Originally posted by YACBros85:
Originally posted by NCommand:
Originally posted by YACBros85:
Originally posted by NCommand:
Originally posted by YACBros85:
Originally posted by NCommand:
Originally posted by YACBros85:
Originally posted by NCommand:
Originally posted by YACBros85:
Originally posted by NCommand:
Originally posted by tankle104:
Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
And this ignores the great designs Kyle called which got huge gains. It also ignores the strong possibility on a lot of those first and second downs that EXECUTION was the problem.
How about jimmy and the O did a great job of executing the plays on crucial downs that Kyle put in place? We can give both of them credit?
jimmy benefits from kyles system and play calling while Kyle benefits from Jimmys execution, accuracy, and composure.
Yup. Even if this was one of Kyle's most vanilla game plans ever.
The good news is if we play a 3rd string team in the playoffs, we know we can still have a come-from-behind win in the 4Q with a run-centric game plan playing behind the sticks.
When Mitchell got the ball on 1st down he had carries of 3 yds, 7 yds, 8 yds, 9 yds, 7 yds, 12 yds, 1 yd and 6 yds. When CMC got the ball on 1st down he had carries of 4 yds, -1 yd, -1 yd, 3 yds, 5 yds, 12 yds, 0 yds, 0 yds and -3 yds. When Deebo got the ball on 1st down he had carries of 15 yds, 5 yds and 0 yds. On 1st down, Jimmy threw 3 incompletions, was sacked once and kneeled once. Only 1 pass on 1st down that was completed didn't go for a 1st down but instead went for 8. And 1 pass on 1st down that would have moved the chains ended up being a fumble and a turnover. The only reason that 2nd and long stat that you are throwing around to knock Kyle exists is because most of CMC's 1st down carries went nowhere. Mitchell didn't have that problem running it on 1st down.
Back up a few more steps. The reason we're a 2nd and long offense is because every DC in the world knows we're running on first downs more than any other team with the exception of three others.
Post #50448
https://www.49erswebzone.com/forum/niners/187983-49ers-head-coach-kyle-shanahan-thread/page3364/
That is not QB-friendly. That is not OL-friendly. IMHO, of course.
So why did Mitchell have so much success on 1st down?
I'm not arguing it still can't work. Like I said, it's no secret. The issue is when it's clear the defense is adjusting to it and winning.
If you want to get granular and say one RB was more successful, that's fine.
But the point is, Kyle's run-centric first-down tendency does not make life easy on that OL, RB and eventually, the QB and the passing game. It leaves no room for error esp. when the volume is so small to overcome so many 2nd and longs.
That starts with Kyle. But we as a fan base typically spend our time down stream with the passing game.
Kyle can make this a whole lot easier on everyone. And we've seen that first hand when he has come out more pass-centric and balanced.
But when we did throw the ball and the pass was completed it ended up as a 1st down a majority of the time. So there was no opportunity for a 2nd and short. When Mitchell ran the ball, it ended up being 2nd and short a majority of the time. When CMC ran the ball, it ended up being 2nd and long a majority of the time. You don't see the pattern?
It's not just Kyle here either. Penalties too and poor execution lead to a number of 2nd and longs. Not just the rushing attempts. It's really his first down offense but a big part of that IS the obvious tendency to run on first downs in between the tackles.
To your other point, it was clear to me Mitchell was clearly the better rusher. But that was another tendency. Kyle stuck with CMC on a series and then Mitchell on a series. But both were only used in the rush game minus a pass or two.
Mitchell had no issues running the ball in between the tackles on 1st down inspite of this known tendency you speak of. CMC is not a downhill runner. Calling CMC's number on 1st down to run in between the tackles was the real issue and I hope that Kyle sees that on film and gets that corrected ASAP.
That's fair. Another tell is that Juice is in there with one or the other. My guess is Mitchell and Juice are probably more in sync with the intricate blocking scheme together vs. CMC who's still learning all of the nuances thus far.
To elaborate, DL just noted on his pod even further than I did. We were actually cumulatively negative on 1st AND 2nd downs.
Also, this still is not a formula for making life easier on a QB or the OL...the original point.
Not sure why we don't evaluate a play caller like we do a backup QB. Is there any scenario out there where we're equally critical of a game plan and play caller (not directed to you, YAC)?
If Mitchell wasn't finding the success he was having than it would be justifiable to question the playcaller on 1st downs. If receivers aren't getting open consistently because of coverage than it would be justifiable to question the playcaller. I just don't see the evidence that backs up the negative take on Kyle's playcalling.
As far as 2nd down situations, this is the first time I have seen it brought up. What is your evidence to back up your claim that 2nd down is also an issue when it comes to playcalling? Perhaps I should dig into those stats? But first, I'd like to see where you are coming from when it comes to 2nd down so that I am not doing the research for nothing.
It's his and Barrows, 'Here's the Catch,' podcast: A Sunday Night Comeback for the Niners
Advanced PFF stats. I'll try to get the time stamp for you. Edit:
32:40
I'm also not saying it wasn't a great game plan to start. I'm saying once it was obvious how they were defending it, he stuck with it making it very difficult for his QB and OL going forward.
[ Edited by NCommand on Nov 15, 2022 at 9:54 AM ]
Same thing with Sanfran talking about "further justification" like it was some back shoulder throw....lol.
