The annual Fire Dean Pees thread; 2016 edition

[ravensdfan]

2 hours ago, BmoreBird22 said:

One thing I will say about people calling this a "prevent defense" (which it is not) is that as Ravnesfan23 pointed out, the Browns got like 25 yards on four plays and took over a minute off the clock. Really, had the Ravens just tackled Corey Coleman in bounds (we're talking about Mosley and Wright both missing), we're probably not even in a position where the Browns may have a shot at the end zone at all. 

I say this frequently, but most of you don't hate the play call; you hate the execution by the players. Truthfully, it wasn't a bad play call at all by Pees because the Browns were getting maybe three or four yards at a time if the players tackle immediately or near immediately and each play is gonna run off maybe 15 seconds. In that situation, you need to stop them about eight times (assuming every time is 15 seconds exactly) and you're talking about a team getting maybe 40 yards. 

Hell, nothing wrong with the way Pees called that; players just really needed to step up and make crucial tackles and they did not.

Again though, we're talking the Browns and an injured McCown. Significantly injured enough that he is out this week so yes, it affected his play. I said earlier in this thread there were clear instances of botched execution that made this more nail biting than necessary this week. The issue is though, that Pees will attempt this same style when we play better teams with more potent and disciplined offenses. This is what he does. No matter the situation (he's done this when the other team only needs 3 pts to tie or win) or the opponent. Which is why it frequently has failed during his tenure.

[BmoreBird22]

Just now, ravensdfan said:

Again though, we're talking the Browns and an injured McCown. Significantly injured enough that he is out this week so yes, it affected his play. I said earlier in this thread there were clear instances of botched execution that made this more nail biting than necessary this week. The issue is though, that Pees will attempt this same style when we play better teams with more potent and disciplined offenses. This is what he does. No matter the situation (he's done this when the other team only needs 3 pts to tie or win) or the opponent. Which is why it frequently has failed during his tenure.

I am willing to be a lot of money you could not identify most defensive play calls or coverages. 

People love to say Pees does the exact same things, but if Wright and Mosley make that tackle in bounds against Corey Coleman instead of allowing him to get out of bounds for a first down, we probably aren't even having this discussion about  whether or not Pees is too conservative. Honestly, I didn't see too much wrong with it when you consider that Corey Coleman was routinely picking on Wright deep.

I mean hell, go to the above because Chris Simms, one of the commentators, noticed Coleman's propensity to get behind the defense when they pressed.

But let me ask this since people love to complain

What would you all have done differently?

[The Raven]

6 hours ago, BmoreBird22 said:

I am willing to be a lot of money you could not identify most defensive play calls or coverages. 

People love to say Pees does the exact same things, but if Wright and Mosley make that tackle in bounds against Corey Coleman instead of allowing him to get out of bounds for a first down, we probably aren't even having this discussion about  whether or not Pees is too conservative. Honestly, I didn't see too much wrong with it when you consider that Corey Coleman was routinely picking on Wright deep.

I mean hell, go to the above because Chris Simms, one of the commentators, noticed Coleman's propensity to get behind the defense when they pressed.

But let me ask this since people love to complain

What would you all have done differently?

Press coverage, organized chaos, punch them in the mouth, and play Ravens football.

[BmoreBird22]

30 minutes ago, The Raven said:

Press coverage, organized chaos, punch them in the mouth, and play Ravens football.

I'm usually a huge fan of this, but that would require the Ravens had Jimmy shadow Corey Coleman, which I would have preferred, but I guess Pees saw a physical mismatch with Pryor and Wright. 

But just about literally every time I saw Wright press Coleman, he missed his punch and got flipped around immediately. Wright just couldn't keep up. Had McCown been more accurate, Coleman probably could have had 3 touchdowns and 150+ yards. It was bad for Wright all the way around. 

[flynismo]

1 hour ago, The Raven said:

Press coverage, organized chaos, punch them in the mouth, and play Ravens football.

Cmon man. You forgot to send in the seven man blitzes. Credibility = shot

[flynismo]

7 hours ago, BmoreBird22 said:

What would you all have done differently?

Personally....not a damn thing. It was near perfection by Pees, as well as a huge game from the DL. If Wright didn't have such a terrible game, and if we eliminated that one play that resulted in an 85 yard TD -- which was not on Pees, btw -- we likely would have blown them out.

Edited September 20, 2016 by flynismo

[BmoreBird22]

38 minutes ago, flynismo said:

Personally....not a damn thing. It was near perfection by Pees, as well as a huge game from the DL. If Wright didn't have such a terrible game, and if we eliminated that one play that resulted in an 85 yard TD -- which was not on Pees, btw -- we likely would have blown them out.

Wright struggled heavily with covering Coleman from press man. He was failing to land his punch and henwas beat off the line almost immediately.

Just not a good game from him.

[ravensdfan]

8 hours ago, BmoreBird22 said:

I am willing to be a lot of money you could not identify most defensive play calls or coverages. 

People love to say Pees does the exact same things, but if Wright and Mosley make that tackle in bounds against Corey Coleman instead of allowing him to get out of bounds for a first down, we probably aren't even having this discussion about  whether or not Pees is too conservative. Honestly, I didn't see too much wrong with it when you consider that Corey Coleman was routinely picking on Wright deep.

I mean hell, go to the above because Chris Simms, one of the commentators, noticed Coleman's propensity to get behind the defense when they pressed.

But let me ask this since people love to complain

What would you all have done differently?

Did you even read what I said? lol The issue isn't what he did this week, it was the Browns & an injured QB. I said that there were clear instances of botched execution that made this more nail biting than necessary. I mean, I pretty much agreed with everything you just said there - but you ignored the rest. He clearly goes conservative in the final 2 minutes of the half and the game. That is beyond obvious. The problem becomes when he does so without any consideration or adjustments when we face better and more disciplined offenses.

[BmoreBird22]

1 minute ago, ravensdfan said:

Did you even read what I said? lol The issue isn't what he did this week, it was the Browns & an injured QB. I said that there were clear instances of botched execution that made this more nail biting than necessary. I mean, I pretty much agreed with everything you just said there - but you ignored the rest. He clearly goes conservative in the final 2 minutes of the half and the game. That is beyond obvious. The problem becomes when he does so without any consideration or adjustments when we face better and more disciplined offenses.

But I'm asking, if the Ravens play let's say the Steelers, what do you do differently against them in thr final 2:00?

[ravensdfan]

9 minutes ago, BmoreBird22 said:

But I'm asking, if the Ravens play let's say the Steelers, what do you do differently against them in thr final 2:00?

Are we up by 2? 3? a TD? 3 TDs? I mean there is situational football. Are they gashing us with the run? Or is Ben on his game and hitting every receiver in stride? These are things that should have an impact on defensive play but seem not to matter when Pees comes out with play off and deep , keep everything in front of you no matter what in the final 2 minutes.

If we're talking this particular scenario we faced against the Browns, you'd best not just lay back and let them have their way. i understand that our players aren't world beaters in press coverage but you aren't going to win in this situation against the better teams by just backing up and hoping for the best. You have to come up with creative blitzes (which we know he CAN do), rush more than 4, if you fail, then you fail but at least you tried to win.

My issue isn't that he plays conservative in some situations, it is that he seems to do so 99% of the time regardless of the situation.

 

Edited September 20, 2016 by ravensdfan

[Purple_City39]

58 minutes ago, ravensdfan said:

Are we up by 2? 3? a TD? 3 TDs? I mean there is situational football. Are they gashing us with the run? Or is Ben on his game and hitting every receiver in stride? These are things that should have an impact on defensive play but seem not to matter when Pees comes out with play off and deep , keep everything in front of you no matter what in the final 2 minutes.

If we're talking this particular scenario we faced against the Browns, you'd best not just lay back and let them have their way. i understand that our players aren't world beaters in press coverage but you aren't going to win in this situation against the better teams by just backing up and hoping for the best. You have to come up with creative blitzes (which we know he CAN do), rush more than 4, if you fail, then you fail but at least you tried to win.

My issue isn't that he plays conservative in some situations, it is that he seems to do so 99% of the time regardless of the situation.

 

Pees didn't play conservative at all in Sunday's game.  He only played situational football on the last drive.

I think it was 2013, I remember seeing Pees send 5, 6, and occasionally 7 man rushes often and literally NOBODY got pressure or could beat a blocker one on one.  Certain instances had a defensive player being blocked easily and another defensive player running into his back.  Then I'd come here and see people saying Pees needs to blitz and stop with soft coverages because the corners eventually got beat.

It's obvious that until the defense holds teams to under 10 points and under 200 total yards, someone will complain about Pees regardless of whether he called a bad or great game.  Even then he'll still get complaints.  It's the thing to do I guess.

[PurpleCity5]

13 hours ago, BmoreBird22 said:

I say this frequently, but most of you don't hate the play call; you hate the execution by the players. Truthfully, it wasn't a bad play call at all by Pees because the Browns were getting maybe three or four yards at a time if the players tackle immediately or near immediately and each play is gonna run off maybe 15 seconds. In that situation, you need to stop them about eight times (assuming every time is 15 seconds exactly) and you're talking about a team getting maybe 40 yards. 

Hell, nothing wrong with the way Pees called that; players just really needed to step up and make crucial tackles and they did not.

It really annoys me when a guy like Za'Darius Smith has the opportunity at a big sack on 3rd down(?) and completely whiffs it which is followed by a 47 Yard pass to Corey Coleman. Be patient, wrap up, and make sure you get the sack. Wrapping up isn't the most difficult thing to do if you're a pass rusher compared to the other things you're told to do. Too many times on 3rd down we whiffed on tackles and allowed guys to do what they wanted. Just horrible execution by the players. With Jimmy, when the ball hits your hands, you have got to make that play and get the INT. It's very rare that you get an opportunity like that. Anyways, Pees called one hell of a game, these players have just got to execute and also take better angles (looking at you Webb). 

Edited September 21, 2016 by PurpleCity5

[ravensdfan]

1 hour ago, Purple_City39 said:

Pees didn't play conservative at all in Sunday's game.  He only played situational football on the last drive.

I think it was 2013, I remember seeing Pees send 5, 6, and occasionally 7 man rushes often and literally NOBODY got pressure or could beat a blocker one on one.  Certain instances had a defensive player being blocked easily and another defensive player running into his back.  Then I'd come here and see people saying Pees needs to blitz and stop with soft coverages because the corners eventually got beat.

It's obvious that until the defense holds teams to under 10 points and under 200 total yards, someone will complain about Pees regardless of whether he called a bad or great game.  Even then he'll still get complaints.  It's the thing to do I guess.

We're talking about the final 2 minutes of the half and the game. That in this instance, it wasn't a bad call but that he does it regardless of the circumstance.

[DomMcRaven]

56 minutes ago, PurpleCity5 said:

It really annoys me when a guy like Za'Darius Smith has the opportunity at a big sack on 3rd down(?) and completely whiffs it which is followed by a 47 Yard pass to Corey Coleman. Be patient, wrap up, and make sure you get the sack. Wrapping up isn't the most difficult thing to do if you're a pass rusher compared to the other things you're told to do. Too many times on 3rd down we whiffed on tackles and allowed guys to do what they wanted. Just horrible execution by the players. With Jimmy, when the ball hits your hands, you have got to make that play and get the INT. It's very rare that you get an opportunity like that. Anyways, Pees called one hell of a game, these players have just got to execute and also take better angles (looking at you Webb). 

This CAN NOT be stressed enough. So many times I get up off of my seat only to hold my head in agony once I see whiffs like that. I hope Harbs gets on them for this. 

[BOLDnPurPnBlacK]

I don't get the whole - we should've been aggressive because at least if we lose we went out swinging - mentality as opposition to what Pees did. 

Pees game plan does have an "if" factor to it too... but the if is, IF our guys can close and make basic open field tackles in bounds. If they don't then yea it can cause issues but I'll take my chances that our defenders will be capable of performing the most basic of football tasks. And in this case we actually missed a couple tackles (which is the only reason they even had a chance... otherwise they run out of time around midfield) and STILL won because with his philosophy you can minimize mistakes bc there's always more bodies to make the tackle. One or two mistakes aren't lethal. 

But, the preference should be to blitz extra numbers AND press so that one missed tackle is the game?? If we were doing what many are professing then Wrights missed tackle goes for a TD or leaves Coleman with maybe one man to beat in the open field. 

And that's why you do it. Every plan if executed perfectly as intended works. But mistakes and things you don't account for happen. We didn't get gashed or give up chunk plays. We gave em 4-6 yds tops and wore the clock down. 

Maybe being aggressive does the same. But it's a lot more likely that IF or when that missed tackle comes, someone slips, the blitz doesn't hit home, etc... it isn't just a 1st down and clock stopped. It's the leads gone or our win hinges on Webb making a 1on1 open field tackle against a dynamic playmaker. 

 

You use the aggressive game plan when it's one game for all the marbles. Deep playoffs or the Super Bowl. You attack and try to win. 

In the marathon of the regular season where it's about collecting as many wins as possible... you do what's going to most likely work most of the time. You make the other team execute as many times as possible to get the score, not get it on one play. It's literally the most logical thing in the world... as long as we are between them and the end zone they don't score. So you do what you can to stop them without ever sacrificing that principal unless you're 100% sure. If you're not you keep yourself between the ball and the end zone. 

First downs don't matter in that situation. Nothing but points and time do. 70 yards to go... go ahead and take 5-6 every time bc you can't run 10-11 plays. And if we make a mistake you're only getting 12-15 yds not 40. Not the points. 

And btw a lot of our pressure came from only rushing 4 throughout the game. Mosleys blitz is the only one I can think of that we got pressure or a hit bc of sending extra men... and guess what? Ended in a big play for them. 

Dont know why Pees was supposed to know we suddenly wouldn't be able to generate pressure with 4 anymore. 

[Ravensfan23]

 It truly amazes me how so many people can watch the same thing and seemingly miss what truly happened. As I and some others have said....it wasn't a prevent defense. It was literally the same exact defense he played the entire 2ND half. What was the difference? I'll get to it later. 

17 hours ago, The Raven said:

Press coverage, organized chaos, punch them in the mouth, and play Ravens football.

Don't know if this is sarcasm or not, but what I do know that this is exactly what Pees did. The Browns ran 9 (Pryor play included) plays that drive. On 6 of the 9 the defense had some combination of either a crowded LOS, blitz, or late shifting coverage to confuse the offense. BTW none of this spells prevent. The DB were tight on 5 plays with the exception of Wright for obvious reasons. The DL ran the same 4 man rush with twist and stunts mixed in. 

In fact this aggressive style of defense actually bite the Ravens on the 16 yard swallow cross to Hawkins. Man coverage gave him room to run. So again what was the difference that allowed the Browns to have success on that final drive.

It was the BROWNS!!! You know that other team who also gets paid to perform and they have a pretty special offensive mind as HC. Despite the Ravens dominating the game after the 1st quarter the score remained close, that allowed the Browns to continue to operate in their original game plan. Establish the run and attack the Ravens secondary down field. Those slow developing routes throughout the game allowed the Ravens 4 man rush to get home or at least pressure. Fast forward to the final drive, Hue started focusing on the quick pass exclusively. The only time he attacked down field was the Pryor play and Mosley int.

I can't really figure out why Pees is getting any flack. There was minimal pressure because everything the Browns did was quick and short which played right into the Ravens hands. There were no chunk plays other than the one short pass to Hawkins that got 16 because of man coverage and Pryor's catch which Webb was in position to make a play but wasn't aggressive enough(looked like Brooks). Other than the 16 yard play to Hawkins, Pees had his defenders in position to make a play and that's all you can all of a coach.

[rmcjacket23]

14 hours ago, ravensdfan said:

Are we up by 2? 3? a TD? 3 TDs? I mean there is situational football. Are they gashing us with the run? Or is Ben on his game and hitting every receiver in stride? These are things that should have an impact on defensive play but seem not to matter when Pees comes out with play off and deep , keep everything in front of you no matter what in the final 2 minutes.

If we're talking this particular scenario we faced against the Browns, you'd best not just lay back and let them have their way. i understand that our players aren't world beaters in press coverage but you aren't going to win in this situation against the better teams by just backing up and hoping for the best. You have to come up with creative blitzes (which we know he CAN do), rush more than 4, if you fail, then you fail but at least you tried to win.

My issue isn't that he plays conservative in some situations, it is that he seems to do so 99% of the time regardless of the situation.

 

I can assure you that precisely zero fans on these boards or probably anywhere would simply say "well we lost on a game winning drive, but at least we blitzed the crap out of them and were aggressive doing it".

100% are result oriented. The problem is that a lot of fans who complain about this just automatically assume that being aggressive in those situations automatically leads us to having a better opportunity to stop them from scoring. In most cases, I find this is based on what they see OTHER TEAMS doing in those situations, with the obvious caveat that other teams have different personnel than we do.

Based on how I saw Sunday's game go, I'd have greatly preferred we drop 7 in coverage and take our chances. That would change week to week based on the opponent and gameflow.

Its not good enough to say "hey we lost being aggressive", when being conservative may have been the better decision that gave us the better chance to win.

[ravensdfan]

1 hour ago, rmcjacket23 said:

I can assure you that precisely zero fans on these boards or probably anywhere would simply say "well we lost on a game winning drive, but at least we blitzed the crap out of them and were aggressive doing it".

100% are result oriented. The problem is that a lot of fans who complain about this just automatically assume that being aggressive in those situations automatically leads us to having a better opportunity to stop them from scoring. In most cases, I find this is based on what they see OTHER TEAMS doing in those situations, with the obvious caveat that other teams have different personnel than we do.

Based on how I saw Sunday's game go, I'd have greatly preferred we drop 7 in coverage and take our chances. That would change week to week based on the opponent and gameflow.

Its not good enough to say "hey we lost being aggressive", when being conservative may have been the better decision that gave us the better chance to win.

Which is what I said. Except the majority of the time, it doesn't change. AT all. We drop back, play off and hope for the best regardless of our opponent and the situation. That was all I was saying.

Now, we don't know this will be the case this season. We will have to wait and see. We only have his history to judge right now.

[rmcjacket23]

4 minutes ago, ravensdfan said:

Which is what I said. Except the majority of the time, it doesn't change. AT all. We drop back, play off and hope for the best regardless of our opponent and the situation. That was all I was saying.

Now, we don't know this will be the case this season. We will have to wait and see. We only have his history to judge right now.

Correct. And historically, we've also had a LOT of personnel constraints to deal with in regards to this also. 

[sibelius]

I think Pees is doing a decent job with play calling bust his personnel casting baffles me. Why is Albert McClellan on the field on ANY 3rd down, so much as on a potential game-deciding drive?? He has the presence of mind to sub Pierce for Brandon Williams in the pass rush but he's got McClellan out there? 

I don't understand. 

[rmcjacket23]

5 minutes ago, sibelius said:

I think Pees is doing a decent job with play calling bust his personnel casting baffles me. Why is Albert McClellan on the field on ANY 3rd down, so much as on a potential game-deciding drive?? He has the presence of mind to sub Pierce for Brandon Williams in the pass rush but he's got McClellan out there? 

I don't understand. 

Lack of replacement options. No ZaDarius, no Dumervil.

[Purple_City39]

2 hours ago, sibelius said:

I think Pees is doing a decent job with play calling bust his personnel casting baffles me. Why is Albert McClellan on the field on ANY 3rd down, so much as on a potential game-deciding drive?? He has the presence of mind to sub Pierce for Brandon Williams in the pass rush but he's got McClellan out there? 

I don't understand. 

Well, besides the fact he doesn't have all his OLBs healthy, you also have to remember the OLBs do also drop into coverage on occasion.

[The Raven]

7 hours ago, Ravensfan23 said:

 It truly amazes me how so many people can watch the same thing and seemingly miss what truly happened. As I and some others have said....it wasn't a prevent defense. It was literally the same exact defense he played the entire 2ND half. What was the difference? I'll get to it later. 

Don't know if this is sarcasm or not, but what I do know that this is exactly what Pees did. The Browns ran 9 (Pryor play included) plays that drive. On 6 of the 9 the defense had some combination of either a crowded LOS, blitz, or late shifting coverage to confuse the offense. BTW none of this spells prevent. The DB were tight on 5 plays with the exception of Wright for obvious reasons. The DL ran the same 4 man rush with twist and stunts mixed in. 

In fact this aggressive style of defense actually bite the Ravens on the 16 yard swallow cross to Hawkins. Man coverage gave him room to run. So again what was the difference that allowed the Browns to have success on that final drive.

It was the BROWNS!!! You know that other team who also gets paid to perform and they have a pretty special offensive mind as HC. Despite the Ravens dominating the game after the 1st quarter the score remained close, that allowed the Browns to continue to operate in their original game plan. Establish the run and attack the Ravens secondary down field. Those slow developing routes throughout the game allowed the Ravens 4 man rush to get home or at least pressure. Fast forward to the final drive, Hue started focusing on the quick pass exclusively. The only time he attacked down field was the Pryor play and Mosley int.

I can't really figure out why Pees is getting any flack. There was minimal pressure because everything the Browns did was quick and short which played right into the Ravens hands. There were no chunk plays other than the one short pass to Hawkins that got 16 because of man coverage and Pryor's catch which Webb was in position to make a play but wasn't aggressive enough(looked like Brooks). Other than the 16 yard play to Hawkins, Pees had his defenders in position to make a play and that's all you can all of a coach.

Oh that was flaming sarcasm. Agreed 100 percent on Pees

[Ravensfan23]

31 minutes ago, The Raven said:

Oh that was flaming sarcasm. Agreed 100 percent on Pees

Thought so, but that was still the perfect post for me to quote lol

[The Raven]

2 minutes ago, Ravensfan23 said:

Thought so, but that was still the perfect post for me to quote lol

To play devil's advocate, though, one wonders how much influence comes from Frazier. Food for thought

[flynismo]

On 9/20/2016 at 5:06 AM, Tank 92 said:

Bottom line. No matter the play call/coverage players have to execute to make it work, people will whine and complain. Period.

Could not agree more

[Wildabeast88]

On September 18, 2016 at 4:40 PM, JoeyFlex5 said:

The entire point of the rant was the final drive. He does it all the time dating back to his patriots days. He fails on final drives and more often than not it's because he scraps his own game plan which had been working the whole game.

He called a brilliant game for 2 quarters and 13 minutes, and then blew it at the end, like he has done a million times.

On September 18, 2016 at 4:40 PM, JoeyFlex5 said:

 

Prevent defense prevents you from winning period.

[Wildabeast88]

8 hours ago, rmcjacket23 said:

I can assure you that precisely zero fans on these boards or probably anywhere would simply say "well we lost on a game winning drive, but at least we blitzed the crap out of them and were aggressive doing it".

100% are result oriented. The problem is that a lot of fans who complain about this just automatically assume that being aggressive in those situations automatically leads us to having a better opportunity to stop them from scoring. In most cases, I find this is based on what they see OTHER TEAMS doing in those situations, with the obvious caveat that other teams have different personnel than we do.

Based on how I saw Sunday's game go, I'd have greatly preferred we drop 7 in coverage and take our chances. That would change week to week based on the opponent and gameflow.

Its not good enough to say "hey we lost being aggressive", when being conservative may have been the better decision that gave us the better chance to win.

Die a slow painful death or get it over with quickly. It depends on game flow sometimes but getting methodically worked versus a quick big play score at least gives us a chance to score and bring it back in our favor. I mean last year watching Rivers work us was horrible and many others. Remember a few years back the Vikings game that went back and forth like 4lead changes in the final 4 minutes i would at least like to give Tucker a shot at the W

[Ravensfan23]

1 hour ago, The Raven said:

To play devil's advocate, though, one wonders how much influence comes from Frazier. Food for thought

I don't think that's a bad thing though. That's what he's hear for to help Pees and the defense improve. Otherwise why bring him here. The fact that he could step in at DC if it comes to that is a bonus. His influence is just as big as CB's was or Wink's is. 

When I listen to the coaches talk or watch sideline footage on Wired, it's clear that this entire organization takes it lead from Mr. B in terms of how things should be ran. As a businessman he said his focus was hiring the right people and trusting them to do the job he hired them for. That's exactly how the Ravens coaches are, almost to a fault. Both Pees and Trestman take input from coaches and some players. 

Also Harbs spoke about how well the combination of Pees on the field and a Frazier in the both is working so far. So i think Frazier has a huge influence on the defense. 

 

[GrimCoconut]

4 minutes ago, Ravensfan23 said:

I don't think that's a bad thing though. That's what he's hear for to help Pees and the defense improve. Otherwise why bring him here. The fact that he could step in at DC if it comes to that is a bonus. His influence is just as big as CB's was or Wink's is. 

When I listen to the coaches talk or watch sideline footage on Wired, it's clear that this entire organization takes it lead from Mr. B in terms of how things should be ran. As a businessman he said his focus was hiring the right people and trusting them to do the job he hired them for. That's exactly how the Ravens coaches are, almost to a fault. Both Pees and Trestman take input from coaches and some players. 

Also Harbs spoke about how well the combination of Pees on the field and a Frazier in the both is working so far. So i think Frazier has a huge influence on the defense. 

 

I wonder if people realize how important Harbaugh is in this whole thing, too. Yeah, he's not calling defensive plays but you have to give him credit for getting the talent here in terms of coaching. Look at some of the coaches he's brought here:  Caldwell, Kubiak, Frazier, Pagano, Monachino, Austin, Castillo, Rosburg. Not one of those guys pre-dates Harbaugh here. Furthermore, they all seemed to do good things with this team to some capacity. He was especially instrumental in bringing Frazier and Kubiak here. 

And people talk about firing him. I'm not trying to turn this into a Harbaugh thread, but it's an interesting aspect that is forgotten in the scheme of things but if things were bad, this would be a subject broached.