Golden's Vision for Defense Vs Current "Talent"

Dghustla

Junior
Joined
Jan 29, 2012
Messages
4,935
When you look at the current list of commitments Golden has solidified for the defensive front, i think his vision is to field a Defense that looks like the 49ers defense. They don't send blitz pressure often and they have long physical DLineman.

Without typing all of the names their DLineman the heights are as follows. I have included Aldon Smith since he's the primary edge rusher in their defense.

6'4 265 (Aldon Smith)
6'4 285
6'3 290
6'5 301
6'1 297 (Glen Dorsey)
6'5 318
6'4 273

http://www.49ers.com/team/roster.html
-------------

Our current DL contributors
6'4 250 Gilbert
6'3 264 Green
6'4 275 Chick
6'1 300 Moore
6'6 320 renfrow
6'4 305 Pierre
6'3 303 Robinson
6'1 316 Porter
6'3 230-240 AQM/McCord

Now of all those guys listed (NOT including AQM/McCord.), Chick and Pierre are the only players who fit the mold that Golden is looking build. The other guys either don't have great length/Height or a too round (not to mention they are str8 up jags, but that has nothing to do with physical measurements). I think many would agree that Chick should be playing Inside on a majority of his snaps. But due to lack of depth he has to play DE mostly.

---Current Top DL Commitment List
Valentine 6'4 297
C. Thomas 6'4 250
A. Moten 6'4 279
D. Jackson 6'4 230
Chris Herdon listed a TE but might play DE 6'4 230

(we have some other 3* DEs and DT committed ranging between 6'2-6'3)

-----Now the first thing that jumps off of that list of top recruits is the size. Valentine and Moten don't have the college level strength that Chick has. But they are already as big as Chick while being 3 years younger. Chad Tomas will enter his freshman year of college bigger than Green and Gilbert, two of our top DL in terms of snaps played ---


I'm NOT giving Coach D a pass. I think that he needs to run his scheme because young guys like McCord, AQM,Tracy,Deon,Jenkins, etc. need to get use to executing it. BUT his gameday play calling has been suspect and IT needs to improve asap.

In Contrast for the ppl who say this denfense has talent? I've said it before, I just don't see it. Look at this future DL in 3 years vs. what we are rolling out now and it's not even close. Now in that future group someone has to become an Aldon Smith type player for it to work...But You tell which line you want for your canes.

Chick
pierre
Green
Renfrow/Robinson/Porter

or

Moten
Valentine
Thomas
McCord/AQM/Jackson
 
Last edited:
Advertisement
People are going to be erecting statues of Golden in their front yards in February when we have a top 5 recruiting class.
 
First off valentine is 325 and will play nt not sde like chick ,moten is 292 and is a dt, and chad is 240.

Just because we are a 3-4 doesn't mean it's the same. The 49ers ask their guys to attack up front not just contain like this D.

Looking at some of those uva and temple defenses they were not all that aggressive. This D is for a team without good athletes like penn st.,temple and etc.
 
First off valentine is 325 and will play nt not sde like chick ,moten is 292 and is a dt, and chad is 240.

Just because we are a 3-4 doesn't mean it's the same. The 49ers ask their guys to attack up front not just contain like this D.

Looking at some of those uva and temple defenses they were not all that aggressive. This D is for a team without good athletes like penn st.,temple and etc.


247 list valentine as 297.
maybe they are out of date.
 
People are going to be erecting statues of Golden in their front yards in February when we have a top 5 recruiting class.

I wouldn't go that far lol. But at least we finally appear to be righting this ship in terms of the DL.
 
Advertisement
We would recruit Chad Thomas and them regardless of what scheme we were trying to run. Just in terms of height and weight, those guys can fit in any scheme.

BUT WHAT ABOUT THEIR SKILL SETS?

What do they do best? Are they stout at the point of attack? Can they 2-gap? Are they better suited for playing on edges and in gaps?

Height and weight doesn't tell us anything.
 
The Polish army had cavalry.

The US Army had cavalry.

Both had cavalry, just like two teams can play a 3-4.

The Polish cavalry rode horses, and the Germans with their tanks and machinguns wiped them out.

The US Army cavalry rode in helicopters with gunships, and kicked serious enemy ***.

Both called cavalry - two different things.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top