There are 246 users in the forums

Coaches Film Analysis: 2017 Season

Shop Find 49ers gear online
Sep 13, 2017 at 9:50 AM
Originally posted by NYniner85:

Good example of how one guy not doing his job can have disasterous results, even when the playcall is money. Instead of a 15-20 yard completion we have a sack-fumble.
Sep 13, 2017 at 9:51 AM
Love this thread. Brings some optimism for the future. Thanks!
Sep 13, 2017 at 9:52 AM
Originally posted by Niners816:
I noticed that Garçon was seemed to be isolated on quite a few plays away from the concept side. So they had him playing the X in plays. He had a nice little 20 yard gain as the isolated WR opposite of a sticks variant concept. Kyle likes getting his best WR in these isolated situations.

It's the role he played in Washington as well. Even led the league in receptions one year iirc.
Sep 13, 2017 at 10:05 AM
Originally posted by SofaKing:
Originally posted by NYniner85:

Good example of how one guy not doing his job can have disasterous results, even when the playcall is money. Instead of a 15-20 yard completion we have a sack-fumble.

Here's another one

Sep 13, 2017 at 10:10 AM
Here's that play action to juice on 1st down that was talked about

Sep 13, 2017 at 10:13 AM
Originally posted by NYniner85:
Here's another one


Good grief. That really is a shame...Kittle wide open down the seam for a potential big gain.
Sep 13, 2017 at 10:13 AM
Originally posted by NYniner85:
Originally posted by SofaKing:
Originally posted by NYniner85:

Good example of how one guy not doing his job can have disasterous results, even when the playcall is money. Instead of a 15-20 yard completion we have a sack-fumble.

Here's another one


Jim should have called a run play. Oh I mean Kyle.
Sep 13, 2017 at 10:21 AM
  • Giedi
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 33,368
Originally posted by SoCold:
Originally posted by NYniner85:
Originally posted by SofaKing:
Originally posted by NYniner85:

Good example of how one guy not doing his job can have disasterous results, even when the playcall is money. Instead of a 15-20 yard completion we have a sack-fumble.

Here's another one


Jim should have called a run play. Oh I mean Kyle.

Agree. A run or a draw play to that side, the DE is split so wide on the left side of the offensive line, that a draw to that side would have probably worked and got better yardage than what was called. (of course this is 20/20 hindsight here) I think Hoyer should hopefully see those and call audibles for draws to that side if Seadderall tries that stuff on them. I think Hyde and that O Line have to really get in synch, and I know they have to transition from a power run game to a zone run game, but until they are in rythem and synch on the zone rune, you will have inconsistent run production which will really hold back the rest of the offense, because this offense really depends on that play action pass working.
Sep 13, 2017 at 10:25 AM
Originally posted by Giedi:
Originally posted by SoCold:
Originally posted by NYniner85:
Originally posted by SofaKing:
Originally posted by NYniner85:

Good example of how one guy not doing his job can have disasterous results, even when the playcall is money. Instead of a 15-20 yard completion we have a sack-fumble.

Here's another one


Jim should have called a run play. Oh I mean Kyle.

Agree. A run or a draw play to that side, the DE is split so wide on the left side of the offensive line, that a draw to that side would have probably worked and got better yardage than what was called. (of course this is 20/20 hindsight here) I think Hoyer should hopefully see those and call audibles for draws to that side if Seadderall tries that stuff on them. I think Hyde and that O Line have to really get in synch, and I know they have to transition from a power run game to a zone run game, but until they are in rythem and synch on the zone rune, you will have inconsistent run production which will really hold back the rest of the offense, because this offense really depends on that play action pass working.

That was a sarcastic joke. I'm sorry. Prob should have used italics.
Sep 13, 2017 at 10:31 AM
Originally posted by ChazBoner:
teams know our DBs are s**t. They'll continue to max protect knowing their WRs can beat double coverage if need be.

our DB's played well last game. despite a couple bad breakdowns. and Fartt.
Sep 13, 2017 at 10:33 AM
Originally posted by jonnydel:
Big props to Thl for getting this going. All day yesterday I was driving to the beach with the fam - it's a 5 hour drive for us to the gulf coast of Alabama so I just finished watching the game film sitting here on our balcony overlooking the beautiful gulf o' Mexico with nary a cloud in the sky, 75 degree weather and the sound of waves gently crashing against the canal Jetty while drinking my coffee - not a bad vacay if you ask me :)

I'll speak specifically about a few things I noticed:

Offense: I loved the design on a few plays. There was one play where I have no idea how Shanny knew what he did about the defense - it was unshanny. He had a variation of a 'stick' concept dialed up and the defense was showing cover 3 zone - which the 'stick' beats, but right before the snap they shifted into a cover 2 zone - which beats a 'stick' concept but shanny had a stick'nod called up for the TE. The play would've gone for a good gain had we had better protection - but it was a Keanu matrix, "whoa" moment, lol. Overall, I thought we were better than the score was and more competitive. It felt like watching a real grown up football game, lol. We didn't get yards by trickery or misdirection only, but by good, sound plays and good variation. We used pre-snap movement to reveal coverages and create mismatches, not "the things that make things tough for the defense" i.e. 800 plays a game.

O-line - Losing Garnett really sucks. I don't think he's going to be an all-world player but he'd definitely be better than Beadles. I thought Kilgore and Fusco did better than they're being given credit for - some of the pressure given up the middle was more about miscommunication or wrong protection slides than simply being whooped. I noticed at least 3 plays where we gave up quick pressure up the middle simply because the line slid the wrong way and we were outmatched. Those things are correctable though, which is encouraging. Beadles was the only guy I felt like was just under-talented.

Hyde - "the reports of my demise have been greatly exaggerated" I said it a while back that I thought Hyde would be just fine in Shanny's scheme and it worked out on Sunday. If we had converted a few missed opportunities in the game, the run game would've still been a factor later and I think he would have easily had a 100+ yard game. He'll be just fine and given time in this system is gonna be a monster IMO - if he stays healthy.

Kittle - dude is gonna be a stud for a long time. I was really high on this kid coming out of college and he sure looked the part. For being a late round guy, he already looked like an average starter in the league IMO. He held up well in blocking, caught the ball well and broke a few tackles.

Garcon - this dude is worth every penny.

Hoyer - to me, a little better than meh. He didn't make any huge mistakes IMO but also didn't make a couple throws and adjustments you'd like to see. It's his first game with this new team so I'll give him a little time.

Defense: Overall, I thought we played fairly sound. We did get outschemed a few times, but that comes with the territory when you play simple defense. But, in the regard, playing a more simplified defense allowed our players to execute their assignments better, especially along the line.

D-line - The d-line as a group looked really good against the run. It was nice to see us hold up well no matter who was in there. The only player I felt underwhelmed by was Armstead. He didn't have a lot of plays his direction but when he did, he didn't secure the edge real well and got zero pass rush. There were two plays where he got owned by Greg Olsen in the run game - which if you're a 1st round pick in your 3rd year as a D-lineman, that should not be happening. Mitchell had a couple rough plays but made up for it with some others that he stuffed well.

It was obvious to everyone that pass rush is a problem and hopefully we'll be able to address that next year.

LB - Same with Hyde, Bowman looked just fine to me. When he was chasing down plays from the backside with Foster in the game, he was just as fast as Foster closing to the play, Foster just made the play because he was on the front side of play - which, Foster is a stud and needs to stay healthy. There was a big dropoff in production from Foster to Ray Ray. There was one play that reminded me of exactly why Bowman is so great. he drove the O-lineman into a running lane with one arm and then made the tackle on a running back with the other when he tried to cut-back - it was awesome. I'm not sure he looks 100%, which wouldn't be expected for another month or so. But, looked good, to me.

DB - I thought we looked alright, but there were a few busts in coverage that cost us - mainly on the 1st TD which IMO was on Dontae Johnson. The biggest problem was pass rush and a few bad angles on tackles. With a better pass rush I think the coverage would look much better.

check bold
[ Edited by defenderDX on Sep 13, 2017 at 10:33 AM ]
Sep 13, 2017 at 10:51 AM
Who should I be more upset with, Niners interior Oline or Hoyer?
Sep 13, 2017 at 10:53 AM
  • thl408
  • Moderator
  • Posts: 33,074
Normally I'd go chronological order to piece the game together, but there wasn't any big swings in momentum since it was a lopsided victory. No lead changes, no real pivotal moments that require build up. I watched this game in segments of 49ers D then 49ers O. So I'll show the topics in a similar way.

First up is the blown coverages from the 49ers pass defense. All summer long we heard from the players and coaches how the defense is simplified. Ahmad Brooks said there were only about 10 playcalls. Simple means less confusion. Supposedly. Here's the the touchdown that CAR scored off a blown coverage. Ted Robinson (49ers play by play) mentioned it was on Tartt. When it comes to the blown coverage aspect of the play, the player I don't fault is Tartt. He missed the tackle, but he didn't blow the coverage. This play is up for interpretation because the plays that are the hardest to break down are when a player(s) doesn't correctly perform their assignment. Only the 49ers know what is supposed to happen here.

The 49ers are in Cover 1 blitz (rush 5, man coverage, 1 deep safety). They will drop AA off into coverage and bring Lorenzo (26) off the edge. DJohnson will line up across from Olsen (88). Bow is showing pressure into the A gap but will drop into coverage. The deep cross from the #3 WR (inner most slot WR) was a problem all first half for the 49ers defense.


AA jams Olsen and drops into coverage. As Olsen (88) starts his drag route, both DJ and Bow are drawn to Olsen. There is no reason for two defenders to double cover a shallow crossing route. Especially by a lumbering TE.


A few different scenarios that should have taken place here.
1) If there is an Under call to be made where if Olsen goes shallow, DJ calls "under!", then passes coverage off to Bow. DJ then drops back to find work, and would see the deep cross.
2) Bow fakes pressure then drops back to cover #3 WR, the deep cross. DJ is supposed to follow Olsen no matter what since he's locked on Olsen on matter where Olsen goes.
Neither of these occur.


Tartt takes a good angle over to make the tackle but makes one misstep just as he approaches the WR.


The moment of the misstep. If he approaches aggressively, perpendicular to the sideline, the worst that can happen is the WR tries to get past Tartt up the sideline, but Tartt pushes him out of bounds. By taking a step away from the WR, the WR is able to stop, forcing Tartt to step back towards the WR. Ends up trying to tackle the WR around the shoulders.


Sep 13, 2017 at 10:58 AM
First off thank you THL and JD as always, the best thread on the internet. Anyhow, I was reading one of the beat writers twitter (forget which one) and he said it looked like Goodwin was open deep quite a few times but Hoyer didn't look his way/didn't have time to throw. Did you see the same thing? I would love to see that deep connection a few times a game or atleast some more attempts.
Sep 13, 2017 at 11:11 AM
  • thl408
  • Moderator
  • Posts: 33,074
One way to bust Cover3 is the "999" concept. This is run from a trips formation (3 WRs to one side of the field) as it sends 3 vertical routes to horizontally stretch the deep zone defenders. Reid will rotate down into the weakside Hook zone. James will man the FS spot. This was a 3rd & 12 where McCaffrey converted.


There are the 4 underneath zones. Bow redirects and allows the #3 to go by. DJ, the CB at the bottom of the screen (not labeled) is locked onto the WR and will not be taking his deep 1/3.


Reid rotated down and also allows the #3 to run by him. So with Reid rotated down, and DJ locked onto the WR at the bottom running a short route, there is a deep 1/3 unaccounted for. Blown coverage.


Directing attention to the middle of the field, Tartt has matched McCaffrey coming out of the backfield. As McCaffrey drags across the field, Tartt thinks he should pass coverage off to Bow, the strongside Hook defender. Bow sees Cam scramble and attacks Cam.




From this angle, we can see what Tartt was thinking. "Pass off coverage, oh wth". Was he supposed to pass off coverage? In man coverage, it's easy to know what to do in scramble drill - stick to your assignment. In zone coverage, there needs to be more understanding of what to do. Do you match and morph to man coverage? Do you stay in your assigned zone? Only the 49ers know.
Search
YouTube
Flipboard
Threads
✕
Search Share 49ersWebzone