. Judgement call but close enough that even if reviewed it would not be overturned. If it had happened to Olsen when he was playing and not called, he'd still be squalling about it.
He also harped on the "bad call" of the defenseless player hit by SF saying his head & neck were not impacted at all. Wrong, as they were showing it in slow mo he kept insisting he was right despite clear evidence to the contrary staring him in the face. The right elbow does in fact hit the right side of the helmet in a downward angle to also at least land sideways in the neck area up against it. Judgement call but close enough that even if reviewed it would not be overturned. If it had happened to Olsen when he was playing and not called, he'd still be squalling about it.
I feel very confident that if that play happened with 100 different referee crews, at least 80 would have called that penalty. The defender launched himself off the ground and lead towards a defenseless WRs head/neck. He might have missed by a inch, but in real time, that looks like an obvious penalty almost every time.
-
I'm more interested to see if he can conjure up a winning formula after a WIN. 3-13 after a win since 2021 is ridiculous. He makes these crucial mistakes that I'll never understand. For example, we're up 3 against the Steelers late...need a first down...but really we just need our defense to end it. Obviously you call a safe play and try to get the first, but if not, your defense has given up - 7 yards for the quarter, and you feel good. WRONG. You call a risky, long-developing, play action pass, Watson fumbles, ball obviously rolls right to the Steelers because that's what happens for them, and we lose. THAT'S on coach.
It's a new week, let's win the game. I'm predicting a big win with terrific Watson stats.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login