I wish Gabbert was locked up
bears 46 defense they used in 1985
View media item 2178194
the way bow takes these losses to heart reminds me so much of franky G through the dark years. i feel for him.
on a positive note, we're 1-0 at home.going to be a tough game against that cowboy O-line and running attack next sunday.
******* horrible. They need to bench his *** but chip too stubborn that it probably won't happen until after our game vs cards or after a bye week. I honestly don't think Kaep is 100% might be a reason chip isn't putting Kaep in
:x
i don't get it either.
http://www.49ers.com/video/videos/E...-Seattle/5ad82116-2471-4718-a1b2-e2c81b935c1f
listen @ 2:52
i specifically touched on this a couple seasons ago on why our defense has so much trouble vs seattle's 11 personnel package
i drew this ghetto *** **** up just now to give you guys an idea
11 personnel=1 TIGHT END, 1 RB, 3 WRs
seattle's 11 personnel offers unique challenge in that beast mode is one of the toughest players to bring down ever to play in the NFL. arm tackles wont do ****, and you'll need big bodies and emphasis on group tackling. they also have the benefit of the inline tight end being utilized as a blocker.
not only lynch, but containing wilson makes it a double trouble. now you worry about 2 people running out of the backfield with their read options, ZBS and scramble drills. defenders have to maintain integrity, rushers have to stay in their lane, and backside defenders have to STAY HOME so that there aren't any cutback lanes. now safeties have to compensate for these shortcomings by playing closer to the line to help in the run defense and cheat a couple yards closer, while still accounting for that extra wide out on the field.
this is why its preferable to stay in BASE defense. you want to maintain that strong box defense(lol) against lynch and that extra blocker(if he blocks). HOWEVER, that extra wide receiver is unaccounted for in base defense.
stopping the run in a 3-4 all starts with the 0 technique(nose tackle). for us, it begins and ends with ian williams. when he is on the field, dude is a beast at stacking the center and preventing any sort of push and choking the flow of the opposing line. he knows how to doublegap(account for 2 gaps/2linemen), thus keeping bow/willhoite flowing freely to the RB to make tackles.
when we are in base, ian williams is on the field, so bringing down lynch is easier; however, with ian williams on the field, we are relegated to a zone coverage if they pass the ball because they have more receivers than we do coverage people(defensive backs). this is why lynchmobb has to go out, cover a zone and NOT pass rush. not only that, but you have fat *** linemen trying to chase down a little ****** that is russell wilson if he leaks out.
SO, now you are in zone coverage in base defense against 3 ****** WRs who are quick and shifty, and if they pass, your pass rush has been hindered because your best pass rushers are in coverage. you'll likely have soft zones in the deeper intermediates because people are playing shorter depth for 1.) the RB 2.) the running QB. this is why those ******* always have big plays down the seams against us.
so what do you do?
you switch to nickel(or dime) to combat their extra receivers that are eating you alive down the field. now, lynch is back to being a pass rusher, and we have an extra body for their extra wide receiver; HOWEVER, now we have a very soft box because ian williams is off the field. you have 6 defenders in the box against 6 blockers. THAT's MAN-ON-MAN ACROSS THE BOARD. WE STILL HAVENT ACCOUNTED FOR LYNCH. this is when marshawn lynch has destroyed us in the past. he gets to the second level and eats DBs alive. the emphasis on group tackling is highlighted even more, but you have skinny *** 180lbs DBs(who are terrified dont kid yourselves) on the field trying to bring one of the most physically intimidating runners of all time. good luck.
i didn't even mention that the tight end is basically wide receiver now
this is why 11 personnel is a killer when we play seattle. you're ****** if you do, ****** if you don't.
