Originally posted by Youngbuck17:
No one has a Parsons, so no, the Eagles don't have one comparable to him. But we have a deeper D than Dallas with only one weakness, and that's at LB. So the Niners match up well there with Kittle, CMC and Deebo. But the Eagles comp that because they often get pressure and a ton of sacks just rushing 4, which allows more coverage help on passing downs. The Niners win if they can:
1) establish a strong run game and keep Purdy in safe situations with short to medium passes, with less than 20 pass attempts.
2) have long, sustained drives that keeps the Eagles O off the field
3) if the Niners can minimize the big plays (which is where they are vulnerable) and keep the scoring low.
Eagles win if they can:
1) establish at least a moderate run game. Doesn't need to be incredible in order for the RPO to be effective
2) hit those big plays, including Sanders' runs
3) get ahead early in order to try and get the Niners to get away from the run by the second half
Obviously there's more, but I think those things are key
The 49ers run blocking schemes in particular are quite dynamic with lots of movement in different directions. The "hole" is often a fluid thing kind of there one second gone the next. Quite a few good defenders are able to get to the right place but just a little too late which doesn't do much good. Parsons was able to get there in time much of the game. On a number of plays if he had been just a little slower he would have been a spectator. That's part of the reason the 49ers do better in the second half as defenders go from being in time to a little too late. Also why the offense can can have a famine to feast arc over the course of a game. Moreso than most teams the difference is often fractions of a second.