Eric Mangini Thread

Originally posted by 4everFaithful:

Don't be mad at Mangini, be mad at our front office. Letting Fangio walk out the door.

We can be mad that he's not doing his job.

Originally posted by 49ersOnMINE:

Mangini will live and die using that Zone, bring back the Man to Man please... Accept that zone is the weakest link of this defense, theres just too many holes. Why get off the scheme that held the GB to 17 points ?

perhaps he knows that installing a new scheme comes with growing pains? you dont give up a newly installed system that fast unless you really dont have the players for that.
apparently he indeed thinks that the player material is not the issue though.

Originally posted by Baldie:

Originally posted by tohara3:

This guy couldn't adjust to save his life last night & it cost us a big road win. Wow, just wow

A win would have definitely started righting the ship. If only Brock would have caught that INT . This morning we'd all be talking how we're back in it.

No it wouldn't have. Scheme is still bad.

Originally posted by LifelongNiner:

Originally posted by Baldie:

Originally posted by tohara3:
This guy couldn't adjust to save his life last night & it cost us a big road win. Wow, just wow

A win would have definitely started righting the ship. If only Brock would have caught that INT . This morning we'd all be talking how we're back in it.

No it wouldn't have. Scheme is still bad.

This. This was my biggest fear. Mangini did not learn a SINGLE thing from the Steelers/Cards game, let alone the Packers game.

Originally posted by pdizo916:
Mangini doesn't have the pieces yet. His secondary is young and stupid, he only has one pass rusher, and his schemes are known to be complex. It's gonna take time for the players to be comfortable in his scheme. But Baalke does need to get another pass rusher to pair with Lynch. (I don't know why Tomsula started Lemonier over Harold. I want to see what Harold can do)

Yet those "young and stupid" CB's looked pretty darn good against a hot Green Bay team (Acker, Ward and Brock + even Tartt and Reaser).

But odd how when Mangini changes BACK up to his losing formula of soft zone, we give up 525 yards and everyone looks utterly lost.

Philosophy and scheme is SO important esp. at this level. There is plenty of talent on this team and Mangini not only is failing them but failing the entire team. I can NOT imagine how low the morale of this team is right now. Offense finally does their part and Mangini calls a horrendous game. And if I hear any more B.S. about "execution" I'm going to lose it.

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by SofaKing:

Originally posted by thl408:
Not the right pieces. Alright, but in Tomsula's first interview (paraphrased): "In the offseason you try to find players for the scheme. It's not a perfect world. Sometimes you can't find the pieces. Then you re-evaluate and fit the players you have to a scheme."

All these pass defenders (LBs/DBs) were playing a different scheme last season and it worked for the most part. They are missing another pass rusher, I agree. So crank up the complexity of the coverages. This cushy zone crap ain't working. Complex coverages that adapted to the WR routes were used the past 3 seasons and they've gotten away from it. It's like he's trying to put his own stamp on things. The defense didn't need a scheme overhaul.

It's really puzzling, I didn't see this one coming. I assumed Mangini would continue to play a similar scheme, but increase the frequency of blitzing. I didn't expect a complete overhaul of coverage scheme, nobody did. Mangini has trashed this defense.

Bolded is what I thought as well. I have a feeling the film of tonight's defense is going to look a lot like ARI's where Fitz was killing it over the middle. Zone defense versus Ben and Palmer, two grizzled vets, and they light us up. Man coverage against Rodgers and he's contained. Let's go back to zone against Eli who is a veteran of however many years. Genius.

I couldn't even sleep last night I was so steamed! And for this EXACT reason.

A worthy question.

Originally posted by thl408:
Is it fair to question Tomsula for signing off on these gameplans? I mean if Tomsula isn't heavily involved in the offense (personal speculation), he's saying, "yeah, moar zone plz". Step in and veto this weak ass defensive gameplanning.

Originally posted by dtg_9er:

Originally posted by Stud:
Zone Defense. Giants players were literally wide open all game, 10-15 yard cushions it seemed. Hence the 525 yards of Giants offense.

There was so very good coverage tonight but they didn't maintain it for the whole game and went into a prevent in the last drive...but if they had played tight and been beaten deep we'd be screaming they should have played off...9er lost so they were wrong!

No, b/c in man, you play to the strengths of Acker, Ward and Brock. We still have our S's back...GB was the perfect blue print to our defensive strengths. Big Dime was also very effective and allowing the OLB's to pass rush, was another smart move. And then he goes full potato again right AFTER seeing this defenses success 6 days earlier...no excuses.

Originally posted by NCommand:
Yet those "young and stupid" CB's looked pretty darn good against a hot Green Bay team (Acker, Ward and Brock + even Tartt and Reaser).

But odd how when Mangini changes BACK up to his losing formula of soft zone, we give up 525 yards and everyone looks utterly lost.

Philosophy and scheme is SO important esp. at this level. There is plenty of talent on this team and Mangini not only is failing them but failing the entire team. I can NOT imagine how low the morale of this team is right now. Offense finally does their part and Mangini calls a horrendous game. And if I hear any more B.S. about "execution" I'm going to lose it.

They looked promising. I wouldn't say good. Got away with some holds. Misplayed balls in the air still at times. Some dropped passes helped too. Not good, but A LOT better. And they weren't giving up as many quick completions. If we could have covered for any time at all on a bunch of plays we could have had a few sacks IMO. There was a pretty nice steady pressure coming from Lynch but he rarely had time to get home.

Originally posted by Baldie:
A win would have definitely started righting the ship. If only Brock would have caught that INT . This morning we'd all be talking how we're back in it.

This is true, but trust me, I'd still be going OFF on Mangini!

LMAO

Mangini is a virus on this team and has been since he got here. I knew this s**t would happen with him and after the Vikes game I almost thought i was wrong. Nope..there's a reason he was talking on ESPN and not in the NFL. Obviously his time on the offensive side of the ball hasnt helped him as some thought it would. Not surprising as the offense kept getting worse since he got here. I guess telling the offensive staff "well if you do this id probably play a zone" over and over again wasnt really helpful.

People wanna talk about ego with York and Baalke...but we can see this guys ego with our two eyes. Shuts down the leagues best qb playing man and then goes back to whats been getting us killed...the charmin soft zone..because its the scheme HE wants to run. Pitiful.

Originally posted by Evilgenius:

Originally posted by NCommand:
Yet those "young and stupid" CB's looked pretty darn good against a hot Green Bay team (Acker, Ward and Brock + even Tartt and Reaser).

But odd how when Mangini changes BACK up to his losing formula of soft zone, we give up 525 yards and everyone looks utterly lost.

Philosophy and scheme is SO important esp. at this level. There is plenty of talent on this team and Mangini not only is failing them but failing the entire team. I can NOT imagine how low the morale of this team is right now. Offense finally does their part and Mangini calls a horrendous game. And if I hear any more B.S. about "execution" I'm going to lose it.

They looked promising. I wouldn't say good. Got away with some holds. Misplayed balls in the air still at times. Some dropped passes helped too. Not good, but A LOT better. And they weren't giving up as many quick completions. If we could have covered for any time at all on a bunch of plays we could have had a few sacks IMO. There was a pretty nice steady pressure coming from Lynch but he rarely had time to get home.

'Promising' is a better word. Thank you. Last game, it looked like Brock was back 100%, looked quick/fast/physical. Acker was in his comfort zone playing man and press as well. The S's were still deep dropping down to help as needed, Brooks and Lynch darn near had 6 sacks total, Rodgers was very very frustrated, Ward also looked healthy for the first time (44 yards to Cobb), etc.

This game? The Giants were down to their 3rd and 4th team players on offense...so to let them completely off the hook, we play the one proven scheme we can't play as a team...soft zone.

Originally posted by Antix:
Mangini is a virus on this team and has been since he got here. I knew this s**t would happen with him and after the Vikes game I almost thought i was wrong. Nope..there's a reason he was talking on ESPN and not in the NFL. Obviously his time on the offensive side of the ball hasnt helped him as some thought it would. Not surprising as the offense kept getting worse since he got here. I guess telling the offensive staff "well if you do this id probably play a zone" over and over again wasnt really helpful.

People wanna talk about ego with York and Baalke...but we can see this guys ego with our two eyes. Shuts down the leagues best qb playing man and then goes back to whats been getting us killed...the charmin soft zone..because its the scheme HE wants to run. Pitiful.

Totally and I love your point about how working with the offense helped him prepare his schemes. Can you imagine, Eli and staff in an offensive meeting room saying, "Guys, let's just hope they don't play zone. If they play zone, we're screwed!"

Well, I think Mangini was thinking we'd get home and that the zones would be the correct calls vs the plays being run at times but Manning was sharp today. Sometimes he's not and is prone to throwing picks. I sort of understand the mentality - but they should have dropped it quickly and instead stubbornly stuck with it. There were some interception opportunities but ironically they mostly came in man coverage outside of the Brock drop. Even though that's not really the strength of man coverage. Anyway, our guys are not zone corners. They aren't used to it. They actually seemed to be a bit frustrated by it all - I think they knew the calls were awful. Didn't seem to be trying as hard as they could have been at times (some guys anyway).

Originally posted by NCommand:
'Promising' is a better word. Thank you. Last game, it looked like Brock was back 100%, looked quick/fast/physical. Acker was in his comfort zone playing man and press as well. The S's were still deep dropping down to help as needed, Brooks and Lynch darn near had 6 sacks total, Rodgers was very very frustrated, Ward also looked healthy for the first time (44 yards to Cobb), etc.

This game? The Giants were down to their 3rd and 4th team players on offense...so to let them completely off the hook, we play the one proven scheme we can't play as a team...soft zone.

His soft ass zone last night killed us. Eli had guys WIDE open underneath. Too easy. We actually got lucky in the first half when the Giants had a big drop. They were marching for a TD.