49ers Head Coach Kyle Shanahan Thread

Originally posted by qnnhan7:

As a former member of the organization put it: "Kyle b***hes about everything, and then his father has to fix it. He b***hes about the food in the cafeteria, he b***hes about the field, he b***hes about the equipment. He complains and then Mike takes care of it. Kyle is a big problem there. He is not well liked."
Several members of the organization said Kyle Shanahan was a cause of internal strife, surrounding himself with young coaches with inferior experience, and allowing for no checks and balances of outside voices in the offensive coaching rooms.

"Kyle's not that confident, so they set him up with a bunch of yes men rather than have some experienced coaches to push him. It's like Kyle is the pied piper and these kids just follow him around. I mean, Mike has been a head coach for 20 years -- usually a guy like that has a posse he can bring with him. So he's got Bobby Turner (running backs coach) here, and Slowik, and that's it. How does that happen? How does he end up hiring all of his son's buddies?
"What Mike has allowed to happen there, with that staff, there is no excuse for. There are guys on that staff who are just not qualified, and it shows up. Have you seen the quarterback develop? Look at (defensive ends Brian) Orakpo and (Ryan) Kerrigan? Are they progressing or regressing? Are you seeing the offensive lineman they drafted making it to the field?' How many players are getting the kind of NFL coaching you'd expect on that staff?"
The Redskins have had a succession of first-time wide receivers coaches on this staff, and the offensive staff has generally been devoid of experience other than Turner. Most of the offensive staff had less than two years of NFL experience before coming to Washington and even in those cases the two years weren't as actual position coaches, but as offensive assistants and low-level help.

Quarterbacks coach Matt LaFleur worked with Kyle Shanahan in Houston and had only two years experience as an "offensive assistant" with the Texans prior to becoming the Redskins QB coach. Similarly, receivers coach Mike McDaniel was a lower-level assistant on the Texans staff before coming to Washington. Tight ends coach Sean McVay's only prior NFL experience to joining Washington came in 2008 as an offensive assistant in Tampa.
"McVay is really the only one of those kids qualified to do what he's doing," said one member of the organization.

lol at the BS thrown at Kyle's way several years ago.

Hahaha...and those low-level guys are working their way up the ladder and even becoming a HC (McVay). Seems like what he's got going on now is the complete opposite of what these guys were crying about.

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

Amen!

Originally posted by NYniner85:
This!

I want to compete every year," Shanahan added. "But you never want to compete in one year at the expense of your future. I feel the situation that the Yorks have given us, we can make the right decisions. I'm always going to try to be an aggressive type of decision maker where you make the decision that improves your team right away but never at the expense of the future. And that's what we're trying to do through this process."

He gets it, It's a process. I want to be competitive, but not at the expense of costing us a chance at getting a FQB....winning enough games to be just out of reach for a game-changer is a great way to be the bills or a Jeff fisher run team .I'm fine with sucking one more yr, as long as the games are competitive...no 32nd ranked defense and 31st ranked offense s**t though.

VERY well put NY.

Originally posted by pasodoc9er:
NY, i understand what you are saying here, and why. But my take is that these two guys, John and kyle, are going to go all out to win every single last game they can, and the LT results of that be damned. I just don't see them dogging it to win a few less games. Now, if it is last 1/3 of season, and we are way out of it already, sure i could see them playing guys who are question marks for next yr and playing a lower caliber player....but not to lose but to find out any info they can about that particular player...or players.

If they have a shot at going 9-7 instead of 7-9, I think they go for it....the winning record , that is. If it is a matter of going 7-9 vs 4-10, sure i could see them start CJ for the last 3 or 4 games. But overall, they will NOT be going about this half hearted, or playing just well enough to lose. I think they bust their backsides to win as many as possible. If it gets us near the playoffs, with a draft pick somewhere 20-24...then i think they go for the better record and shot at playoffs.,,even with a much lesser first pick in draft. The beneficial mental /psychological effects , especially on guys like Joe S, are not to be discounted. That is, winning breeds more winning.

You could be as right as i am, but i just don't see these guys settling for anything less than the max wins they can get. If they can squeeze 9 Ws out of the season, even with no playoffs, i still think they go full steam ahead. Why? Because that is the way these two guys compete....pedal to the floor, and no brakes.

Admittedly , i could be all wrong and you 100% correct. It will be fascinating to see how they handle the # of Ws issue. Obviously if we come out of the gate like a rocket, (not that likely), then it may very well change their decisions on how they want to play it. But overall...i see these guys taking no prisoners and trying to win every single game we play. Their very wise decision NOT to go all in on a FR QB(when there was none), and same for #1 WR, allowed us to build OL, receiving corps(minus the #1), RBs(incl Juice), DL, LBs, CBs/S instead. That means that they passed on the best of not very good QB class and #1 WR to better the rest of the team. But for Ws...unless we are already out of it by game 9, i think they try to win every single one. If we are at 3 Ws after game 9 or 10...yes, then sure, play CJ on out and see what he has...and let the Ls pile up. But if we have even the minutest chance of getting in or near the playoffs...i think they go all in on that...ie, max out on Ws.

I just don't think either of our two head guys will settle for anything other than a W, even if it hurts us in draft. They are both young, smart, hopeful, and hell bent on winning it all. Neither one strikes me as playing anything less than the best we can do. To date , it would seem that kind of thinking is just not in their DNA.

Note: your point about the Bills and or Jeff Fisher, is well taken.

I think the only reason a fan wants his team to suck is to get those high draft picks. That is not always a guarantee that those picks turn out to be true blue chippers that they were advertised as on paper. That's only ONE of three ways to acquire players. The other two are as viable as the draft, and don't depend on the previous years won-loss record. All three ways to get players really force a team to get to mediocrity (8-8) without really too much trouble. (assuming the HC and front office are half way competent). To get from mediocrity to the required number of wins to make it to the playoffs is about 2 games (10-6) *usually* but not always gets you into the playoffs. From there a substantial part of making the super bowl is luck. 49ers win Super Bowl XXIII with a 10-6 regular season record, Super bowl XLII NY Gnats win with a 10-6 record, super bowl XLV Peckers win with a 10-6 record. So the *suck for Luck* thing really bugs me when folks say things like that. But that's just me.

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

"Stay the course!" ~ Nolan

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by pasodoc9er:

NY, i understand what you are saying here, and why. But my take is that these two guys, John and kyle, are going to go all out to win every single last game they can, and the LT results of that be damned. I just don't see them dogging it to win a few less games. Now, if it is last 1/3 of season, and we are way out of it already, sure i could see them playing guys who are question marks for next yr and playing a lower caliber player....but not to lose but to find out any info they can about that particular player...or players.

If they have a shot at going 9-7 instead of 7-9, I think they go for it....the winning record , that is. If it is a matter of going 7-9 vs 4-10, sure i could see them start CJ for the last 3 or 4 games. But overall, they will NOT be going about this half hearted, or playing just well enough to lose. I think they bust their backsides to win as many as possible. If it gets us near the playoffs, with a draft pick somewhere 20-24...then i think they go for the better record and shot at playoffs.,,even with a much lesser first pick in draft. The beneficial mental /psychological effects , especially on guys like Joe S, are not to be discounted. That is, winning breeds more winning.

You could be as right as i am, but i just don't see these guys settling for anything less than the max wins they can get. If they can squeeze 9 Ws out of the season, even with no playoffs, i still think they go full steam ahead. Why? Because that is the way these two guys compete....pedal to the floor, and no brakes.

Admittedly , i could be all wrong and you 100% correct. It will be fascinating to see how they handle the # of Ws issue. Obviously if we come out of the gate like a rocket, (not that likely), then it may very well change their decisions on how they want to play it. But overall...i see these guys taking no prisoners and trying to win every single game we play. Their very wise decision NOT to go all in on a FR QB(when there was none), and same for #1 WR, allowed us to build OL, receiving corps(minus the #1), RBs(incl Juice), DL, LBs, CBs/S instead. That means that they passed on the best of not very good QB class and #1 WR to better the rest of the team. But for Ws...unless we are already out of it by game 9, i think they try to win every single one. If we are at 3 Ws after game 9 or 10...yes, then sure, play CJ on out and see what he has...and let the Ls pile up. But if we have even the minutest chance of getting in or near the playoffs...i think they go all in on that...ie, max out on Ws.

I just don't think either of our two head guys will settle for anything other than a W, even if it hurts us in draft. They are both young, smart, hopeful, and hell bent on winning it all. Neither one strikes me as playing anything less than the best we can do. To date , it would seem that kind of thinking is just not in their DNA.

Note: your point about the Bills and or Jeff Fisher, is well taken.

I think the only reason a fan wants his team to suck is to get those high draft picks. That is not always a guarantee that those picks turn out to be true blue chippers that they were advertised as on paper. That's only ONE of three ways to acquire players. The other two are as viable as the draft, and don't depend on the previous years won-loss record. All three ways to get players really force a team to get to mediocrity (8-8) without really too much trouble. (assuming the HC and front office are half way competent). To get from mediocrity to the required number of wins to make it to the playoffs is about 2 games (10-6) *usually* but not always gets you into the playoffs. From there a substantial part of making the super bowl is luck. 49ers win Super Bowl XXIII with a 10-6 regular season record, Super bowl XLII NY Gnats win with a 10-6 record, super bowl XLV Peckers win with a 10-6 record. So the *suck for Luck* thing really bugs me when folks say things like that. But that's just me.

No one is saying tank, I'm saying I'd rather win 4 games & be competitive all yr then squeak out 7-8 wins and be out of reach for a top QB. This IS a QB driven league and unless a guy like Kirk becomes available you're not getting a FQB via trade or FA more than likely.

I don't want this team to me searching for a QB for the next 3+ yrs...I don't want guys like hoyer or Barkley being the starters for the next three yrs because we were lucky enough to win 7 games. I don't want to be mediocre for the next 4 yrs....you can say nothing is guaranteed in the draft till you're blue in the face, but more often then not that's where your finding your FQB, at the top of the draft. I'd rather our FO have the most options to get who they want.

This upcoming draft is looking like the 2004 draft as far as QB talent goes. I want SF to be part of that and if we manage to get Kirk, trade that pick for a kings ransom.

We aren't going to the playoffs this yr, so why not get your rookies the most experience possible, see who's got a future with us and go all in in 2018? I guess I'm look at the bigger picture.

You can do that after week 8 if needed...

But we also have 50 million we couldve spent but we didnt. Didnt wanna go for the gold cause its not a sprint...its a marathon race. Thats how im taking it.

We were right there with the Dolphins and Cawks at the end of the year last year as both those teams were fighting for playoffs and we had a depleted team playing for nothing and 31st ranked O/32 in D.

Im not expecting a winning record.. But i wouldnt be completely shocked .

No point spending $50 or $60 million on nothing..

Wait for value.

Originally posted by NYniner85:
No one is saying tank, I'm saying I'd rather win 4 games & be competitive all yr then squeak out 7-8 wins and be out of reach for a top QB. This IS a QB driven league and unless a guy like Kirk becomes available you're not getting a FQB via trade or FA more than likely.

I don't want this team to me searching for a QB for the next 3+ yrs...I don't want guys like hoyer or Barkley being the starters for the next three yrs because we were lucky enough to win 7 games. I don't want to be mediocre for the next 4 yrs....you can say nothing is guaranteed in the draft till you're blue in the face, but more often then not that's where your finding your FQB, at the top of the draft. I'd rather our FO have the most options to get who they want.

This upcoming draft is looking like the 2004 draft as far as QB talent goes. I want SF to be part of that and if we manage to get Kirk, trade that pick for a kings ransom.

We aren't going to the playoffs this yr, so why not get your rookies the most experience possible, see who's got a future with us and go all in in 2018? I guess I'm look at the bigger picture.

I agree with you that we need a franchise QB, but I don't think we have to competitively lose games at all to get a franchise QB. I think this HC is good enough to find a franchise QB via all three ways to acquire players. (draft, trade, free agency) and while I prefer him to use all the draft capital he needs to land a franchise QB in the draft. (that means I'm fine with him trading multiple high round draft picks from multiple years to get that FQB) I don't think he needs to. He's a good enough Coach to design a system around a first round draft pick and make him successful, as well as a 4rth rounder. Keep in mind Joe Cool was 3-6 in 1982 because he didn't have an adequate surrounding cast. Also, Greg Cook - was a Franchise QB according to Walsh, was lost due to injury in his first year. So not only do you have to *get* a FQB, but keep him healthy. That's where a run game and good O-linemen come into play. And if you surround good (but not great) QB's with a good supporting cast, you might still win a super bowl. Brad Johnson, Mark Rypien, Jim McMahon, Trent Dilfer, and Jeff Hostetler come to mind. Again, I'm agreeing with you - that having a FQB just makes thing so much easier for the fans and the whole organization though.

But... what he said about Kirk in this. link. is Pretty interesting comment, don't you think, considering who we drafted this year.

Kirk Cousins (Washington Redskins): "Kirk's one of the sharper guys I've been around. He processes things so fast. He lets it rip. He's as tough as can be. Like what I said about Rex (Grossman), he'll hang in there and doesn't flinch. Kirk has a chance to be a great quarterback some day."

Kyle loves Kirk and wants him soooooooooo bad.

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

No one is saying tank, I'm saying I'd rather win 4 games & be competitive all yr then squeak out 7-8 wins and be out of reach for a top QB. This IS a QB driven league and unless a guy like Kirk becomes available you're not getting a FQB via trade or FA more than likely.

I don't want this team to me searching for a QB for the next 3+ yrs...I don't want guys like hoyer or Barkley being the starters for the next three yrs because we were lucky enough to win 7 games. I don't want to be mediocre for the next 4 yrs....you can say nothing is guaranteed in the draft till you're blue in the face, but more often then not that's where your finding your FQB, at the top of the draft. I'd rather our FO have the most options to get who they want.

This upcoming draft is looking like the 2004 draft as far as QB talent goes. I want SF to be part of that and if we manage to get Kirk, trade that pick for a kings ransom.

We aren't going to the playoffs this yr, so why not get your rookies the most experience possible, see who's got a future with us and go all in in 2018? I guess I'm look at the bigger picture.

I agree with you that we need a franchise QB, but I don't think we have to competitively lose games at all to get a franchise QB. I think this HC is good enough to find a franchise QB via all three ways to acquire players. (draft, trade, free agency) and while I prefer him to use all the draft capital he needs to land a franchise QB in the draft. (that means I'm fine with him trading multiple high round draft picks from multiple years to get that FQB) I don't think he needs to. He's a good enough Coach to design a system around a first round draft pick and make him successful, as well as a 4rth rounder. Keep in mind Joe Cool was 3-6 in 1982 because he didn't have an adequate surrounding cast. Also, Greg Cook - was a Franchise QB according to Walsh, was lost due to injury in his first year. So not only do you have to *get* a FQB, but keep him healthy. That's where a run game and good O-linemen come into play. And if you surround good (but not great) QB's with a good supporting cast, you might still win a super bowl. Brad Johnson, Mark Rypien, Jim McMahon, Trent Dilfer, and Jeff Hostetler come to mind. Again, I'm agreeing with you - that having a FQB just makes thing so much easier for the fans and the whole organization though.

But... what he said about Kirk in this. link. is Pretty interesting comment, don't you think, considering who we drafted this year.

Kirk Cousins (Washington Redskins): "Kirk's one of the sharper guys I've been around. He processes things so fast. He lets it rip. He's as tough as can be. Like what I said about Rex (Grossman), he'll hang in there and doesn't flinch. Kirk has a chance to be a great quarterback some day."

I'm just looking at probability at the position and top picks give us the best chance at getting a top tier guy....other teams could also give up picks unless we have the pick

I hope he's not so full of himself to think it's all system and not talent....like I said I'm a fan of what he said about not messing with a better future to win one or more games this yr.

So you want us to Tank for Dart picks this year?

Originally posted by GoldenGateGlory:
So you want us to Tank for Dart picks this year?

I don't think he means it that way, but that's how it sounds like when I read his post.

Originally posted by NYniner85:
I'm just looking at probability at the position and top picks give us the best chance at getting a top tier guy....other teams could also give up picks unless we have the pick

I hope he's not so full of himself to think it's all system and not talent....like I said I'm a fan of what he said about not messing with a better future to win one or more games this yr.

Well, I think it's more of getting the right talent to fit the system. First rounder RG3 or second rounder Colin Kaepernick wouldn't fit in this system as well as a fourth round guy in Kirk Cousins. Then again Bret and Elway were very high round draft pics that were just as athletically gifted as Colin and RG3 that also did extremely well in this system too. If it's true that 2018 QB class is as strong as the draft nerds say - with an 8-8 record (or worse), I think there is going to be some high quality quarterbacks available to ShanaLynch in 2018 without needing to do any moves to trade up at all. In the past first rounds - Dan Marino was pick # 27, Jim Kelly was pick # 14, Big Ben was pick # 11, and I'm not even talking about QB's that have been chosen in the later rounds that have been FQB's. In other words, I think we can safely win 8 games and still have a great chance to get a FQB.

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by GoldenGateGlory:

So you want us to Tank for Dart picks this year?

I don't think he means it that way, but that's how it sounds like when I read his post.

If I have to choose between winning 4 games and being competitive all yr or squeaking out 7-8 wins and being out of reach for a chance at getting a FQB...I'll take the 4 wins