From: GC.SUL@forsythe.stanford.edu (Sullivan)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: comments on Vikings/Niners
Date: 14 Dec 1992 17:51:31 -0800
Organization: Stanford University
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: morrow.stanford.edu

In article <1992Dec15.001208.15299@u.washington.edu>,
tokuno@carson.u.washington.edu (Ken Tokuno) writes:
>GC.SUL@forsythe.stanford.edu (Sullivan) writes:

other stuff deleted.

>>I do have one big area of concern, and that's the D backfield's
>>hands.  They've made lots of plays this year on passes, yet have
>>seemingly dropped more INTs than they've caught.  I wonder if they
>>miss Ray Rhodes?  The young D backfield's progress and improvement
>>has been fine otherwise.
>
>Just for general interest.  Comparing the first 7 and second 7 for the
>49er secondary this season:
>
>                Yards   % Comp.   TDs   INTs
>
>First 7         1705     55.6%     11     11
>Second 7        1389     54.8%      8      5
>
>(By the way, I include sacks as pass attempts and figure yards gained
>acoordingly- it gives a more accurate picture IMHO.)
>
>Looks like they've sacrificed the big play (interceptions) for the
>sake of better pass coverage.

I tend not to look at the stats, though it is interesting.  The
stuff I look at is what I guess to be important to the Niners
scheme.  I hate to call it 'bend but no break' but that they make
a team have to execute 10 plays or so to get a score.  They really
try to stop the first and second down run, and press to stop 3rd and
long, which IMO is why some passing teams have had good success
moving down the field.  In the early season, when it was time to
really tighten up, it seemed there would be a blown coverage, or
someone wide open in the 10-15 yd zone. This is not the case in the
last couple games.

>
>>The special teams failure where Wilmsmeyer was tackled on the 5
>>actually shows how good the special teams have been this year.  I'm
>>used to watching the Niners hang themselves on Special teams and
>>keep teams that are inferior on D and O in games.  This year they've
>>been very good.
>
>On the other hand, does anybody out there remember when the last time was
>that the Niners blocked a punt or a field goal attempt?  Those plays are
>really big plays and more attention needs to be given to them.

They got one against the Rams, no?  You are right that this is a big
play, but the Niners emphasis is to not let Special teams beat you.
don't take undue chances.  They want to safely field the punts, and
get good field position, if possible.  Give the offense the ball!

>
>>I was very excited to see Vikes with the ball, needing only to drive
>>to FG range to tie it in the last 5 minutes.  Before the drive, I
>>thought about how this was the signature of the Niner Super Bowl
>>Defenses, to dominate a situation and stop a drive to win it.
>>They've only once had what might be considered a dominant D, in
>>1984, and this D is not as good.  I do believe they are as good as
>>the others now.
>
>I think they're getting there.  Tim Harris is still not the pass rusher
>like Fred Dean or Charles Haley have been and no one on the line rushes
>the passer like Dwayne Board or Jeff Stover used to do.  They *are* as

No argument here. But I think they're good enough, and are getting
better as the season wears on.  The Seifert platoon system makes
some average players look like all-pros at the end of a season,
especially the impact area of D line.

>good against the run, though.  The secondary still needs to mature.

They seem to be growing fast.

>Remember that the benchmark is the '84 backfield of Lott, Wright, Hicks,
>and Williamson.  Four All-Pros.

Yep.  But that was the only time they had 4 all-pros in the same
backfield.  What about the other 3 SBs?

Go Niners.

Mike
From: boell@hpcc01.corp.hp.com (Donald P Boell)
Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1992 17:29:44 GMT
Subject: Re: QUESTION ABOUT OT IN PLAYOFFS
Organization: the HP Corporate notes server