From: timr@sco.COM (Tim Ruckle)
Subject: Niner Trick Plays (NOT) (was Re: '49ers News)
Organization: The Gifted and the Damned
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1992 22:20:02 GMT
Summary: even more so recently?
Keywords: 49ers, razzle-dazzle


Va negvpyr <1992Jul23.235712.6784@iscnvx.lmsc.lockheed.com>
marshall@force.ssd.lmsc.lockheed.com jevgrf:
} In article <1992Jul23.193300.23194@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU>,
} gidi@Hilbert.Stanford.EDU (Gidi Avrahami) writes:
} >alan@wrc.unr.edu (Alan McKay) writes:
} >(Do the Niners really tend to call trick plays less often than other
} >teams?)
} 
} Yes! And it's always frustrated me no end. I mean, they don't have to
} throw a flea-flicker on every series, but once or twice a game you need
} to try some razzle-dazzle just to keep people on their toes. With Steve
} Young at QB last year it was an ideal opportunity to try some trickery.
} I remember watching a game last year and the 49ers ran a misdirection
} play, and I remember thinking "wow, that was pretty tricky!". Then I
} thought for a second and realized "no it wasn't, it's just tricky according
} to the 49ers standards".

I think this's not only historically true, but even more prevalent last
season.  They had one option pass--by Sydney, incomplete.  They had one
end around--to Rice, for two yards (though I think they faked it to him
a few times...oh boy).  I don't recall a single faked punt or field goal.
In fact I can't remember anything "tricky" at all besides those two plays.

Perhaps Walsh thought that his offensive scheme was one big "trick play".
But unless I'm mistaken, he had a pretty good judgement for when it was
appropriate to go for a "low percentage" play, and used them accordingly.
Seifert seems to be more of a conservative, by-the-book kind of coach.

I'd even be happy if they would go for it on 4th down once in a while due
to field position and a little guts, rather than only when desperation
warrants it.  The Niners were 3 for 8 in 4th down attempts, while their
opponents went 9 for 17.

Now I know that any coach would rather have a winning season than an
interesting one, and taking chances will mean getting second guessed
by a rapid media and millions of fans.  But anybody who knows football
could stand on the sidelines and call a game ``by-the-book''.  Hell,
you could program and expert system to calculate the play with the
highest percentage for any situation based on all the quantifiable data
available.

But a great coach will be able to calculate those ineffable aspects of
the game, and beat the odds when throwing out the book.  Seifert was
able to bring the Niners back to a repeat Super Bowl win in his first
year, which I think showed more skill than luck.  And while he lost in
the conference championship the following year, and didn't make the
playoffs last year, I would still rate him overall as a good coach.

But he will always be dogged with comparisons to Walsh, and by my own
assessment he has yet to show Walsh's "genius" in this and other areas
of the game (like personnel decisions).  I certainly wouldn't call for
him to step down, even if the Niners had had a losing season.  In fact
perhaps now that there is no chance that Walsh will be rejoining the
Niners in any capacity, Seifert can finally get out of his shadow and
start coming into his own.

And maybe he'll loosen up just a bit and show (or let Mike Shanahan call)
a little ``razzle-dazzle'' play now and again.

-timr

--
Nothing up my sleeve...
                                                      --Bullwinkle Moose