LISTEN: Are The 49ers Done? →

There are 218 users in the forums

Eric Mangini Thread

Shop 49ers game tickets

Eric Mangini Thread

Originally posted by dtg_9er:
Agree and am not unhappy with this. 8-8 last year with many of the injured retiring or moving on leads me to believe 9-7 would be very optiimistic at the beginning of the year. Now, at 1-4, the team looks more like a 7-9 team. That would still require them to win more than half their remaining games...with two each against Seattle and St Louis and one more against Arizona. Tough division.

I guess the hope is if we are gonna be bad or have a bad season we need it to be a 6-10 year. We've went 6-10 three times in our history ('80, '00, '10)....the years following have been rather good.

1980: 6-10
1981: 13-3 (champs)

2000: 6-10
2001: 12-4 (escaped first cap hell)

2010: 6-10
2011: 13-3 (OT fumble away from SB46)

I realize it's a total coincidence, but I still think it's a pretty amazing occurrence in our team history.
Why did Tomsula and Mangini feel the need to change the defensive scheme and philosophy so greatly, the defensive scheme and philosophy they had worked.

I don't get the appeal of Mangini, he didn't get results as the TE coach and his one year as DC in New England was BY FAR their worst defensive year in all the years Belichick has been there.
  • Antix
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 9,841
Still sucks.
Originally posted by TheWooLick:
Why did Tomsula and Mangini feel the need to change the defensive scheme and philosophy so greatly, the defensive scheme and philosophy they had worked.

I don't get the appeal of Mangini, he didn't get results as the TE coach and his one year as DC in New England was BY FAR their worst defensive year in all the years Belichick has been there.

They probably felt they needed to go in a new direction after the talent that left this year. Cowboy, Aldon, Willis, Borland.... I wasn't opposed to the switch at first, but now I'm starting to see certain players being asked to play into a scheme they aren't really meant for/ Nobody is perfect, and I am hoping Mangini realizes this and starts to tinker with his formations
Originally posted by Quest4six:
Originally posted by TheWooLick:
Why did Tomsula and Mangini feel the need to change the defensive scheme and philosophy so greatly, the defensive scheme and philosophy they had worked.

I don't get the appeal of Mangini, he didn't get results as the TE coach and his one year as DC in New England was BY FAR their worst defensive year in all the years Belichick has been there.

They probably felt they needed to go in a new direction after the talent that left this year. Cowboy, Aldon, Willis, Borland.... I wasn't opposed to the switch at first, but now I'm starting to see certain players being asked to play into a scheme they aren't really meant for/ Nobody is perfect, and I am hoping Mangini realizes this and starts to tinker with his formations

The switch was coach driven or DC driven, specifically. With Fangio signing elsewhere Mangini was a logical inhouse choice. He has experience and success as a DC and a DBC so I'm still waiting on the D clicking before jumping ship.
Originally posted by dtg_9er:
Originally posted by Quest4six:
Originally posted by TheWooLick:
Why did Tomsula and Mangini feel the need to change the defensive scheme and philosophy so greatly, the defensive scheme and philosophy they had worked.

I don't get the appeal of Mangini, he didn't get results as the TE coach and his one year as DC in New England was BY FAR their worst defensive year in all the years Belichick has been there.

They probably felt they needed to go in a new direction after the talent that left this year. Cowboy, Aldon, Willis, Borland.... I wasn't opposed to the switch at first, but now I'm starting to see certain players being asked to play into a scheme they aren't really meant for/ Nobody is perfect, and I am hoping Mangini realizes this and starts to tinker with his formations

The switch was coach driven or DC driven, specifically. With Fangio signing elsewhere Mangini was a logical inhouse choice. He has experience and success as a DC and a DBC so I'm still waiting on the D clicking before jumping ship.

Where has Mangini had success as a DC?
Why not stick with the previous scheme that worked?
Originally posted by TheWooLick:
Where has Mangini had success as a DC?
Why not stick with the previous scheme that worked?

Culliver and Cox being gone may have something to do with it. Fangio like veterans playing CB and Baalke always fourn them. This year they decided to build from within and have very young CBs, so they are trying different things and working on communication and chemistry. Not pretty but I believe by the end of the year the DBs will be much better.
Originally posted by dtg_9er:
Originally posted by Joecool:
This Defense does not have much more time to gel. We are halfway through the second quarter of the season. These guys MUST use these next 3 out of 4 home games to gel and get momentum and confidence going.

Same goes for the offense. If it doesn't happen in the next two weeks, it will be time to start evaluating talent rather than worry about winning games.

Agree and am not unhappy with this. 8-8 last year with many of the injured retiring or moving on leads me to believe 9-7 would be very optiimistic at the beginning of the year. Now, at 1-4, the team looks more like a 7-9 team. That would still require them to win more than half their remaining games...with two each against Seattle and St Louis and one more against Arizona. Tough division.

6-5 record to finish season

anything is possible, just not sure that is
tinker. i like that. yes i hope mangini tinkers his way out of goving up four hundred yards passing with zero sacks on fifty one dropbacks.




tinker.
looking like a 7 9 team.


put down the pipe.

were looking like a 3 13 team. with maybe three or four coulda woulda shoulda losses sprinkled in among the flat out a** whoopings.

jt may be a part of it. he doesnt seem like a sounding board for geep and mangini. so theyll stick with bad concepts longer.
Originally posted by TheWooLick:
Why did Tomsula and Mangini feel the need to change the defensive scheme and philosophy so greatly, the defensive scheme and philosophy they had worked.

I don't get the appeal of Mangini, he didn't get results as the TE coach and his one year as DC in New England was BY FAR their worst defensive year in all the years Belichick has been there.

Defensive coaches have their own styles, just like offensive coaches, they are going to run what they know, and feel comfortable with. Mangini is trying to turn us into the Patriots.
Originally posted by GolittaCamper:
Originally posted by TheWooLick:
Why did Tomsula and Mangini feel the need to change the defensive scheme and philosophy so greatly, the defensive scheme and philosophy they had worked.

I don't get the appeal of Mangini, he didn't get results as the TE coach and his one year as DC in New England was BY FAR their worst defensive year in all the years Belichick has been there.

Defensive coaches have their own styles, just like offensive coaches, they are going to run what they know, and feel comfortable with. Mangini is trying to turn us into the Patriots.

That's the thing, the Pats defense hasn't been the same since they lost the presence of Harrison and Brueschi. They have been standing on the shoulders of their offense for years now.
Honestly, if this doesn't get better, I think it's time to pull the plug and let Tarver take over. I think he's a bright young mind too who could get a lot out of the players we have. He knows both the 4-3 and 3-4, so it'd give us options. I would prefer to stick to the 3-4 and build depth at LB and DE primarily.


CB: Brock, Acker, Ward, Reaser, Johnson is a good group.
Upgrades Needed: We could add competition, but these guys when playing in the right scheme are fine.

DE: Dial, Armstead, Dorsey, TJE, Carradine
Upgrades Needed: Carradine hasn't been the stud people expected, and TJE is barely worth keeping, if at all. Dorsey is better suited to NT, and it'll be interesting what the team does considering Ian Williams is in a contract year and Purcell has emerged as a starter-caliber player for the future.

NT: Williams, Purcell (with Dorsey and Dial also able to cover)
Upgrades Needed: None yet. If we let Williams walk, I think Dorsey and Purcell compete for the starting job in 2016. The versatility of our other players makes this not a huge area of concern at the moment.

OLB: Brooks, Lynch, Harold, Lemonier
Upgrades Needed: Lemonier looks a little better this year, perhaps the extra PT is helping. He's still not as good as we hoped based on his draft slot, so at best he's an OK depth guy. Brooks' contract will be way too much at his age after this season. We will likely need to replace these two and probably add another OLB for extra competition in 2016.
[ Edited by OnTheClock on Oct 15, 2015 at 7:47 AM ]
Originally posted by OnTheClock:
Honestly, if this doesn't get better, I think it's time to pull the plug and let Tarver take over. I think he's a bright young mind too who could get a lot out of the players we have. He knows both the 4-3 and 3-4, so it'd give us options. I would prefer to stick to the 3-4 and build depth at LB and DE primarily.

CB: Brock, Acker, Ward, Reaser, Johnson is a good group.
Upgrades Needed: We could add competition, but these guys when playing in the right scheme are fine.

DE: Dial, Armstead, Dorsey, TJE, Carradine
Upgrades Needed: Carradine hasn't been the stud people expected, and TJE is barely worth keeping, if at all. Dorsey is better suited to NT, and it'll be interesting what the team does considering Ian Williams is in a contract year and Purcell has emerged as a starter-caliber player for the future.

NT: Williams, Purcell (with Dorsey and Dial also able to cover)
Upgrades Needed: None yet. If we let Williams walk, I think Dorsey and Purcell compete for the starting job in 2016. The versatility of our other players makes this not a huge area of concern at the moment.

OLB: Brooks, Lynch, Harold, Lemonier
Upgrades Needed: Lemonier looks a little better this year, perhaps the extra PT is helping. He's still not as good as we hoped based on his draft slot, so at best he's an OK depth guy. Brooks' contract will be way too much at his age after this season. We will likely need to replace these two and probably add another OLB for extra competition in 2016.

Good post. Agree very much. I hate talking about next year but overall, I agree. I don't think locking up Williams will be too difficult and with Dorsey still under contract and Purcell, we're fine there. AA will most likely take over at LDE for Dorsey at some point this year anyhow. Dial has RDE locked down. That's a very good and active and young front 3 with depth in Dorsey, Carradine, Purcell, etc. I'm guessing this run-defense unit will slowly climb up the charts as the year goes on. We've played against a lot of top backs already (at that time).

I'm with you on the CB's. IF they think they can upgrade, fine but I don't see a lack of talent nor depth here. For perspective, behind one of the best pass rushing units in the NFL, Marcus Peters has given up 6 TD's in 6 games. And many think he's great. So for us to expect a rookie to come in and out perform Brock or Acker, that probably isn't too realistic. Scheme, like you, IMHO, is the real culprit here. In a more vanilla scheme during pre season, Acker/Reaser/Johnson looked terrific. Put them is a complex scheme with essentially, a new game plan every week, and everyone looks a step slow and lost (everyone).

Tarver? If Mangini can't pull his head out of his ass this game and continues to force a complex scheme and ever-changing game plan week-to-week, it's proof he is inflexible, incapable of playing to player-strengths and is losing the concept of momentum (a no-no in sports) and is not allowing his talent to grow WITHIN the (proper) scheme unless this is a looooong-term plan (which we'd need new personnel for). I'd be all for a change.

Baalke/JT/Geep/Logan have all adjusted and adapted to the offensive side of the ball as evidenced last week in working together. Mangini? It's your turn! Listen to your proven vets. This is a veteran defense that is flat out lost and a step slow. Get BACK to what you KNOW works for this talent. He's watched it for 3 years now. No excuses.

Talent? You nailed it...OL (obvious) and a cornerstone OLB pass rusher is what we need (and some interior push/rush would help too). I don't know if any premier FA's will be on the market but we are certainly in position to 'buy' whatever we need next year while these young-ones continue to grow and develop on the field.

There are a few positions we can look to upgrade or add key depth too such as ILB, OLB, C, RG, RT, TE and maybe CB & PK. We have $13.36M right now before some of the older vets contracts are reworked (Brooks/Bethea), traded (VD), or cut. We'll have plenty of roll-over $ as well. We'll just have to take our lumps this year and use it for evaluation of the players, scheme and staff. Sad. This off season went from a simple 'retooling' to a 'rebuilding' in about a 3-month period. I like a lot of the talent and depth we have...coaching/scheme/philosophy is my biggest concern.

I know Baalke will go get the key pieces we'll need for next year (i.e. Reid, Bethea, T.Smith, etc.). He was a former OLB himself so he does have an eye for pass rushers. Eli needs at least a full year to build up his strength to play in our 3-4. He's physically overmatched right now but does have great upside and heart.

Baalke will also now have a full year in working with Tom Gamble and I'm hoping that pays off on the offensive side of the ball.
[ Edited by NCommand on Oct 15, 2015 at 9:43 AM ]
Kevin Lynch said something yesterday on KNBR that was very interesting. He was saying Mangini is going to run his 'scheme' so that the players, especially the young guys, can get comfortable with it. It's a new, complex defensive scheme that takes time for players to learn and grow in. He also said, if the 49ers want to keep Manigini for the future, he is going to run the defense how he wants it to be run, with the hope that players will be better after spending time with the scheme. So if this is true, I think Mangini is safe from the chopping block, for now.
Share 49ersWebzone