15 minutes ago, McMVP said:

Yes…

I disagree with Kempski.  He has fought the chem of football long enough to know that the running game is not always about yards per carry as it is about number of attempts.  
 

If team abandoned the run game because the defense stops it at first, then the defense has accomplished their mission of making their opponent one dimensional.

Teams that quit running because it’s not working are just that…quitters. I don’t see this team as that. I hope they prove me right

 

The issue is really you cannot become one dimensional against that 49ers defense. You make it easier for them and harder on yourself. Once they don’t  have to respect the fact that you’re gonna run the football it’s an uphill battle and makes the eagles easier to defend. It’s why they’d mashed the cowboys, jags, eagles in those games. When you are missing goedert and become one dimensional it is even worse. You don’t have reliable pass catchers outside of smith and brown. So the niners after the first quarter adjusted and slowed down Aj and the eagles didn’t go to the plays Aj runs well til later in the game.

let me point out browns beat the niners. The first quarter of the game vs. 49ers they ran 8 times with their RBs for 23 yards (2.87 yards per carry). Stuck with the run game and rest of the game their rbs were 108 on 21 attempts for 5.14 yards per carry. They should’ve lost but they were able to keep that game within reach with pj walker at Qb by keeping themselves balanced and not one dimensional. Vikings didn’t exactly kill it in the run game vs. Niners but they ran it with Akers and Mattison 18 times for 3.8 yards per carry. The bengals game was an asswhopping for the niners. They couldn’t stop pass or run. 

6 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

How do 3 and outs usually end?

With Jalen usually running around, not completing a significant pass and/or getting sacked. 
 

And for what it’s worth, I’ve always been a pass-first guy.  The idea is to maintain a ball control offense and not giving up entirely on the run - which makes us one dimensional - and will never work against a defense like the 49ers.  They’re way too good and if all they need to focus on is defending the pass and rushing the QB, they will beat us every time.  Need to keep them honest - always need to mix in runs so it opens up the passing game, etc. 

We completely lost control of the game after the 1st two offensive drives and basically handed the 49ers control.   
 

What would you have done differently? 

 

 

7 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

Yes. The offense wasn’t good. The running game was dreadful and vanilla and completely sniffed out. 

SF also is significantly better and more diverse at running the ball than we are.  

As currently constructed, our run game isn’t worth sticking to, especially with a crap defense against a highly efficient and explosive offense like SF. 

I would much rather lose trying to get the ball to Smith and Brown than chipping away with 2 yard gains in hopes of getting the run game going. 

We need to change how we run before we decide to plug away with it just because. 

Also have to realize that with the defense this bad it's not easy to have the patience seeing your run game run into a brick wall in the instances you do run, knowing on the other end your defense is going to give up 7. Especially when you have the passing weapons this team has. It's not like when they abandon the run because it sucks they're throwing to trash receivers. Yeah, they've been trailing early regardless these days whether they run or pass, but when you come out of every halftime trailing by double digits, you're going to be forced to throw the ball anyway.

We've been having the same argument after losses for 20 years on this board and the old one, regardless of the coach. The whole premise of running the ball isn't to gain 8 YPC in the first few drives of the game and start out on fire. It's to help neutralize the pass rush and give off the perception that the running game is still an option so defenses still respect it. We saw it in the Buffalo game where in the second half, Swift finally got going and was a major reason why they were able to come back. This game wasn't out of reach until later in the second half. They panicked and went into pass, pass, pass mode and it was predictable. I don't think it would have made a difference either way because the defense gave up six straight TD drives and that game was just an ass-kicking. 

But if they're okay going three and out with the passing game not working, then abandoning the run game after the first quarter because they were only averaging 2 YPC doesn't make sense either. 

Interesting thread take it FWIW

5 minutes ago, Ace Nova said:

With Jalen usually running around, not completing a significant pass and/or getting sacked. 
 

And for what it’s worth, I’ve always been a pass-first guy.  The idea is to maintain a ball control offense and not giving up entirely on the run - which makes us one dimensional - and will never work against a defense like the 49ers.  They’re way too good and if all they need to focus on is defending the pass and rushing the QB, they will beat us every time.  Need to keep them honest - always need to mix in runs so it opens up the passing game, etc. 

We completely lost control of the game after the 1st two offensive drives and basically handed the 49ers control.   
 

What would you have done differently? 

 

 

Point was there was not "multiple 3 and outs due to passing all the time". The two times they did go 3 and out is because the run game was bad and put them behind early in the drive. 

3 minutes ago, BDawk_ASamuel said:

We've been having the same argument after losses for 20 years on this board and the old one, regardless of the coach. The whole premise of running the ball isn't to gain 8 YPC in the first few drives of the game and start out on fire. It's to help neutralize the pass rush and give off the perception that the running game is still an option so defenses still respect it. We saw it in the Buffalo game where in the second half, Swift finally got going and was a major reason why they were able to come back. This game wasn't out of reach until later in the second half. They panicked and went into pass, pass, pass mode and it was predictable. I don't think it would have made a difference either way because the defense gave up six straight TD drives and that game was just an ass-kicking. 

But if they're okay going three and out with the passing game not working, then abandoning the run game after the first quarter because they were only averaging 2 YPC doesn't make sense either. 

It has been the same slow process of realization throughout the years.  We want to be a pass first team but our strength is the OL and the run game.  Yes, our receivers are way better than they have been but I believe controlling the line of scrimmage and imposing our will physically is an important part of our identity as a team.  

1 minute ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Point was there was not "multiple 3 and outs due to passing all the time". The two times they did go 3 and out is because the run game was bad and put them behind early in the drive. 

Fair enough.  How many "short offensive” drives did that have that led to punts or non scores? 

 

 

 

3 ypc is better than incomplete passes or 15 yard sacks. They need to run the ball more, that's all there is to it. The second they have a run thay doesn't go 4 yards they throw the ball 15 times in a row. I'm not saying run 3 consecutive downs if you're getting stuffed, but you can't just eliminate runs from the game plan. 3 called runs in the first half is ridiculous 

4 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

 

 

Had mine taken out in college.  He will be fine by Sunday.

9 minutes ago, Ace Nova said:

Fair enough.  How many "short offensive” drives did that have that led to punts or non scores? 

Just one. 

41 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

Yes. The offense wasn’t good. The running game was dreadful and vanilla and completely sniffed out. 

SF also is significantly better and more diverse at running the ball than we are.  

As currently constructed, our run game isn’t worth sticking to, especially with a crap defense against a highly efficient and explosive offense like SF. 

I would much rather lose trying to get the ball to Smith and Brown than chipping away with 2 yard gains in hopes of getting the run game going. 

We need to change how we run before we decide to plug away with it just because. 

The passing game was 2-6 for 14 yards in the second quarter. That’s 2.33 yards per pass attempt. so you were awful throwing the ball. Meanwhile the best drive they had that game up to that point was the first one of the game where they had balance of 4 runs and 6 passes. Second drive was good until we hit what I’m going to say next which is you don’t have consistent 2022 version of hurts.

Here’s a problem, I would be more on your side of we should just keep throwing the football to smith and Aj brown if Jalen hurts was playing like 2022 Jalen hurts consistently. He’s not. That’s the big elephant in the room. after watching that game, the bills game and the Chiefs game he plays like 2022 Jalen hurts for a quarter or a half or a couple drives. You’re not getting complete game of 2022 hurts like he did most weeks. Wasn’t every week but it sure wasn’t 13 weeks off a quarter, half or couple of drives. So you can’t afford to just take away your whole aspect of your offense and just assume Jalen hurts is gonna play like 2022. It’s why their second quarter pass offense blew up in their face.

If you wanna just keep throwing solely to Smith and brown, if I’m an opposing defense and know you aren’t going to even run anymore then I’m taking at least one of them away once that happens especially not having goedert out there i think it’s easier to employ that. Lately it’s been brown who teams gear up to take away. Aj brown had 59 yards in the 1st quarter. Had 55 rest of the game. And really 26 on the garbage time drives in the 4th quarter. So when the game was on the line in the 2nd and 3rd quarter niners basically limited him to 29 yards. Cause they adjusted and basically said try to beat me with just one of them (smith) and then the JAG players behind them at TE and WR. Eagles couldn’t because guys like Watkins, julio, Oz, Stoll and Albert O aren’t consistent or reliable enough to do it. 

Let’s just be honest it’s the fourth quarter of the Dallas game, the passing offense has been wildly inconsistent. So just relying on that and nothing else against the no. 1 defense in the NFL is likely a recipe for an ass kicking because you can’t sustain an offense with inconsistent passing game and not wanting to even run or fix the running game.  

2 hours ago, NOTW said:

Ha, was just about to post. Well here's close up.

.  Took me a minute to figure out what the sweatshirt on the left said... "Shine that Penny".    

2 hours ago, eagle45 said:

 

Cox is getting $14m, back to back high first round picks at DT, a high 3rd in Williams, and two drafted players rounding out the depth for the 5th and 6th DTs.

And we need to bring in a washed vet at DT mid season. 
 

He was pretty good last season for the team in his limited reps.    But, your point stands.  Last year they brought in TWO, so I guess this could be considered progress?   

29 minutes ago, BDawk_ASamuel said:

We've been having the same argument after losses for 20 years on this board and the old one, regardless of the coach. The whole premise of running the ball isn't to gain 8 YPC in the first few drives of the game and start out on fire. It's to help neutralize the pass rush and give off the perception that the running game is still an option so defenses still respect it. We saw it in the Buffalo game where in the second half, Swift finally got going and was a major reason why they were able to come back. This game wasn't out of reach until later in the second half. They panicked and went into pass, pass, pass mode and it was predictable. I don't think it would have made a difference either way because the defense gave up six straight TD drives and that game was just an ass-kicking. 

But if they're okay going three and out with the passing game not working, then abandoning the run game after the first quarter because they were only averaging 2 YPC doesn't make sense either. 

We were down 21-6 before even touching the ball in the second half. And when we did touch the ball, we ran once and threw 10 straight times to cut the lead to 21-13. Then started the next drive with a run and a 3 and out. And then passed the whole next drive and scored a TD again.

1 hour ago, Ace Nova said:

Makes me wonder if some of these guys just read stat sheets instead of actually watching and paying attention to games. 
 

It’s not about just running the ball more.  It’s about maintaining a ball control offense.   After the 1st quarter, the 49ers wore our defense down by converting almost every third down and marching down the field repeatedly and scoring.
 

 The only way to slow them down would have been to maintain a ball control offense - either by actually completing passes and getting first downs or running the ball effectively.  The idea is that they needed to give the defense time to recover after getting constantly hammered by the 49ers offense - especially after converting almost every 3rd down, after the defense made tough stops on 1st & 2nd downs.  

 

Need to take a look at the nuances of a game before calling people morons, Jimmy. 

Honestly, Jimmy has one of the most condescending personalities in the media that he pushed off as humor for a long time. Calling someone a moron isn't a huge deal in the grand scheme of things, but when you have to resort to calling someone a moron in a tweet, that tells me more about the person tweeting. His stick figure drawings always make me laugh but otherwise, his whole schtick wore off and I can't take anything he says seriously. 

12 minutes ago, devpool said:

3 ypc is better than incomplete passes or 15 yard sacks. They need to run the ball more, that's all there is to it. The second they have a run thay doesn't go 4 yards they throw the ball 15 times in a row. I'm not saying run 3 consecutive downs if you're getting stuffed, but you can't just eliminate runs from the game plan. 3 called runs in the first half is ridiculous 

I think you need a bigger sign, ‘run the ball more but also differently’. The shotgun mesh RO isn’t fooling anybody as Hurts isn’t the threat that he was with his legs and the formation tells the opposing defense which side you’re running to.

1 hour ago, ManuManu said:

Obviously running 10 more times would have saved the defense from giving up 6 consecutive TD drives. 

Probably true.  They likely would have only given up 5.   

55 minutes ago, BwianWestbwook said:

Carr says Hurts can't handle drop back passing but he had some great games hanging in the pocket this year, let him read and throw with some actual route combinations instead of the all curls plan

Carr is right

2 hours ago, eagle45 said:

The run the ball thing frustrates me.  The OL has not been reliably opening holes in the running game.  We have one good back who is presently injured.

This isn’t a particularly good running team.  

What I find funny about Swift getting hurt is there's been this argument all year long to use Gainwell so they don't overuse Swift who many consider injury prone, yet Swift gets injured in absolute garbage time of a blowout game. If there's ever a time to not risk injury, it's when you're down 42-19. 

1 minute ago, LeanMeanGM said:

We were down 21-6 before even touching the ball in the second half. And when we did touch the ball, we ran once and threw 10 straight times to cut the lead to 21-13. And then scored a TD on the next drive by again, passing. 

 pass offense inconsistent since 4th quarter vs. Dallas will do that. They look good for a series and then revert back eventually cause they are inconsistent. Before niners game was usually a big run by swift that would jumpstart the offense. When you have to solely rely on just passing the football against the no. 1 defense in the league you are only gonna wind up scoring 19 points (frankly 6 were basically garbage time points as down 35-13 with 6 mins left in the 4th quarter) and having more punts than successful scoring drives.

i’m gonna make this really simple. You are not beating the San Francisco 49ers being a one dimensional offense. Point blank. The 3 losses the niners had were teams having some sort run attack along with their passing attack. Steve Wilks might not be a great head coach but he’s a damn good defensive coordinator with great talent on that defense. Hard time seeing with their pass rush, talent and his experience just letting you pass the ball consistently to beat him.

This goes back to you have to fix your running game and get it going. Whether that’s better blocking, backs doing a better job or schematically changing it up. Because you are going to get to San Francisco again and with an inconsistent passing offense you aren’t beating them being one dimensional. 

2 hours ago, eagle45 said:

Of course DT isn’t the issue.  But the massive DT investment is the reason we have a replacement level back 7.  Have the DTs been dominant enough to justify or overcome that?

I don't agree that the secondary talent is replacement level.  Their production is replacement level.  I think that's mostly due to a mismatch of LB talent and scheme.

48 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

How do 3 and outs usually end?

We should have ran on third and long just to prove a point.