Make No Mistake The 49ers are the Real Threat NOT the Rams

[knownone]

The 49ers are 4-0; you can't argue that they are not a good team.

However, their opponents thus far have a combined winning percentage of 25%, so I think it's fair to wonder how good they actually are. For the record, the Hawks opponents have a combined winning percentage of 39%, so they haven't been knocking the doors of good teams either.

The 49ers still have a few question marks that we haven't seen tested. These aren't meant to be critical. I'm just pointing out my concerns for them moving forward.

1) What happens when they play a good run defense?

The best run defense they played was against Tampa Bay. Tampa largely dominated the 49ers offense, and Jimmy G struggled when he had to carry the offense. Now, the 49ers won that game comfortably, but that had a lot to do with Tampa turning the ball over 4 times.

Every other team they've played has either been slightly below average at defending the run (Steelers), or among the worst in the league (Bengals, Browns).

They run a lot of misdirection/trap plays. I don't think those will be as effective against the better defenses in the league, and their offense seems predicated on the success of those plays.

2) What happens when their defense has to play from behind?

I'll be honest, the 49ers defense looks every bit as frightening as the Bears or Patriots, and they haven't gotten nearly the amount of respect they deserve.

Here's the thing though, we haven't seen them play from behind. Their front 7 outside of Jones is small, and they are built to play with a lead. The amount of pressure their front 7 is generating is (IMO) protecting a pretty average secondary. What happens when they have to play from behind and the defensive line can't pin their ears back and get after the QB? Does the back-end get exposed? Can a relatively small front 7 hold up against the run?

If they can answer those questions they have the potential to be one of the best defenses we've seen since 2015.

Other than that... I really don't see a glaring weakness outside of the unknown that is Garoppolo. They are a good team, and deserve to be in the conversation with the Hawks and Rams. The Rams will test their defense this week. Mcvay will attack them in the middle of the field, and try to use the speed of their front 7 against them in the running game. I think the Rams sellout against the run, and do everything to make Garoppolo win this game, giving us the opportunity to see what he's made of in a meaningful game. Anything short of a blow out loss is a good sign for the 49ers. If they blow out the Rams... my level of concern sky rockets.

 

[Washington49er]

The 49ers are 4-0; you can't argue that they are not a good team.

However, their opponents thus far have a combined winning percentage of 25%, so I think it's fair to wonder how good they actually are. For the record, the Hawks opponents have a combined winning percentage of 39%, so they haven't been knocking the doors of good teams either.

The 49ers still have a few question marks that we haven't seen tested. These aren't meant to be critical. I'm just pointing out my concerns for them moving forward.

1) What happens when they play a good run defense?

The best run defense they played was against Tampa Bay. Tampa largely dominated the 49ers offense, and Jimmy G struggled when he had to carry the offense. Now, the 49ers won that game comfortably, but that had a lot to do with Tampa turning the ball over 4 times.

Every other team they've played has either been slightly below average at defending the run (Steelers), or among the worst in the league (Bengals, Browns).

They run a lot of misdirection/trap plays. I don't think those will be as effective against the better defenses in the league, and their offense seems predicated on the success of those plays.

2) What happens when their defense has to play from behind?

I'll be honest, the 49ers defense looks every bit as frightening as the Bears or Patriots, and they haven't gotten nearly the amount of respect they deserve.

Here's the thing though, we haven't seen them play from behind. Their front 7 outside of Jones is small, and they are built to play with a lead. The amount of pressure their front 7 is generating is (IMO) protecting a pretty average secondary. What happens when they have to play from behind and the defensive line can't pin their ears back and get after the QB? Does the back-end get exposed? Can a relatively small front 7 hold up against the run?

If they can answer those questions they have the potential to be one of the best defenses we've seen since 2015.

Other than that... I really don't see a glaring weakness outside of the unknown that is Garoppolo. They are a good team, and deserve to be in the conversation with the Hawks and Rams. The Rams will test their defense this week. Mcvay will attack them in the middle of the field, and try to use the speed of their front 7 against them in the running game. I think the Rams sellout against the run, and do everything to make Garoppolo win this game, giving us the opportunity to see what he's made of in a meaningful game. Anything short of a blow out loss is a good sign for the 49ers. If they blow out the Rams... my level of concern sky rockets.

5 turnovers in Pittsburgh game, played from behind.

 

[Marvin49]

The 49ers are 4-0; you can't argue that they are not a good team.

However, their opponents thus far have a combined winning percentage of 25%, so I think it's fair to wonder how good they actually are. For the record, the Hawks opponents have a combined winning percentage of 39%, so they haven't been knocking the doors of good teams either.

The 49ers still have a few question marks that we haven't seen tested. These aren't meant to be critical. I'm just pointing out my concerns for them moving forward.

1) What happens when they play a good run defense?

The best run defense they played was against Tampa Bay. Tampa largely dominated the 49ers offense, and Jimmy G struggled when he had to carry the offense. Now, the 49ers won that game comfortably, but that had a lot to do with Tampa turning the ball over 4 times.

Every other team they've played has either been slightly below average at defending the run (Steelers), or among the worst in the league (Bengals, Browns).

They run a lot of misdirection/trap plays. I don't think those will be as effective against the better defenses in the league, and their offense seems predicated on the success of those plays.

2) What happens when their defense has to play from behind?

I'll be honest, the 49ers defense looks every bit as frightening as the Bears or Patriots, and they haven't gotten nearly the amount of respect they deserve.

Here's the thing though, we haven't seen them play from behind. Their front 7 outside of Jones is small, and they are built to play with a lead. The amount of pressure their front 7 is generating is (IMO) protecting a pretty average secondary. What happens when they have to play from behind and the defensive line can't pin their ears back and get after the QB? Does the back-end get exposed? Can a relatively small front 7 hold up against the run?

If they can answer those questions they have the potential to be one of the best defenses we've seen since 2015.

Other than that... I really don't see a glaring weakness outside of the unknown that is Garoppolo. They are a good team, and deserve to be in the conversation with the Hawks and Rams. The Rams will test their defense this week. Mcvay will attack them in the middle of the field, and try to use the speed of their front 7 against them in the running game. I think the Rams sellout against the run, and do everything to make Garoppolo win this game, giving us the opportunity to see what he's made of in a meaningful game. Anything short of a blow out loss is a good sign for the 49ers. If they blow out the Rams... my level of concern sky rockets.

I'll start by saying those points are fair and you are correct that they really haven't been tested yet. Unknown isn't a criticism, its reality.

I disgree with you on the secondary though. I think they are UNDER rated, particularly now with Ward at FS. Play has never been Jimmie's problem. Staying healthy has been. It didn't get much pub last night, but being at the game I had my eyes on him and he was pretty damn good.

I also hope the Rams sell out to stop the run. If they do, I'd expect big days from Kittle and Samuel. Jimmy has been good under pressure and particularly when blitzed. The Steelers blitzed a TON and that was arguably one of Jimmys best games in SF.

 

[Washington49er]

I just don't get the whole "who have they played". Especially from Hawk fans, who have the Hawks played. As far as I can see they're not exactly knocking it out of the park.

 

[Maulbert]

I just don't get the whole "who have they played". Especially from Hawk fans, who have the Hawks played. As far as I can see they're not exactly knocking it out of the park.

The difference is track record. Over the last 4 seasons, Seattle has won at least 9 games every year. During that span, the 49ers highwater mark was 6 victories. No one believed Seattle was good going into 2012, we hadn't won more than 7 games in 5 years. We had to earn respect then. It's no different for you.

 

[Washington49er]

I just don't get the whole "who have they played". Especially from Hawk fans, who have the Hawks played. As far as I can see they're not exactly knocking it out of the park.

The difference is track record. Over the last 4 seasons, Seattle has won at least 9 games every year. During that span, the 49ers highwater mark was 6 victories. No one believed Seattle was good going into 2012, we hadn't won more than 7 games in 5 years. We had to earn respect then. It's no different for you.

But I thought you guys were so high on the whole "past success means nothing" b.s. I get it needs to be earned but if I was a Hawk fan, I'd be reserving judgment until the Hawks prove themselves. Beating the Rams at home by a point is their biggest win to date and 2 feet to the left and it wouldn't be a win at all.

 

[Marvin49]

I just don't get the whole "who have they played". Especially from Hawk fans, who have the Hawks played. As far as I can see they're not exactly knocking it out of the park.

The difference is track record. Over the last 4 seasons, Seattle has won at least 9 games every year. During that span, the 49ers highwater mark was 6 victories. No one believed Seattle was good going into 2012, we hadn't won more than 7 games in 5 years. We had to earn respect then. It's no different for you.

Entirely true. Same goes for the Pats.

Constant drumbeat just gets old. The drummer usually just happens to be a fan of a team who WANTS it to be true.

 

[Maulbert]

I just don't get the whole "who have they played". Especially from Hawk fans, who have the Hawks played. As far as I can see they're not exactly knocking it out of the park.

The difference is track record. Over the last 4 seasons, Seattle has won at least 9 games every year. During that span, the 49ers highwater mark was 6 victories. No one believed Seattle was good going into 2012, we hadn't won more than 7 games in 5 years. We had to earn respect then. It's no different for you.

Entirely true. Same goes for the Pats.

Constant drumbeat just gets old. The drummer usually just happens to be a fan of a team who WANTS it to be true.

True, I can't deny it. Watching the 49ers implode during the 2015 offseason was incredibly cathartic. :179417:

 

[NINEster]

The 49ers are 4-0; you can't argue that they are not a good team.

However, their opponents thus far have a combined winning percentage of 25%, so I think it's fair to wonder how good they actually are. For the record, the Hawks opponents have a combined winning percentage of 39%, so they haven't been knocking the doors of good teams either.

The 49ers still have a few question marks that we haven't seen tested. These aren't meant to be critical. I'm just pointing out my concerns for them moving forward.

1) What happens when they play a good run defense?

The best run defense they played was against Tampa Bay. Tampa largely dominated the 49ers offense, and Jimmy G struggled when he had to carry the offense. Now, the 49ers won that game comfortably, but that had a lot to do with Tampa turning the ball over 4 times.

Every other team they've played has either been slightly below average at defending the run (Steelers), or among the worst in the league (Bengals, Browns).

They run a lot of misdirection/trap plays. I don't think those will be as effective against the better defenses in the league, and their offense seems predicated on the success of those plays.

2) What happens when their defense has to play from behind?

I'll be honest, the 49ers defense looks every bit as frightening as the Bears or Patriots, and they haven't gotten nearly the amount of respect they deserve.

Here's the thing though, we haven't seen them play from behind. Their front 7 outside of Jones is small, and they are built to play with a lead. The amount of pressure their front 7 is generating is (IMO) protecting a pretty average secondary. What happens when they have to play from behind and the defensive line can't pin their ears back and get after the QB? Does the back-end get exposed? Can a relatively small front 7 hold up against the run?

If they can answer those questions they have the potential to be one of the best defenses we've seen since 2015.

Other than that... I really don't see a glaring weakness outside of the unknown that is Garoppolo. They are a good team, and deserve to be in the conversation with the Hawks and Rams. The Rams will test their defense this week. Mcvay will attack them in the middle of the field, and try to use the speed of their front 7 against them in the running game. I think the Rams sellout against the run, and do everything to make Garoppolo win this game, giving us the opportunity to see what he's made of in a meaningful game. Anything short of a blow out loss is a good sign for the 49ers. If they blow out the Rams... my level of concern sky rockets.

Some fair points on here.

I too don't like to say quite the high number of misdirection/motion that they run. I respect it, but wish they could just line up a lot more without exotic shifting and just play -- this could just be lowering the percentages a bit. Don't want a return to a stale Harbaugh like offense.

I think the defense can play ok in tight games. Remember they built the defense in the more boring "run stopping" paradigm for years, and now just this year they get the edges. I imagine scheme wise the weakness is greater than the players, meaning if they try to play Seattle the same way they played the Browns they could get hurt. But playing Seattle is always different anyway......the big difference is on 3rd and 9....

As far as the Rams, who have they dominated physically so far this year? They used to be able to manhandle the Seahawks, and now they're like a finesse version of years past. They couldn't manhandle the Bucs either....

I don't see the 49ers blowing out the Rams, but I see the game being very physical for a long time.

I'm also expecting Kyle to dial up more aggressive passing plays, pull out more stops for Jimmy for this one.

Unfortunately he will have to play without Juice. This is the 49er offense having to resemble the Rams offense just based on personnel. Should be interesting.

 

[NINEster]

I just don't get the whole "who have they played". Especially from Hawk fans, who have the Hawks played. As far as I can see they're not exactly knocking it out of the park.

The difference is track record. Over the last 4 seasons, Seattle has won at least 9 games every year. During that span, the 49ers highwater mark was 6 victories. No one believed Seattle was good going into 2012, we hadn't won more than 7 games in 5 years. We had to earn respect then. It's no different for you.

Entirely true. Same goes for the Pats.

Constant drumbeat just gets old. The drummer usually just happens to be a fan of a team who WANTS it to be true.

True, I can't deny it. Watching the 49ers implode during the 2015 offseason was incredibly cathartic. :179417:

The HATE...…

Don't worry.....what goes around comes around. I mean, it wasn't one offseason but Wagner is the only legit defensive star on the Seahawks. ET, Kam, Sherm, Bennett, Avril, wasn't that long ago they lined up for ya'll…

 

[Maulbert]

The difference is track record. Over the last 4 seasons, Seattle has won at least 9 games every year. During that span, the 49ers highwater mark was 6 victories. No one believed Seattle was good going into 2012, we hadn't won more than 7 games in 5 years. We had to earn respect then. It's no different for you.

Entirely true. Same goes for the Pats.

Constant drumbeat just gets old. The drummer usually just happens to be a fan of a team who WANTS it to be true.

True, I can't deny it. Watching the 49ers implode during the 2015 offseason was incredibly cathartic. :179417:

The HATE...…

Don't worry.....what goes around comes around. I mean, it wasn't one offseason but Wagner is the only legit defensive star on the Seahawks. ET, Kam, Sherm, Bennett, Avril, wasn't that long ago they lined up for ya'll…

Coming from you, that's rich. You can barely contain your contempt in your terrible attempts at trollery.

 

[chris98251]

The difference is track record. Over the last 4 seasons, Seattle has won at least 9 games every year. During that span, the 49ers highwater mark was 6 victories. No one believed Seattle was good going into 2012, we hadn't won more than 7 games in 5 years. We had to earn respect then. It's no different for you.

Entirely true. Same goes for the Pats.

Constant drumbeat just gets old. The drummer usually just happens to be a fan of a team who WANTS it to be true.

True, I can't deny it. Watching the 49ers implode during the 2015 offseason was incredibly cathartic. :179417:

The HATE...…

Don't worry.....what goes around comes around. I mean, it wasn't one offseason but Wagner is the only legit defensive star on the Seahawks. ET, Kam, Sherm, Bennett, Avril, wasn't that long ago they lined up for ya'll…

Yet last I checked we still finished ahead in the standings with the 49ers...….

 

[chris98251]

I just don't get the whole "who have they played". Especially from Hawk fans, who have the Hawks played. As far as I can see they're not exactly knocking it out of the park.

The difference is track record. Over the last 4 seasons, Seattle has won at least 9 games every year. During that span, the 49ers highwater mark was 6 victories. No one believed Seattle was good going into 2012, we hadn't won more than 7 games in 5 years. We had to earn respect then. It's no different for you.

But I thought you guys were so high on the whole "past success means nothing" b.s. I get it needs to be earned but if I was a Hawk fan, I'd be reserving judgment until the Hawks prove themselves. Beating the Rams at home by a point is their biggest win to date and 2 feet to the left and it wouldn't be a win at all.

Yeah and two more feet to the right and we would have been up by three earlier.

 

[5_Golden_Rings]

The difference is track record. Over the last 4 seasons, Seattle has won at least 9 games every year. During that span, the 49ers highwater mark was 6 victories. No one believed Seattle was good going into 2012, we hadn't won more than 7 games in 5 years. We had to earn respect then. It's no different for you.

Entirely true. Same goes for the Pats.

Constant drumbeat just gets old. The drummer usually just happens to be a fan of a team who WANTS it to be true.

True, I can't deny it. Watching the 49ers implode during the 2015 offseason was incredibly cathartic. :179417:

The HATE...…

Don't worry.....what goes around comes around. I mean, it wasn't one offseason but Wagner is the only legit defensive star on the Seahawks. ET, Kam, Sherm, Bennett, Avril, wasn't that long ago they lined up for ya'll…

Clowney sometimes plays like a demigod.



Anyway, all these questions will be answered soon. The 49ers without Juice Check are not going to be as good on offense, no question. The only certainties there are in this division are Aaron Donald and Russell Wilson. The rest is mostly a set of questions.

 

[NINEster]

I remember when the Hawks started to get good with Wilson and Co. It was all DVOA this and DVOA that to prove that they were the best team in the league, or that the 49ers weren't as good as them. It was an uncomfortable statistic for some of us.

Well, things change:

https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teameff/2019

SF #1, SEA #9, LAR #17, AZ #28

The only counterargument here is "well, let's see after week 17!"

True perhaps, but as of right now.... :2thumbs:

 

[NINEster]

Seahawks were #1 DVOA apparently from 2012-2015, by season's end.

49ers never finished higher than 4th under Harbaugh. His last season a respectable 11th, then it was in the 20s and as low as 32 under Tomsula.

20th in 2017, 30th in 2018.

Either the high DVOA ranks were completely coincidental when the Hawks were a SB contender each year, or the Niners are a top team this moment. Patriots are #2 right now, BTW.

Can't have it both ways.

 

[knownone]

Some fair points on here.

I too don't like to say quite the high number of misdirection/motion that they run. I respect it, but wish they could just line up a lot more without exotic shifting and just play -- this could just be lowering the percentages a bit. Don't want a return to a stale Harbaugh like offense.

I think the defense can play ok in tight games. Remember they built the defense in the more boring "run stopping" paradigm for years, and now just this year they get the edges. I imagine scheme wise the weakness is greater than the players, meaning if they try to play Seattle the same way they played the Browns they could get hurt. But playing Seattle is always different anyway......the big difference is on 3rd and 9....

As far as the Rams, who have they dominated physically so far this year? They used to be able to manhandle the Seahawks, and now they're like a finesse version of years past. They couldn't manhandle the Bucs either....

I don't see the 49ers blowing out the Rams, but I see the game being very physical for a long time.

I'm also expecting Kyle to dial up more aggressive passing plays, pull out more stops for Jimmy for this one.

Unfortunately he will have to play without Juice. This is the 49er offense having to resemble the Rams offense just based on personnel. Should be interesting.

I don't think the Rams can or will manhandle anyone. However, Mcvay's system has exposed defenses that are built for speed in the past, and I think that will be a good test for the 49ers defense. Why? Because we really haven't seen a team attack the strength of their defense and use it against them yet. I guarantee that's what Mcvay is going to try to do.

I expect the game to be physical but also high scoring. The key to the game (IMO) is Aaron Donald. If Donald can penetrate and disrupt the running game, the 49ers are going to struggle to move the ball. If Donald can't, I think we'll see the 49ers control the pace of the game and win/lose a close game. I have no doubt that the Rams offense will move the ball; the only way I see them getting blown out is if they turn the ball over a bunch.

For sure, it definitely should be interesting.

 

[rlkats]

Well more fuel for the fire so to speak. Niners lose another tackle. MCglinchey out 4-6 weeks for knee surgery.

This Rams game just got a ton harder to win.

 

[NINEster]

Well more fuel for the fire so to speak. Niners lose another tackle. MCglinchey out 4-6 weeks for knee surgery.

This Rams game just got a ton harder to win.

Exactly.

But in a way, the pressure of keeping up a win streak is tough. Maybe now the team might feel legitimately an underdog with the injuries.

 

[NINEster]

Some fair points on here.

I too don't like to say quite the high number of misdirection/motion that they run. I respect it, but wish they could just line up a lot more without exotic shifting and just play -- this could just be lowering the percentages a bit. Don't want a return to a stale Harbaugh like offense.

I think the defense can play ok in tight games. Remember they built the defense in the more boring "run stopping" paradigm for years, and now just this year they get the edges. I imagine scheme wise the weakness is greater than the players, meaning if they try to play Seattle the same way they played the Browns they could get hurt. But playing Seattle is always different anyway......the big difference is on 3rd and 9....

As far as the Rams, who have they dominated physically so far this year? They used to be able to manhandle the Seahawks, and now they're like a finesse version of years past. They couldn't manhandle the Bucs either....

I don't see the 49ers blowing out the Rams, but I see the game being very physical for a long time.

I'm also expecting Kyle to dial up more aggressive passing plays, pull out more stops for Jimmy for this one.

Unfortunately he will have to play without Juice. This is the 49er offense having to resemble the Rams offense just based on personnel. Should be interesting.

I don't think the Rams can or will manhandle anyone. However, Mcvay's system has exposed defenses that are built for speed in the past, and I think that will be a good test for the 49ers defense. Why? Because we really haven't seen a team attack the strength of their defense and use it against them yet. I guarantee that's what Mcvay is going to try to do.

I expect the game to be physical but also high scoring. The key to the game (IMO) is Aaron Donald. If Donald can penetrate and disrupt the running game, the 49ers are going to struggle to move the ball. If Donald can't, I think we'll see the 49ers control the pace of the game and win/lose a close game. I have no doubt that the Rams offense will move the ball; the only way I see them getting blown out is if they turn the ball over a bunch.

For sure, it definitely should be interesting.

McVay might have exposed speed defenses, but whatever you classify Detroit/Chicago/New England, he did not do so well against. Maybe Eagles too.

Donald was considered the single most important factor in deciding the last Super Bowl so I can respect that for this game too.

Shanny vs McVay, could be the best battle yet...