49ers Offensive Line

The reality of carrying one more offensive lineman like Hance is they don't have a ton of faith in their depth or possibly one of the rookies.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by GorefullBore:

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by thl408:
Do injury free OLmen come to SF and get injured more often? That's something to consider. There are so many variables that I think we'd need 10-15 years of data to find any association between scheme and injuries.

100%. Let's see some data before making definitive statements.

A theory is not a definitive statement. Also, it's football. Good luck finding anything that's a clear causation and not just correlation.

I think what we're doing with 'scheme causes injuries' is hypothesizing.

About half the league uses some zone concepts in their scheme, so I don't get that one.

Since 2019, the 49ers have noticeably increased the variety of their run game. 2017 and 2018 was high volume of outside zone from what I remember. I do remember at the start of 2019 noticing a real expansion of the run game. I did some digging and saw that the 49er guards have been very healthy.

LTomlinson, 0 games injured since 2019
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/T/TomlLa01.htm

Mike Person missed two games in 2019 (none in 2018, left team after 2019).
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/P/PersMi00.htm

Brunskill 0 games missed as a guard in 2020 and 2021
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/B/BrunDa00.htm

So perhaps it's the Center and Tackles that are the only ones getting injured due to scheme, or that scheme doesn't affect injuries. Again, too little data to tell, but it seems odd that guards stay healthy while Center and Tackles don't. IMO, I don't think this 49er scheme is a big factor in OL injuries - it's simply, 'dumb luck' or 'injuries happen', until we can actually get valid data stating otherwise.

NC, maybe we can refine the hypothesis to '49ers scheme causes injuries to Tackles and Center', but now it seems we are trying to cram things to force it to make sense.

This. How about we don't give big contracts to centers that have a history of being injured? It's just weird to me, if a guy gets his leg rolled up how does that have anything to do with scheme? It doesn't…it's part of playing the position.

So far you're the only one who's said that.

Going back many pages I listed the grand number of unique OL, TE and RB's needed to run this system HERE over the past 5 years. Nobody said an injury like this is part of that. You're focusing on one example while completely missing the point/theory/hypothesis.

With the numbers Kyle is keeping, he's clearly recognized the point/theory/hypothesis himself while a few of you bebate me otherwise. Which is fine...it was just a theory/hypothesis and not stated as fact (despite the #'s).

I'm focusing on the majority of injuries to lineman. You're acting like them running out in space is getting them hurt. Which isn't true. Every damn team has OZ concepts. Half the league runs some sort of shanahan offense. Why is Tampa's lineman all getting hurt in PRACTICE? It's because it's a position in the trenches with huge humans failing on the ground. It's not rocket science.

Who cares how many guys he keeps on the OL? They have a bunch of young players and are trying to develop as many as possible. The PS numbers have increased to keep more guys. Go look around the league they ALL have a ton of lineman on their rosters. There's nothing super unique with what they're doing…regardless of how much you're trying to grasp at straws to prove something that isn't there.

Go back and reread this topic again. We are talking about the reliance on the OL (TE/RB), volume esp. run blocking and complexity (ask) of the system potentiality running through OL, TE and RB's here. Like thl noted, Kyle's variant (philosophy/how) of the offense here is different than the others even though it's the same "scheme."

HERE, we had had to use a massive volume to get through it annually. If you don't think that's scheme/philosophy-related I'd love to hear your theory on what it is...hence the discussion topic you guys get so worked up over. Which is weird given you yourself know we've run through a grocery long list of them.

Kyle tells you again right here from the HP article. Kyle gets it. But keep telling me this system here doesn't eat through OL/TE/RB's.

"We didn't really expect for [Mason] to be where he is at," Shanahan admitted Thursday on KNBR's Tolbert & Copes show. "We thought we'd be able to keep four backs and keep him on [the] practice squad (5). But the way he turned it on at the end of camp and practice, and then what he showed in those preseason games, we really felt we were going to lose him. And we actually know we were going to."

"I look at our group of running backs and, four years in a row, we've used all four of our guys within the first six weeks," Shanahan shared. "Last year, we were down to our third running back in Week 2. Actually, in Week 2, we were putting a running back in the game who I was calling him by [his] number, and so was Jimmy [Garoppolo] because we didn't know his name yet. So we were asking the number of the back if he knew how to run power while he was in the huddle during a timeout.

"I'm a little scarred from that stuff, so it's really hard for us to lose guys that have first- and second-down running ability. Those are the things that you really value because you can have these traits of guys who are good on third down, do a little bit of everything, but when you lose that first- and second-down running back, for what we do offensively, it's a little tough to function.

"And that's what JP Mason showed so much, I thought, in the preseason, that he has the capability, like some of our other guys—like Ty, like Elijah—to be a first- and second-down starting running back. And that's something that we value too much."

What does this prove lol? Great they found another UDFA RB and didn't want to lose him to waivers. They dropped Sermon to keep him.

KC has 4 RBs and a FB on their final roster they have 4 TEs on their roster. Tampa bay has 4 RBs and 4 TEs on their final roster as well. LA chargers have 4 RBs and a FB. Rams have 4 RBs on their final roster etc etc.

you act like SF is doing something different compared to the rest of the league and that's not true.

It proves my exact point and why Kyle feels the need to overstock HERE at all three of those positions including the PS. Extra injuries are going to happen there. And that's why our volume (e.g. 32 unique OL in just 5 years) is so high.

Originally posted by NYniner85:
The reality of carting one more offensive lineman like Hance is they don't have a ton of faith in their depth or possibly one of the rookies.

LOL. And that's because Mike McGlinchey is still iffy off of injuries and Brunskill is just as iffy for week 1 b/c of his hammy grade. And those are because McKivitz had to try out at RT (fail) because J.Moore was injured most of camp. LOL

Brendel might have won the C position by default because of Brunskill's injury.

Get it now?

Originally posted by jonnydel:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by NCommand:
I wrote down your original projection/guestimate with all of ours at the time.

If you're changing it now, that's cool.

No need for you to take offense to your own projection.

And tossing out 500-550 passing attempts is still bottom of the league lol. We had 515 passing attempts last yr. Having 550 passing attempts would put them 20th in the league in passing. There's nothing to change dude. It's still not some high end passing stats if they throw 550 times next yr.

LOL. You're debating with yourself here. Literally.

But 550 to 450 IS pass-centric...for us.

No you are lol. You're talking about 550 passing attempts like it's some massive number, but if you go look at passing attempts last yr it's not….and they had 515 passing attempts not 450. Use the correct numbers dude.

This is hilarious. 808 asked who in here thought we'd become pass centric now with Trey (e.g. higher than what we've typically been doing). I noted of the group, who made predictions (for fun), you had the highest by far. It sounds like you're readjusting down after seeing we're keeping 10 OL, 5 RB's and 4 TE's. You're getting all worked up over your own prediction and a non-story.

No you again make everything dramatic and over the top.

No I'm saying what I've been saying in here…you just choose to make stuff up. We threw more than ran it last yr. Fact. We did not pass the ball 450x like you said….We spent 3 1sts on a QB, so any objective person would assume they will probably throw the ball a little more. Whether it's this yr or a yr from now. I don't see how that some wild thing to say. I NEVER stated we'd be a Brady in TB type offense. I have said we will run the ball as much as we can…also tossing out dumb hypotheticals like passing attempts is silly. Its all related to how the team is doing game to game. Nick Mullens in his 8 starts in 2018 was avg almost 35 passing attempts a game…over a 17 week season that's almost 590 passing attempts…why is that? Because we weren't a good football team and he HAD to throw the ball.

so if you're gonna toss my name out there at least add the whole context of the convo. Thanks

What are you babbling about now? You're all over the place.

What's your new prediction. 550 down to what?

YAC smartly adjusted his down too recently from 530/485 to 50/50.

I'll stick to my original: 500 Rushing Attempts & 515 Passing Attempts.

Nope I'm f**king consistent in my stance. You're the one tossing my name out for no damn reason…dramatizing my take. Only one babbling in this thread (for yrs) is you.

I don't care about predications…it's a stupid thing to qualify RIGHT NOW. s**t changes based on injuries and how everyone else plays. Like I said look at Nick Mullens numbers in 2018.

In a perfect world every team would love to run the ball 600 times because that means they're winning the majority of every game. We ALL know Kyle's offense is based on OZ/PA that's the backbone of it. Spending up for a QB means he wants a little more…like having the ability to use the whole field and yeah probably not being last in the league in passing attempts.

You think Kyle wouldn't love every game to be like the 2019 playoffs? I do. If we passed 8-10x a game and ran for over 7 YPA every game Kyle would be ecstatic.

Trey can run, Kyle has talked umpteen million times about Trey adding to the run game by forcing 11 on 11 football, we kept 4 TE's, 5 RB's 10 OL and Deebo is still gonna play wideback with only 5 WR's. If that doesn't scream, "were gonna run the ball 60x a game" I don't know what does, lol.

Not post related but you and John Chapman last night were excellent. I can't wait to see you both again on your channel when you do another episode. Thank you for the content. I learn something new from you every time.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by GorefullBore:

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by thl408:
Do injury free OLmen come to SF and get injured more often? That's something to consider. There are so many variables that I think we'd need 10-15 years of data to find any association between scheme and injuries.

100%. Let's see some data before making definitive statements.

A theory is not a definitive statement. Also, it's football. Good luck finding anything that's a clear causation and not just correlation.

I think what we're doing with 'scheme causes injuries' is hypothesizing.

About half the league uses some zone concepts in their scheme, so I don't get that one.

Since 2019, the 49ers have noticeably increased the variety of their run game. 2017 and 2018 was high volume of outside zone from what I remember. I do remember at the start of 2019 noticing a real expansion of the run game. I did some digging and saw that the 49er guards have been very healthy.

LTomlinson, 0 games injured since 2019
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/T/TomlLa01.htm

Mike Person missed two games in 2019 (none in 2018, left team after 2019).
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/P/PersMi00.htm

Brunskill 0 games missed as a guard in 2020 and 2021
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/B/BrunDa00.htm

So perhaps it's the Center and Tackles that are the only ones getting injured due to scheme, or that scheme doesn't affect injuries. Again, too little data to tell, but it seems odd that guards stay healthy while Center and Tackles don't. IMO, I don't think this 49er scheme is a big factor in OL injuries - it's simply, 'dumb luck' or 'injuries happen', until we can actually get valid data stating otherwise.

NC, maybe we can refine the hypothesis to '49ers scheme causes injuries to Tackles and Center', but now it seems we are trying to cram things to force it to make sense.

This. How about we don't give big contracts to centers that have a history of being injured? It's just weird to me, if a guy gets his leg rolled up how does that have anything to do with scheme? It doesn't…it's part of playing the position.

So far you're the only one who's said that.

Going back many pages I listed the grand number of unique OL, TE and RB's needed to run this system HERE over the past 5 years. Nobody said an injury like this is part of that. You're focusing on one example while completely missing the point/theory/hypothesis.

With the numbers Kyle is keeping, he's clearly recognized the point/theory/hypothesis himself while a few of you bebate me otherwise. Which is fine...it was just a theory/hypothesis and not stated as fact (despite the #'s).

I'm focusing on the majority of injuries to lineman. You're acting like them running out in space is getting them hurt. Which isn't true. Every damn team has OZ concepts. Half the league runs some sort of shanahan offense. Why is Tampa's lineman all getting hurt in PRACTICE? It's because it's a position in the trenches with huge humans failing on the ground. It's not rocket science.

Who cares how many guys he keeps on the OL? They have a bunch of young players and are trying to develop as many as possible. The PS numbers have increased to keep more guys. Go look around the league they ALL have a ton of lineman on their rosters. There's nothing super unique with what they're doing…regardless of how much you're trying to grasp at straws to prove something that isn't there.

Go back and reread this topic again. We are talking about the reliance on the OL (TE/RB), volume esp. run blocking and complexity (ask) of the system potentiality running through OL, TE and RB's here. Like thl noted, Kyle's variant (philosophy/how) of the offense here is different than the others even though it's the same "scheme."

HERE, we had had to use a massive volume to get through it annually. If you don't think that's scheme/philosophy-related I'd love to hear your theory on what it is...hence the discussion topic you guys get so worked up over. Which is weird given you yourself know we've run through a grocery long list of them.

Kyle tells you again right here from the HP article. Kyle gets it. But keep telling me this system here doesn't eat through OL/TE/RB's.

"We didn't really expect for [Mason] to be where he is at," Shanahan admitted Thursday on KNBR's Tolbert & Copes show. "We thought we'd be able to keep four backs and keep him on [the] practice squad (5). But the way he turned it on at the end of camp and practice, and then what he showed in those preseason games, we really felt we were going to lose him. And we actually know we were going to."

"I look at our group of running backs and, four years in a row, we've used all four of our guys within the first six weeks," Shanahan shared. "Last year, we were down to our third running back in Week 2. Actually, in Week 2, we were putting a running back in the game who I was calling him by [his] number, and so was Jimmy [Garoppolo] because we didn't know his name yet. So we were asking the number of the back if he knew how to run power while he was in the huddle during a timeout.

"I'm a little scarred from that stuff, so it's really hard for us to lose guys that have first- and second-down running ability. Those are the things that you really value because you can have these traits of guys who are good on third down, do a little bit of everything, but when you lose that first- and second-down running back, for what we do offensively, it's a little tough to function.

"And that's what JP Mason showed so much, I thought, in the preseason, that he has the capability, like some of our other guys—like Ty, like Elijah—to be a first- and second-down starting running back. And that's something that we value too much."

What does this prove lol? Great they found another UDFA RB and didn't want to lose him to waivers. They dropped Sermon to keep him.

KC has 4 RBs and a FB on their final roster they have 4 TEs on their roster. Tampa bay has 4 RBs and 4 TEs on their final roster as well. LA chargers have 4 RBs and a FB. Rams have 4 RBs on their final roster etc etc.

you act like SF is doing something different compared to the rest of the league and that's not true.

It proves my exact point and why Kyle feels the need to overstock HERE at all three of those positions including the PS. Extra injuries are going to happen there. And that's why our volume (e.g. 32 unique OL in just 5 years) is so high.

Lol it most certainly doesn't prove that…what it proves is you're not looking at final rosters across the league where a ton of teams have 4 RBs. At least 3 TEs and have 9+ lineman.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by NYniner85:
The reality of carting one more offensive lineman like Hance is they don't have a ton of faith in their depth or possibly one of the rookies.

LOL. And that's because Mike McGlinchey is still iffy off of injuries and Brunskill is just as iffy for week 1 b/c of his hammy grade. And those are because McKivitz had to try out at RT (fail) because J.Moore was injured most of camp. LOL

Brendel might have won the C position by default because of Brunskill's injury.

Get it now?

Carrying ONE extra lineman that got cut doesn't prove anything outside the fact that they don't have a ton of faith in their depth and want a guy that has starts under his belt. You're trying so hard to make your point the truth and it's funny to watch you try and spin anything into backing up your stance.

This has absolutely NOTHING to do with the main point you've been trying to make…which is scheme gets lineman hurt. It's simply not true and there's no data to back it up across the league.

lineman get hurt because they play in the trenches and have huge humans falling down all around their legs. That's it. I know that's hard to grasp. Maybe SF needs to stop giving out big contracts or draft dudes that have a history getting hurt. Ever think that's what it is?

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by GorefullBore:

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by thl408:
Do injury free OLmen come to SF and get injured more often? That's something to consider. There are so many variables that I think we'd need 10-15 years of data to find any association between scheme and injuries.

100%. Let's see some data before making definitive statements.

A theory is not a definitive statement. Also, it's football. Good luck finding anything that's a clear causation and not just correlation.

I think what we're doing with 'scheme causes injuries' is hypothesizing.

About half the league uses some zone concepts in their scheme, so I don't get that one.

Since 2019, the 49ers have noticeably increased the variety of their run game. 2017 and 2018 was high volume of outside zone from what I remember. I do remember at the start of 2019 noticing a real expansion of the run game. I did some digging and saw that the 49er guards have been very healthy.

LTomlinson, 0 games injured since 2019
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/T/TomlLa01.htm

Mike Person missed two games in 2019 (none in 2018, left team after 2019).
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/P/PersMi00.htm

Brunskill 0 games missed as a guard in 2020 and 2021
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/B/BrunDa00.htm

So perhaps it's the Center and Tackles that are the only ones getting injured due to scheme, or that scheme doesn't affect injuries. Again, too little data to tell, but it seems odd that guards stay healthy while Center and Tackles don't. IMO, I don't think this 49er scheme is a big factor in OL injuries - it's simply, 'dumb luck' or 'injuries happen', until we can actually get valid data stating otherwise.

NC, maybe we can refine the hypothesis to '49ers scheme causes injuries to Tackles and Center', but now it seems we are trying to cram things to force it to make sense.

This. How about we don't give big contracts to centers that have a history of being injured? It's just weird to me, if a guy gets his leg rolled up how does that have anything to do with scheme? It doesn't…it's part of playing the position.

So far you're the only one who's said that.

Going back many pages I listed the grand number of unique OL, TE and RB's needed to run this system HERE over the past 5 years. Nobody said an injury like this is part of that. You're focusing on one example while completely missing the point/theory/hypothesis.

With the numbers Kyle is keeping, he's clearly recognized the point/theory/hypothesis himself while a few of you bebate me otherwise. Which is fine...it was just a theory/hypothesis and not stated as fact (despite the #'s).

I'm focusing on the majority of injuries to lineman. You're acting like them running out in space is getting them hurt. Which isn't true. Every damn team has OZ concepts. Half the league runs some sort of shanahan offense. Why is Tampa's lineman all getting hurt in PRACTICE? It's because it's a position in the trenches with huge humans failing on the ground. It's not rocket science.

Who cares how many guys he keeps on the OL? They have a bunch of young players and are trying to develop as many as possible. The PS numbers have increased to keep more guys. Go look around the league they ALL have a ton of lineman on their rosters. There's nothing super unique with what they're doing…regardless of how much you're trying to grasp at straws to prove something that isn't there.

Go back and reread this topic again. We are talking about the reliance on the OL (TE/RB), volume esp. run blocking and complexity (ask) of the system potentiality running through OL, TE and RB's here. Like thl noted, Kyle's variant (philosophy/how) of the offense here is different than the others even though it's the same "scheme."

HERE, we had had to use a massive volume to get through it annually. If you don't think that's scheme/philosophy-related I'd love to hear your theory on what it is...hence the discussion topic you guys get so worked up over. Which is weird given you yourself know we've run through a grocery long list of them.

Kyle tells you again right here from the HP article. Kyle gets it. But keep telling me this system here doesn't eat through OL/TE/RB's.

"We didn't really expect for [Mason] to be where he is at," Shanahan admitted Thursday on KNBR's Tolbert & Copes show. "We thought we'd be able to keep four backs and keep him on [the] practice squad (5). But the way he turned it on at the end of camp and practice, and then what he showed in those preseason games, we really felt we were going to lose him. And we actually know we were going to."

"I look at our group of running backs and, four years in a row, we've used all four of our guys within the first six weeks," Shanahan shared. "Last year, we were down to our third running back in Week 2. Actually, in Week 2, we were putting a running back in the game who I was calling him by [his] number, and so was Jimmy [Garoppolo] because we didn't know his name yet. So we were asking the number of the back if he knew how to run power while he was in the huddle during a timeout.

"I'm a little scarred from that stuff, so it's really hard for us to lose guys that have first- and second-down running ability. Those are the things that you really value because you can have these traits of guys who are good on third down, do a little bit of everything, but when you lose that first- and second-down running back, for what we do offensively, it's a little tough to function.

"And that's what JP Mason showed so much, I thought, in the preseason, that he has the capability, like some of our other guys—like Ty, like Elijah—to be a first- and second-down starting running back. And that's something that we value too much."

What does this prove lol? Great they found another UDFA RB and didn't want to lose him to waivers. They dropped Sermon to keep him.

KC has 4 RBs and a FB on their final roster they have 4 TEs on their roster. Tampa bay has 4 RBs and 4 TEs on their final roster as well. LA chargers have 4 RBs and a FB. Rams have 4 RBs on their final roster etc etc.

you act like SF is doing something different compared to the rest of the league and that's not true.

It proves my exact point and why Kyle feels the need to overstock HERE at all three of those positions including the PS. Extra injuries are going to happen there. And that's why our volume (e.g. 32 unique OL in just 5 years) is so high.

Lol it most certainly doesn't prove that…what it proves is you're not looking at final rosters across the league where a ton of teams have 4 RBs. At least 3 TEs and have 9+ lineman.

32.

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by jonnydel:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by NCommand:
I wrote down your original projection/guestimate with all of ours at the time.

If you're changing it now, that's cool.

No need for you to take offense to your own projection.

And tossing out 500-550 passing attempts is still bottom of the league lol. We had 515 passing attempts last yr. Having 550 passing attempts would put them 20th in the league in passing. There's nothing to change dude. It's still not some high end passing stats if they throw 550 times next yr.

LOL. You're debating with yourself here. Literally.

But 550 to 450 IS pass-centric...for us.

No you are lol. You're talking about 550 passing attempts like it's some massive number, but if you go look at passing attempts last yr it's not….and they had 515 passing attempts not 450. Use the correct numbers dude.

This is hilarious. 808 asked who in here thought we'd become pass centric now with Trey (e.g. higher than what we've typically been doing). I noted of the group, who made predictions (for fun), you had the highest by far. It sounds like you're readjusting down after seeing we're keeping 10 OL, 5 RB's and 4 TE's. You're getting all worked up over your own prediction and a non-story.

No you again make everything dramatic and over the top.

No I'm saying what I've been saying in here…you just choose to make stuff up. We threw more than ran it last yr. Fact. We did not pass the ball 450x like you said….We spent 3 1sts on a QB, so any objective person would assume they will probably throw the ball a little more. Whether it's this yr or a yr from now. I don't see how that some wild thing to say. I NEVER stated we'd be a Brady in TB type offense. I have said we will run the ball as much as we can…also tossing out dumb hypotheticals like passing attempts is silly. Its all related to how the team is doing game to game. Nick Mullens in his 8 starts in 2018 was avg almost 35 passing attempts a game…over a 17 week season that's almost 590 passing attempts…why is that? Because we weren't a good football team and he HAD to throw the ball.

so if you're gonna toss my name out there at least add the whole context of the convo. Thanks

What are you babbling about now? You're all over the place.

What's your new prediction. 550 down to what?

YAC smartly adjusted his down too recently from 530/485 to 50/50.

I'll stick to my original: 500 Rushing Attempts & 515 Passing Attempts.

Nope I'm f**king consistent in my stance. You're the one tossing my name out for no damn reason…dramatizing my take. Only one babbling in this thread (for yrs) is you.

I don't care about predications…it's a stupid thing to qualify RIGHT NOW. s**t changes based on injuries and how everyone else plays. Like I said look at Nick Mullens numbers in 2018.

In a perfect world every team would love to run the ball 600 times because that means they're winning the majority of every game. We ALL know Kyle's offense is based on OZ/PA that's the backbone of it. Spending up for a QB means he wants a little more…like having the ability to use the whole field and yeah probably not being last in the league in passing attempts.

You think Kyle wouldn't love every game to be like the 2019 playoffs? I do. If we passed 8-10x a game and ran for over 7 YPA every game Kyle would be ecstatic.

Trey can run, Kyle has talked umpteen million times about Trey adding to the run game by forcing 11 on 11 football, we kept 4 TE's, 5 RB's 10 OL and Deebo is still gonna play wideback with only 5 WR's. If that doesn't scream, "were gonna run the ball 60x a game" I don't know what does, lol.

Not post related but you and John Chapman last night were excellent. I can't wait to see you both again on your channel when you do another episode. Thank you for the content. I learn something new from you every time.

🤜🤛 much appreciated. John is flying out to the Chicago game on Thursday(luckeeeeee) and I work a 12 hour day on Wednesday and neiyehe Monday nor Tuesday worked so we're gonna shoot to have something out the Thursday after opening weekend.

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by NCommand:
I wrote down your original projection/guestimate with all of ours at the time.

If you're changing it now, that's cool.

No need for you to take offense to your own projection.

And tossing out 500-550 passing attempts is still bottom of the league lol. We had 515 passing attempts last yr. Having 550 passing attempts would put them 20th in the league in passing. There's nothing to change dude. It's still not some high end passing stats if they throw 550 times next yr.

LOL. You're debating with yourself here. Literally.

But 550 to 450 IS pass-centric...for us.

No you are lol. You're talking about 550 passing attempts like it's some massive number, but if you go look at passing attempts last yr it's not….and they had 515 passing attempts not 450. Use the correct numbers dude.

This is hilarious. 808 asked who in here thought we'd become pass centric now with Trey (e.g. higher than what we've typically been doing). I noted of the group, who made predictions (for fun), you had the highest by far. It sounds like you're readjusting down after seeing we're keeping 10 OL, 5 RB's and 4 TE's. You're getting all worked up over your own prediction and a non-story.

No you again make everything dramatic and over the top.

No I'm saying what I've been saying in here…you just choose to make stuff up. We threw more than ran it last yr. Fact. We did not pass the ball 450x like you said….We spent 3 1sts on a QB, so any objective person would assume they will probably throw the ball a little more. Whether it's this yr or a yr from now. I don't see how that some wild thing to say. I NEVER stated we'd be a Brady in TB type offense. I have said we will run the ball as much as we can…also tossing out dumb hypotheticals like passing attempts is silly. Its all related to how the team is doing game to game. Nick Mullens in his 8 starts in 2018 was avg almost 35 passing attempts a game…over a 17 week season that's almost 590 passing attempts…why is that? Because we weren't a good football team and he HAD to throw the ball.

so if you're gonna toss my name out there at least add the whole context of the convo. Thanks

What are you babbling about now? You're all over the place.

What's your new prediction. 550 down to what?

YAC smartly adjusted his down too recently from 530/485 to 50/50.

I'll stick to my original: 500 Rushing Attempts & 515 Passing Attempts.

When I made my original prediction, I didn't really account for Trey's designed runs and scrambles which may skew those numbers a bit or if pass pro is sub-par, skew them a lot.

Makes perfect sense. I still might adjust mine down a bit as well. No biggie. It's just for fun anyhow.

Originally posted by jonnydel:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by NCommand:
I wrote down your original projection/guestimate with all of ours at the time.

If you're changing it now, that's cool.

No need for you to take offense to your own projection.

And tossing out 500-550 passing attempts is still bottom of the league lol. We had 515 passing attempts last yr. Having 550 passing attempts would put them 20th in the league in passing. There's nothing to change dude. It's still not some high end passing stats if they throw 550 times next yr.

LOL. You're debating with yourself here. Literally.

But 550 to 450 IS pass-centric...for us.

No you are lol. You're talking about 550 passing attempts like it's some massive number, but if you go look at passing attempts last yr it's not….and they had 515 passing attempts not 450. Use the correct numbers dude.

This is hilarious. 808 asked who in here thought we'd become pass centric now with Trey (e.g. higher than what we've typically been doing). I noted of the group, who made predictions (for fun), you had the highest by far. It sounds like you're readjusting down after seeing we're keeping 10 OL, 5 RB's and 4 TE's. You're getting all worked up over your own prediction and a non-story.

No you again make everything dramatic and over the top.

No I'm saying what I've been saying in here…you just choose to make stuff up. We threw more than ran it last yr. Fact. We did not pass the ball 450x like you said….We spent 3 1sts on a QB, so any objective person would assume they will probably throw the ball a little more. Whether it's this yr or a yr from now. I don't see how that some wild thing to say. I NEVER stated we'd be a Brady in TB type offense. I have said we will run the ball as much as we can…also tossing out dumb hypotheticals like passing attempts is silly. Its all related to how the team is doing game to game. Nick Mullens in his 8 starts in 2018 was avg almost 35 passing attempts a game…over a 17 week season that's almost 590 passing attempts…why is that? Because we weren't a good football team and he HAD to throw the ball.

so if you're gonna toss my name out there at least add the whole context of the convo. Thanks

What are you babbling about now? You're all over the place.

What's your new prediction. 550 down to what?

YAC smartly adjusted his down too recently from 530/485 to 50/50.

I'll stick to my original: 500 Rushing Attempts & 515 Passing Attempts.

Nope I'm f**king consistent in my stance. You're the one tossing my name out for no damn reason…dramatizing my take. Only one babbling in this thread (for yrs) is you.

I don't care about predications…it's a stupid thing to qualify RIGHT NOW. s**t changes based on injuries and how everyone else plays. Like I said look at Nick Mullens numbers in 2018.

In a perfect world every team would love to run the ball 600 times because that means they're winning the majority of every game. We ALL know Kyle's offense is based on OZ/PA that's the backbone of it. Spending up for a QB means he wants a little more…like having the ability to use the whole field and yeah probably not being last in the league in passing attempts.

You think Kyle wouldn't love every game to be like the 2019 playoffs? I do. If we passed 8-10x a game and ran for over 7 YPA every game Kyle would be ecstatic.

Trey can run, Kyle has talked umpteen million times about Trey adding to the run game by forcing 11 on 11 football, we kept 4 TE's, 5 RB's 10 OL and Deebo is still gonna play wideback with only 5 WR's. If that doesn't scream, "were gonna run the ball 60x a game" I don't know what does, lol.

I literally said that any football team would love to have that outcome.

I never said this was gonna be a pass first team (like 70-30 or whatever he's making up), not sure why you're debating any of that with me. I said they would more than likely be in favor of using the whole field. I would expect SF to not be last in the league in passing 2 or 3 yrs from now. I'm not saying they will be Tampa or anything. I said around 550 passing attempts when he wanted me to toss a number to it…which imo is a dumb thing to even qualify right now. That would put them 20th in the league in passing attempts.

NC once again has greatly embellished my points to try and push some weird correlation about scheme injuries.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by NCommand:
I wrote down your original projection/guestimate with all of ours at the time.

If you're changing it now, that's cool.

No need for you to take offense to your own projection.

And tossing out 500-550 passing attempts is still bottom of the league lol. We had 515 passing attempts last yr. Having 550 passing attempts would put them 20th in the league in passing. There's nothing to change dude. It's still not some high end passing stats if they throw 550 times next yr.

LOL. You're debating with yourself here. Literally.

But 550 to 450 IS pass-centric...for us.

No you are lol. You're talking about 550 passing attempts like it's some massive number, but if you go look at passing attempts last yr it's not….and they had 515 passing attempts not 450. Use the correct numbers dude.

This is hilarious. 808 asked who in here thought we'd become pass centric now with Trey (e.g. higher than what we've typically been doing). I noted of the group, who made predictions (for fun), you had the highest by far. It sounds like you're readjusting down after seeing we're keeping 10 OL, 5 RB's and 4 TE's. You're getting all worked up over your own prediction and a non-story.

No you again make everything dramatic and over the top.

No I'm saying what I've been saying in here…you just choose to make stuff up. We threw more than ran it last yr. Fact. We did not pass the ball 450x like you said….We spent 3 1sts on a QB, so any objective person would assume they will probably throw the ball a little more. Whether it's this yr or a yr from now. I don't see how that some wild thing to say. I NEVER stated we'd be a Brady in TB type offense. I have said we will run the ball as much as we can…also tossing out dumb hypotheticals like passing attempts is silly. Its all related to how the team is doing game to game. Nick Mullens in his 8 starts in 2018 was avg almost 35 passing attempts a game…over a 17 week season that's almost 590 passing attempts…why is that? Because we weren't a good football team and he HAD to throw the ball.

so if you're gonna toss my name out there at least add the whole context of the convo. Thanks

What are you babbling about now? You're all over the place.

What's your new prediction. 550 down to what?

YAC smartly adjusted his down too recently from 530/485 to 50/50.

I'll stick to my original: 500 Rushing Attempts & 515 Passing Attempts.

Nope I'm f**king consistent in my stance. You're the one tossing my name out for no damn reason…dramatizing my take. Only one babbling in this thread (for yrs) is you.

I don't care about predications…it's a stupid thing to qualify RIGHT NOW. s**t changes based on injuries and how everyone else plays. Like I said look at Nick Mullens numbers in 2018.

In a perfect world every team would love to run the ball 600 times because that means they're winning the majority of every game. We ALL know Kyle's offense is based on OZ/PA that's the backbone of it. Spending up for a QB means he wants a little more…like having the ability to use the whole field and yeah probably not being last in the league in passing attempts.

NY makes a prediction (for fun).

"I don't care about predications" - NY85

Gets all worked up over his own prediction . That's NY.

I can't wait to see his PYMWYMI prediction.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:

Originally posted by NCommand:
HERE.

As to other teams, do they have regular annual OL injuries within a consistent scheme? Have they used 32 unique OL in 5 years as a result? Now carry 10 OL, 4-6 Backs and 4 TE's to compensate for this trend to carry out their run-centric philosophy?

You should stop

No surprise he didn't go do his research.

Maybe you could. LOL

Or I could just wait and let YAC do all the leg work like you do lol

Originally posted by jonnydel:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by NCommand:
I wrote down your original projection/guestimate with all of ours at the time.

If you're changing it now, that's cool.

No need for you to take offense to your own projection.

And tossing out 500-550 passing attempts is still bottom of the league lol. We had 515 passing attempts last yr. Having 550 passing attempts would put them 20th in the league in passing. There's nothing to change dude. It's still not some high end passing stats if they throw 550 times next yr.

LOL. You're debating with yourself here. Literally.

But 550 to 450 IS pass-centric...for us.

No you are lol. You're talking about 550 passing attempts like it's some massive number, but if you go look at passing attempts last yr it's not….and they had 515 passing attempts not 450. Use the correct numbers dude.

This is hilarious. 808 asked who in here thought we'd become pass centric now with Trey (e.g. higher than what we've typically been doing). I noted of the group, who made predictions (for fun), you had the highest by far. It sounds like you're readjusting down after seeing we're keeping 10 OL, 5 RB's and 4 TE's. You're getting all worked up over your own prediction and a non-story.

No you again make everything dramatic and over the top.

No I'm saying what I've been saying in here…you just choose to make stuff up. We threw more than ran it last yr. Fact. We did not pass the ball 450x like you said….We spent 3 1sts on a QB, so any objective person would assume they will probably throw the ball a little more. Whether it's this yr or a yr from now. I don't see how that some wild thing to say. I NEVER stated we'd be a Brady in TB type offense. I have said we will run the ball as much as we can…also tossing out dumb hypotheticals like passing attempts is silly. Its all related to how the team is doing game to game. Nick Mullens in his 8 starts in 2018 was avg almost 35 passing attempts a game…over a 17 week season that's almost 590 passing attempts…why is that? Because we weren't a good football team and he HAD to throw the ball.

so if you're gonna toss my name out there at least add the whole context of the convo. Thanks

What are you babbling about now? You're all over the place.

What's your new prediction. 550 down to what?

YAC smartly adjusted his down too recently from 530/485 to 50/50.

I'll stick to my original: 500 Rushing Attempts & 515 Passing Attempts.

Nope I'm f**king consistent in my stance. You're the one tossing my name out for no damn reason…dramatizing my take. Only one babbling in this thread (for yrs) is you.

I don't care about predications…it's a stupid thing to qualify RIGHT NOW. s**t changes based on injuries and how everyone else plays. Like I said look at Nick Mullens numbers in 2018.

In a perfect world every team would love to run the ball 600 times because that means they're winning the majority of every game. We ALL know Kyle's offense is based on OZ/PA that's the backbone of it. Spending up for a QB means he wants a little more…like having the ability to use the whole field and yeah probably not being last in the league in passing attempts.

You think Kyle wouldn't love every game to be like the 2019 playoffs? I do. If we passed 8-10x a game and ran for over 7 YPA every game Kyle would be ecstatic.

Trey can run, Kyle has talked umpteen million times about Trey adding to the run game by forcing 11 on 11 football, we kept 4 TE's, 5 RB's 10 OL and Deebo is still gonna play wideback with only 5 WR's. If that doesn't scream, "were gonna run the ball 60x a game" I don't know what does, lol.

And oddly enough, when you lean on the position groups heavily to accomplish this, more injuries happen to these groups, hence the stocking up on these. Such an odd theory. LOL

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Hoovtrain:

Originally posted by NCommand:
HERE.

As to other teams, do they have regular annual OL injuries within a consistent scheme? Have they used 32 unique OL in 5 years as a result? Now carry 10 OL, 4-6 Backs and 4 TE's to compensate for this trend to carry out their run-centric philosophy?

You should stop

No surprise he didn't go do his research.

Maybe you could. LOL

Or I could just wait and let YAC do all the leg work like you do lol

Oh yeah, I've never done leg work on PP concerns and injuries before. LOL.

I always enjoy the NC vs NY85 debates. I think my IQ went up a couple of points. I'm hovering just above zero now.