SANTA CLARA – Greg Roman spoke in the 49ers media tent Thursday afternoon. Here’s what he said about his coaching background and philosophy.
Rams LB James Laurinaitis was talking about some of your run concepts, formations, it’s unique. You just don’t see it with any other team. He specifically talked about the split back. What are some of your influences? Did you watch the Bill Walsh installation tapes? Did that influence you?
“The person that really taught me all that was George Seifert. I worked for George in Carolina and he had a tremendous impact on me as a football coach. I was privy to all that stuff back then, and got to watch all the films and what not and learned about it. But as far as our schemes go, scheme doesn’t matter, it’s players. The players executing the plays matters. And that’s the bottom line. We talked about first day of training camp with our offense, fundamentals, conditioning precedes everything. Fundamentals precede scheme. Ultimately execution is all that matters, no matter what you call. So, anything that succeeds is a credit simply to the players. I think we always keep an eye, an ear and a nose to our players and what we feel that they can do well and try to emphasize that.”
Why is the split back formation never used any more?
“You know, you’d have to ask them. You’d have to ask them. I don’t know. I don’t want to get into a big thing here, but that used to be the norm a long time ago and then it kind of evolved in the 80’s to I-Backs. You try to marry everything you do together so, I think everybody’s more of an I-Back field. But I will say this, I think certain types of backs can run that stuff and certain types of backs you really wouldn’t want to run that stuff with. And we have backs that are multi-dimensional that can run that stuff. So, it’s good.”
How much of an advantage is it that you guys do stuff that’s unique and other teams aren’t seeing it on a weekly basis?
“It can be an advantage. It can be. But it’s overrated. It really is. It’s all about the players on the field executing, no matter what you do. But at the same time, it’s always nice to expand and evolve as you go. So, that’s something you definitely want to do. Every team’s different. You’ve got to measure what’s right for you.”
Laurinaitis was saying that he has to be on the lookout for unusual plays, trick plays, things like that. I know you don’t like trick plays.
“Never heard of them.”
Is that an advantage to you guys that sort of takes away from the defense’s aggression because they’re always on the lookout for something that might be unusual?
“I don’t know. You probably have to ask him. But we do what we do. We’ve just got to go out and execute what we do at a high level and that’s the bottom line as we move into November.”
49ers RSS feed
Loading ...
Seeing Hunter and Gore in the backfield together in that pro formation reminded me of Craig and Tyler. It was awesome.
Hard press to find a better tandom.
so niner films ended up in carolina?
Good Ole’ George,
Loved that guy!
Ran into him a few years back up in Bodega Bay at a Food Fair. He was wearing Duck Hunting Fatigues, we spoke about the 49ers & some of the problems they were having. He hurt just like I did about the Fall of the 49ers, he’s just as nice of man as the guy in those 90′s commercials about doing the “Bosa Nova”.
Right on. The mention of George brought back good memories.
Roman nailed it – the players have to execute. The schemes help put players in position to succeed, but ultimately, the players must execute. Execution in the running game has been solid this year. Lets hope the passing game becomes more consistent 2nd half of the season.
As any smart coaching staff should, GR and JH are emphasing strengths on offense. That explains the run focused attack. I’m not slamming AS, but the passing game is not seen as a strength by GR:
I think we always keep an eye, an ear and a nose to our players and what we feel that they can do well and try to emphasize that.
@ Nick:
but the passing game is not seen as a strength by GR
You’re projecting your opinion onto Roman. He neither said nor implied any such thing. The sentence you quoted had nothing to do with the passing game. It was part of a response to a question that dealt solely with the running game.
You seem to be desperately seeking official vindication of your opinion that the passing game is a weakness. What’s that about?
The team is 6-2, healthy and improving. Quit picking nits, and start enjoying what’s happening.
Not really buying what Roman is selling on this one. He said, “But as far as our schemes go, scheme doesn’t matter, it’s players.”
Obviously, great players are necessary to win games. Great players matched to a complimentary scheme that accentuates the skills of the players wins championships. Otherwise, why do we need all these coaches. Hell, the 49ers have 2 o-line coaches. If it’s all about the players why do they need so many coaches. If it’s all about the players, Jed should just cut Roman’s salary in half and fire several of the extra coaches.
I think most long time 49er fans would probably agree that coaching and scheme matters. When you lived through the past decade of poor coaching then you realize everything from scheme, coaching, and talented players must all be in place to be successful. Sometimes I wonder what in the world these guys are thinking when they come out and say this crap.
If it’s not all about the players, why did Bill Walsh only win 8 games in his first 2 seasons in San Francisco? Players
Why did Steve Mariucci go to the Championship his rookie season and never get that close to a Super Bowl again? Players
As I very clearly said it’s about players, scheme, and coaching. Roman said “Scheme doesn’t matter.” I completely disagree. It all matters.
So are you saying that Walsh’s development and implementation of the West Coast Offense was completely meaningless? It was only because of the players that they were so great? I say, Walsh was a master at finding players that fit his scheme and coaching them to be one of the all time best teams. In fact, that is exactly what Walsh said in his book. Coaches must find players that fit their scheme.
No. Walsh developed the offense in Cincinnati. When he came to SF his players were terrible so he lost. As he accumulated talent to fit his scheme, success followed.
Mariucci game to a team full of talent, and almost got to the Super Bowl. Then they started releasing most of the talent, and became one of the worst teams in the league for a couple years. Did Mariucci forget how to coach? No, he didn’t have the players. Once they built the talent pool back up he began winning and going to the playoffs again.
I’m very well aware of Walsh’s history. So are you saying scheme doesn’t matter? Yes or No
Coaching and Scheme only matter if you have the Players. Players are the ones on the field making it happen. If it were just about coaching and scheme no coach would ever lose because every play is a TD on the chalkboard.
Can you not answer a direct question? You must be a real delight at a dinner party. I wrote,
“Obviously, great players are necessary to win games.”
I agree with you. I said good players are necessary to win games. A great coach with a great scheme can not win championships without great players. We agree on that. Conversely, great players can not win games without good coaching and a good scheme. If it were only about the players, then Jim Harbaugh could not have taken the 9ers from 6-10 to 13-3 and an NFC Champ game birth with largely the same ball club as the previous year. Players matter. Scheme matters. Coaching matters. I disagree with Roman when he says “Scheme doesn’t matter.” That’s all.
BTW, you have your timeline on Mooch wrong. Mooch took the team to the 2nd round of the playoffs and then was fired after he tried to get Donahue removed. Mooch had playoff success every year with the 9ers. Only after Mooch was gone did the player selloff happen at which time Dennis Erickson coached one of the worst teams in the league.
I am a lot of fun at dinner party’s, and my timeline on Mooch is 100% accurate.
His first 2 seasons they made it to the Championship Gane and Divisional rounds. Then in ’99 Steve Young’s career was ended, and Mariucci spent the remainder of that season and 2000 winning a total of 10 games, hence my statement that they were of the worst teams in the league for a couple of years (2).
They then rebounded in 2001, winning 12 games before losing the WC game in GB, and in 2002 they beat NY in the WC round then lost to TB, hence they my comment that they rebuilt the team and got back to the playoffs.
Where exactly was I wrong in my original statement again?
Jack,
My bad. I mistook what you were saying. I thought you were saying the teams of 2003 and 2004 were Mooch’s teams. Mooch left SF having done a good job of coaching.
Now back to the original discussion that you completely ignored. I disagree with you that it’s all about the players. How do you explain Harbaugh making the NFC Champ game with a team that only won 6 games the year before? Good coaching and a scheme that maximized the talent on the roster led to great success. It wasn’t all about the players. After the Giants loss this year Harbaugh said, “We didn’t have the best plan.” Even Harbaugh is basically saying scheme matters. After that game Roman said he didn’t put players in the right places to succeed. Same players – bad scheme – bad plan. Like I originally posted, success comes from the confluence of great players, great coaching, and a great scheme. Without all of these together it’s hard to be successful.
They do matter. I just believe that good players can mask bad coaching more than the other way around. As bad as Singletary was, his teams were still close to .500.
Then I really don’t follow why you even started this discussion. You said, “If it’s not all about the players, why did Bill Walsh only win 8 games in his first 2 seasons in San Francisco? Players” That seemed to indicate to me you felt it was all about the players. Of course good players can mask bad coaching. Likewise bad players can ruin good coaches.
Oh and another by the way, not all plays are TD’s on the chalkboard. I think you said you coached. If that’s the case you know plays are designed to pick up certain number of yards. That’s why the coaches play sheets are grouped by down and distance.
Roman is deflecting credit from himself to his players. That’s what good coaches do. That’s what good leaders do.
Of course that’s what he’s doing. And I agree good leaders give credit out. The quote being so one sided makes the gesture seem a bit disengenuous to me. If I’m a player then I’m thinking, hey if it’s only about the players why is Harbaugh making $5MM this year and I’m only making $1.2MM.
Changing the subject a bit, I’d like to ask for some help from our fellow 49ers fans.
I’m from Brazil and will be at my first live 49er game on Monday Night against the Bears (we sure will show them what a number one defense really is).
I’ll be with my wife (who is 5 1/2 months pregnant) and 2 other couples, and we would like to have the complete game experience.
That means: TAILGATING.
We’d really appreciate any invitation to join a Tailgate barbecue from some of you guys.
But it has to be a family enviroment, with women and children if possible.
How come there isn’t more of a push to get Seifert in the HOF? His record is just as good and better than any coach in there now. How many Super Bowls have we won since Seifert’s departure?
Some additional food for thought.
http://ninerchatter.blogspot.com/2012/11/stanfords-qb-change-and-49ers.html