"I feel a lot more comfortable on the sideline," said Manusky, who played 12 NFL seasons. "I feel like a caged rat upstairs."
But that's not the only change. The 49ers have settled into a 3-4 defense, rather than using the hybrid scheme that former coach Mike Nolan preferred. Manusky seems to favor the type of system he coached under with Wade Phillips as defensive coordinator of the Chargers.
This week, I spoke with Manusky and here is our Q&A:
Q: How is the process of game-planning for an opponent different than it was before the coaching change?
Manusky: "It's similar to what it was. We're shooting ideas back and forth between the assistants and Mike Singletary. That's basically what it was when Mike (Nolan) was here, as well."
Q: Does Mike Singletary take on a more active role than he did before?
Manusky: "He's pretty busy right now, being the head coach. He's in there at times. He has other things to deal with, so it's a little bit different. He's not in there as much as he normally was."
Q: Do you feel more autonomy in putting together the plan?
Manusky: "It's universal with the assistant coaches and myself and Mike, when he's in there. There's a lot of back and forth."
Q: It looks as if you've settled into more of a 3-4. Is that accurate?
Manusky: "Yeah, for the most part we're a 3-4 (team) right now. We can transition down or up, and sometimes Justin (Smith) will play an outside linebacker position or over the tight end."
Q: Why are you playing more 3-4?
Manusky: "Just because we're getting Manny (Lawson) out there and Parys (Haralson) out there. And for the people we have, players we have, it's the best fit."
Q: Has the defense changed much since the coaching change?
Manusky: "Yeah, a little bit here and there. Not vast changes, like terminology or anything like that. We try to stick with the same terminology that we've had for the last year and a half."
Q: What's an example of how the defense has changed?
Manusky: "Like we talked about, from a 4-3 to a 3-4. We're just using different alignments by the linemen in that sense -- different fronts. There are slight changes across the board. It's working pretty good in the run game. Now, we just have to make sure we get more pass rush."
Q: Are you taking a little of what you learned with Wade Phillips and a little of what you learned from Mike Nolan?
Manusky: "Yes, I'm trying to take what I learned with Wade Phillips and the same thing with Mike, and combine them together and try to get the best fit for the players we have here. Sometimes you don't want to stick that round peg in that square hole. You try to fit it to what the players can do and what they can't do."
Q: Is it important that the defensive players find an identity?
Manusky: "Yes. From a player's perspective, it's easier on them because they know what to expect when they come into the building each and every Monday. And if you have consistency with little tweaks here and there, that isn't bad. But when you make vast changes, it's tough on them. They feel comfortable and stout in what they do, and that's the main defense we play and we run with it."
Q: Do you feel that Manny is coming along?
Manusky: "He's getting better each and every week. When he had his hamstring injury at midseason that kind of set him back. Coming back from the knee, early in the season, there's always hesitation because I don't even know if it was a full year since he got hurt. He's in stride now. He's making improvements each and every week. The same thing with Parys. They're trying to get better. And the more you see it and the more you're playing, the more comfortable you get."
Q: Is Manny a three-down player?
Manusky: "I think he is. Each and every week he plays, he gets better and is excelling across the board. The sky's the limit for him."
Q: After Nate Clements' performance last week against the Cowboys, do you reconsider whether to have him shadow the opponents' top receiver?
Manusky: "No. You have the players and have the best game plan that suits the players from week to week. Sometimes it changes. Other times it stays consistent. He is still a quality football player in this business."
* * *
INJURY REPORT
49ers: CB Walt Harris (hamstring), WR Arnaz Battle (foot) and WR Josh Morgan (groin) are questionable. They all went through limited practice.
WR Jason Hill (groin) and LB Patrick Willis (ankle) are probable, meaning it's a near-certainly they will play. Hill went through limited practice, while Willis participated fully.
As previously reported, KR Allen Rossum (ankle) and S Dashon Goldson (knee) are out.
Bills: Starting TE Robert Royal (hamstring) is out. Backup TE Derek Schouman is 50-50 with a hamstring injury. That means rookie TE Derek Fine could get the start. Starting SS Donte Whitner is doubtful with a shoulder injury, and OLB Keith Ellison (ankle) is questionable. Ellison's backup, Teddy Lehman, is out with a hamstring injury. Starting CB Jabari Greer (knee) is out, too.
* * *
I have to disagree because the 3-4 has never worked out with the 49ers because they generally go with:
DE/DT/DE/LB
LB/LB/LB
Now, how is that formation the '3-4' when it looks like a '4-3?' A true 3-4 is:
DE/DT/DE
LB/LB/LB/LB.
4/3 is better with DE/DT/DT/DE
LB/LB/LB
because we don't need to have 4 LBs, and then use a LB to be slotted as 'DE' in the so caled 3-4.
The 4-3 formation of the 49ers is not hurting the team because what hurts them is Sopoaga/Franklin are not and never will be good players for the NFL. There's no pass pressure or run stoppage from them.
The 49ers need to find some DEs and some good DTs. We should get multiple draft picks if we get #8th pick and trade it.
Actually a true 3-4 front aligns like this:
OLB-DE-DT-DE-OLB
MLB MLB
Presuming none of us are experts here... But I think part of the appeal of a 3-4 look is the different options you have for placement of your lbs. Varying your look gives offenses more to think/worry about. So whether an olb is on the line of scrimmage or not, if its an olb, then its a 3-4. If it is a question of whether or not Justin Smith is designated as olb or de, then I would imagine none other than the coaches could tell us what position or responsibilities he had on that play. Basically I am just trying to say that the 3-4 can have varying looks, so if they say it's a 3-4 we should listen to their expert opinions.
3-5, 4-3, or 5-2 Monster, If Manusky can't get a good game against Trent Edwards then he'll be a position coach again next year.
It's hard to play 3-4 when you have a swinging gate at NT. BTW - caoch, if a WO gains over 200 yards, you don't have a good game plan.
It is a pretty safe bet that we will pretty much hear the same explanations/descriptions of the Niner defense the remainder of the season. The one thing we won't hear (for obvious reasons) is that "...we're playing the best we can considering what we have to work with." It simply boils down to us not having the correct 3 or 4 down lineman up front to consistently play ANY style/scheme of defensive football (3-4, 4-3, 3-3-3-2, or 1,2,3 and Out). Soap may one day be an effective DE, but the day won't come when Franklin can, or will, ever properly plug the middle. And no one else currently on the roster can/does either.
I guess I'll be the one to say it; Manusky sucks!
Greg Manusky: A 3-4 will only work when the NT can hold the point of attack...or at the very least, not get blown 3 to 5 yds off the LoS. This is grade school strategy here. 4-3 is our best fit given no stud NT. One day, he will realise this.
Norm In The Bay you may very well be dead-on re: abilities of Manusky. But again I caution that since WE STILL looky exactly the same as we did under "we'll play it real safe and let's-bend-but-don't-break" Nolan, and we ARE attempting different schemes now (altho pointlessly) plus there is a New Sheriff in town. But still our defense sucks. Watching our players come off the ball, then observing other teams ('Boys, Steelers, Colts, Giants, etc.,) gives you text-book evidence of what real down linemen look and play like. And so my friend, Manusky or no Manusky, we just do not measure up. Or even come remotely close. Smith has a motor, true - but that is it. Period. And that ain't Manusky's fault (at least last time I checked it wasn't).
Matt -- Did the subject of Brooks and where Manusky sees him fitting in come up at all? I think we all feel like it's audition time for 2009 and we're glad to see some of the younger guys getting a shot with the playoffs out of reach... Where do you see Brooks lining up most often in practice?
This is the culmination of the Nolan regime.
He Drafted (BPA), he collected a lot of blue collar tweeners that never completed any specific model because he really wasn't building a 3-4 or a 4-3.
Hence the label those anonymous league sources provided about too many guys playing out of position.
He felt compelled to use his first pick on a QB when the BPA wasn't a QB.
His model was flawed, he landed a couple of above average guys and a truck load of reasonably solid players.
We can't expect Manusky and Singletary to do too much because we are totally BELOW average in the NT dept.
Safety play sucks, Nolan couldn't find a WR in a Draft full of ballerinas either.
We've wasted 3+ years stocking the roster with high picks that are barely scratching the surface right now.
Get a solid QB, a couple of stout interior DLmen, shuffle the secondary and hold onto a OC for a couple of years and let these guys get comfortable with a specific scheme.
I'm a broken record already with Nate.
He's a run support CB, not Deion Sanders.
He would be an OUTSTANDING FS with younger faster press CBs in front of him.
Manusky needs guys to hold the middle.
Once we solve that problem, we've got horses to work the edges and shoot the gaps.
Too late to cry about the what ifs, BUT, we do have some pretty durable hard working guys here now.
Assume the current WR corps hangs on, Martz stays and Singletary gets extended, look for the staff to get tweaked by Mike to focus on the lines and I can see us making vast improvements next year.
Fat Man in The Middle, another OT, perhaps a CB early in the Draft?
FA, Haynesworth or another viable NT, along with a decision on the QB position.
Keep Alex if he wants to stay and drastically reduce his cap number, then add a vet perhaps.
Hi Matt, The 3/4 begins with the middle and no one on the current roster fits the bill. Second part is a pass rushing linebacker, don't have that either. I think the rest of the D isn't bad, but the name of the game is pressure. As far as QB is concerned, how about Carson Palmer if he's sound. The Bengals appear to be in rebuilding mode and when healthy he can light it up. Of course he has to become available.