49ers Head Coach Kyle Shanahan Thread

Originally posted by thl408:

http://www.espn.com/blog/tennessee-titans/post/_/id/21184/titans-ability-to-stay-in-base-personnel-could-key-chance-vs-broncos
Tennessee has two or fewer receivers on the field a league-high 56 percent percent of the time. The Falcons are second at 55 percent, the Patriots third at 50 percent, the Bills fourth at 49 percent.

That was a stat from Dec 2016, so not an end of year stat. But shows how Kyle likes to keep the opposing D "slow" by keeping them in base. Keep the nose tackle on the field, and the nickel CB off the field.

I like that approach. Keep them in base, hit them with outside zone, don't let nose tackle be a short-area run plugger. Force him to chase.

Originally posted by thl408:
http://www.espn.com/blog/tennessee-titans/post/_/id/21184/titans-ability-to-stay-in-base-personnel-could-key-chance-vs-broncos
Tennessee has two or fewer receivers on the field a league-high 56 percent percent of the time. The Falcons are second at 55 percent, the Patriots third at 50 percent, the Bills fourth at 49 percent.

That was a stat from Dec 2016, so not an end of year stat. But shows how Kyle likes to keep the opposing D "slow" by keeping them in base. Keep the nose tackle on the field, and the nickel CB off the field.

Nice.

Juice is going to feast in this offense.

Originally posted by SofaKing:

Originally posted by thl408:
http://www.espn.com/blog/tennessee-titans/post/_/id/21184/titans-ability-to-stay-in-base-personnel-could-key-chance-vs-broncos
Tennessee has two or fewer receivers on the field a league-high 56 percent percent of the time. The Falcons are second at 55 percent, the Patriots third at 50 percent, the Bills fourth at 49 percent.

That was a stat from Dec 2016, so not an end of year stat. But shows how Kyle likes to keep the opposing D "slow" by keeping them in base. Keep the nose tackle on the field, and the nickel CB off the field.

I like that approach. Keep them in base, hit them with outside zone, don't let nose tackle be a short-area run plugger. Force him to chase.

Great if you have good TEs and FBs who can catch. Craig and Rathman ate up LB coverage.

Originally posted by 49er-from-Yavin-IV:

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by GoldenGateGlory:
Brady is a good QB and he brings his own balls inflated to a gauge pressure between 12.5 and 13.5 pounds per square inch (psi) or 86 to 93 kPa, .

Yeah, his super bowl wins will always have that asterisk "*" where it would refer to Deflate-Gate and Philm-Gate.

Those wins are as legit as any. Only someone with a grudge against Brady utters the word "asterisk". Sour grapes are sour grapes. Must be a Steelers, Raiders, Rams, Seahawks, Jets, Bills, Dolphins, Panthers, Eagles, Colts, Ravens, Broncos, Chargers, or Falcons fan. I'm so glad we never lost to the Patriots in an important game, otherwise I'd probably cry foul too for my team losing and I would be mistaken for doing so.

Our 5 super bowl wins, we never got caught cheating. I guess we were good at it? Usually when people get caught, they have been cheating a lot more often than they have been caught. So really, you are looking at one instance where they have been cheating - but how many more times have they done what they have been doing and *not got caught?*

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by Giedi:
I got these names from the draft nerd section. These guys know their draft .

Keller Chryst, Wilton Speight, Mike White, Clayton Thorson. These guys will be available in the lower rounds, but I'm just guessing. Chryst and Speight might fit Kyle's pro offense criteria and they just might be available in those 2nd-4rth rounds.

Trash...I already showed you of the 126 qbs drafted outside of the first (since 2004) 7 have done anything...5.5 % success rate. What are you baalke!?

I'm sure you can also give me the lotto numbers for the next million dollar lotto prize too, eh?

I don't know, maybe you are right, maybe not. But Keller would be the kind of QB I think Kyle would at least take a look at. He plays in a pro-style offense and he can be easily graded because of that. Same with Wilton. If they do well this next year - they just might be in the 2nd to 4rth rounds and I'm thinking Kyle can build a team around guys like these a lot easier than guys that play in the spread or run oriented kinds of offenses.

Originally posted by thl408:
http://www.espn.com/blog/tennessee-titans/post/_/id/21184/titans-ability-to-stay-in-base-personnel-could-key-chance-vs-broncos
Tennessee has two or fewer receivers on the field a league-high 56 percent percent of the time. The Falcons are second at 55 percent, the Patriots third at 50 percent, the Bills fourth at 49 percent.

That was a stat from Dec 2016, so not an end of year stat. But shows how Kyle likes to keep the opposing D "slow" by keeping them in base. Keep the nose tackle on the field, and the nickel CB off the field.

My memory is hazy, but I seem to recall that Bellicheat ignored his base defense in the 2nd half and exclusively played nickel that whole time and dared Atlanta to run. I don't know if I recollected right, but for some reason Atlanta's offense stalled in the 2nd half and I'm wondering if that was the case.

Originally posted by Giedi:

I'm sure you can also give me the lotto numbers for the next million dollar lotto prize too, eh?

I don't know, maybe you are right, maybe not. But Keller would be the kind of QB I think Kyle would at least take a look at. He plays in a pro-style offense and he can be easily graded because of that. Same with Wilton. If they do well this next year - they just might be in the 2nd to 4rth rounds and I'm thinking Kyle can build a team around guys like these a lot easier than guys that play in the spread or run oriented kinds of offenses.

It's odds man...it's 5.5% success rate since 2004 and that's looking at the top 32 picks vs 192 picks on a yearly basis. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand the odds are FAR from good.

If you want to continue to go down the baalke route and not value the QB position fine....good teams invest in it and that's a fact. It's 2017 not 1970 the game is played differently and the rules have made it so that the QB position is that much more important....go look at who gets paid the most. It's not a RB, OT, or any defensive player....it's the QB.

Originally posted by tjd808185:

The Jets huh good thing we got Shanny instead of Rex Ryan and Todd Bowles though. With his complex offense I don't see him jumping to develop a qb he's forced to play right away. He's going to want Cousins, Jimmy G 1st, to develop from the bench like Carr, Cousins 2nd. As long as we don't pull a Gruden and pass on the franchise qb I'm not complaining.

Yeah I'm all for Kirk or jimmy G and kyle could want them until he's blue in the face....doesn't mean he's gonna get either of them end of the day.

People in here wanted Bowles and chan Gailey was a pretty good offensive mind imo.

I'll keep quoting kyle..."you never want to compete in one yr at the expense of your future." That's what the Jets did competed in one yr at the expense of the future playing Fitz who knew Gailey's offense but everyone knew he was trash.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Yeah I'm all for Kirk or jimmy G and kyle could want them until he's blue in the face....doesn't mean he's gonna get either of them end of the day.

People in here wanted Bowles and chan Gailey was a pretty good offensive mind imo.

I'll keep quoting kyle..."you never want to compete in one yr at the expense of your future." That's what the Jets did competed in one yr at the expense of the future playing Fitz who knew Gailey's offense but everyone knew he was trash.

You want to provide the context of that quote because I highly doubt he's saying suck for luck and tank for picks. It could be saying slow and steady is a fine way to build so we're not going to run out and overpay every fa we see. Playing your inexperienced, unready rookie to sabotage him and intentionally lose games does not apply there.

As for the Jets they took the bridge route, the bridge overachieved year 1 but then grounded and now they'll see how their 2nd round pick fairs. In all likelihood they'll be picking top 5. Could be worse they could of went 1-15 year 1 and then took Goff the following year. 1st round picks have a 50% bust rate. To me you play it out and if the right guy is there you pull the trigger.

First play Kyle call as a Niner will be a run up the middle

Originally posted by NCommand:
Totally get that one! Like I said before, if Kyle's guy is in the first round, I want to be in position to get him. I just won't be surprised if that guy is later also given the current landscape.

Yeah, I wouldn't be surprised if his QB was later also. It's tough to evaluate QBs, does the QB elevate the talent, or does the Talent elevate the QB. I like the fact that Kyle doesn't pay attention to statistics, but really does the hard work of looking at da philm, and really understanding the offensive system they operate in. You see first round talent after first round talent bomb, and I think a big part of it is those GM's just mis-evaluating the QB talent and defensive coaches associated with them being clueless about that side with the GM's too.

Originally posted by tjd808185:

You want to provide the context of that quote because I highly doubt he's saying suck for luck and tank for picks. It could be saying slow and steady is a fine way to build so we're not going to run out and overpay every fa we see. Playing your inexperinced, unready rookie to sabotage him and intentionally lose games does not apply there.

As for the Jets they took the bridge route and the bridge fell out in year 2. They could of got Mitch for an easy trade up if they wanted but passed since they spent a 2nd on qb the year before. You want to look at failed strategy though let's look at yours. The Jags and Bradley. Bradley took Bortles in year 2 and he a 4 year leash which is as long as you get but still couldn't get over the hump since Bortles couldn't develop in time. There's no full proof plan.

"Shanahan went on to say that he isn't really looking at a timetable to turn things around in San Francisco. Team ownership has shown a commitment to him and Lynch and knows that the two are trying to rebuild the roster the right way."

"With that being said, 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." Did it look like they were aggressive with top end FAs this off season? We got a ton of lower tier FAs and one true pro-bowler and he is a FB.

Once again for the 100th time I didn't say tank...I've been saying play the young players more, play CJ at some pt to see what you have. We don't have to be a 7 win team this yr because we are literally starting from the ground up. Hoyer isn't the future and winning enough games to put us out of reach for one of the top QBs in a draft class, that I think will be on par with the 2004 isn't smart....you call in sabotage, I call it learning. Young players that ARE a part of this future need snaps and we aren't even close to a playoff team so who cares if we win 6-8 games. It's a process.

Easy trade up? Or future 1sts you mean lol....Mitch has zero to do with this upcoming draft class (and everyone has said this past draft was weak at QB) and it looks like they're eyeing the future, which at some pt you have to do if your team is dog s**t. A QB can change the franchise.

Your example isn't even close to what I'm talking about...bortles wasn't looked at as some no brainer FQB coming into the draft and most people were shocked that he was the pick( I also think shanny is better then Gus with developing a young QB, plus I remember shanny thinking Carr and Jimmy G were better than him) ...how about you look at the bucs and titans eh? TB was a 2-14 team and was playing Glennon which lead them to Winston, now their coming off a 9 win season and getting top end FAs like Djax to make a strong playoff push. The titans were playing mettenberger/whitehurst to a 2-14 record then got Marcus Mariota. They're coming off a 9 win season with a s**t ton of promise.

That's what I want, I don't want to win 7 games with hoyer only to screw ourselves out of a potential FQB next yr. I don't want to be the Bills every f**king yr, I don't want to be the Jets who constantly bring in bridge qbs and draft mid-tier qbs for whatever reason. I'm fine with doubling our win total this season and improving on our offense/defense ranks this yr.

I also believe the upcoming draft is gonna be very very good for qbs at the top next yr, unlike this past draft. If you don't think so that's fine....I'd love to get Kirk but that's far from set in stone.

I'm probably going to hash this up but will give it a try, NY.

Since Mooch was unceremoniously dumped in 2001(or whatever yr it was) i assumed we would get another HC who came from an OC background, the idea being if you don't have your HC as an OC, then any great OC ends up as a HC elsewhere. Well, we didn't . At least if we had a HC during the last 16+ yrs, and he was an OC, then he wasn't a very good one. Chip is a prime example. Harbaw was supposed to be a hot shot at playcalling and a QB whisperer, and to this day, i think that was horse puckey.

Early 2017 we land a HC/OC, and arguably the best one out there. FINALLY. Now the question is does the QB matter that much, or does the HC/OC QB-Whisperer/playcaller matter equally? Kyle laid it out pretty succinctly. He wants a QB who has the fundamentals , pocket awareness, keeps eyes downfield, accurate, good leader, etc....heck, everyone knows the list by now. So my question is do we need the one best QB of a bunch of "can't miss QBs", just like this yr, when there were none... or do we need a guy , perhaps like CJ, who already knows and has the fundamentals, who we pair with the best QB-groomer/whisperer/playcaller....like Kyle...and put the two together and get the QB we need? I don't think we are getting "Tom Brady 2" next yr, because that would be an amazing piece of luck. And any of the 32 teams are just as likely to get the next Brady as we are. Besides, Brady was picked by sheer luck, not skill, or he would have gone as 1st pick in rd 1....and he went some 200+ picks later.

So my question is can we win with a super wunderkind OC/HC and a good fundamentals QB? And i mean win it all, and win repeatedly? Or do we have to have Montana, or Brady or Rodgers to win and then do it again? I ask because right now, NY, you seem to be putting everything on the picking the perfect Qb...when i wonder if the real goal should be best HC/OC /playcaller out there paired with a QB who has excellent fundamentals, but wasn't necessarily the top rated QB by the "experts" who pontificate during the draft?

Simply put, could it be that we have the OC/HC/ playcaller we absolutely had to have, and then matching him up with the best fundamentals QB we can find = road to winning the SB? And that means repeatedly. Maybe we already have him in CJ. Maybe he is in next yrs draft, altho not necessarily a top rated pick....but fundamentals wise, he is top flite.

Also i think most would agree that the one best guy for us at present is Cousins. But getting him is a shakey proposition, and to bet on Cousins being here next yr , and ONLY on that, is a bad bet. Danny Snyder will do anything to prevent that. He may cut off his nose to spite his face. So banking on Cousins is an entirely separate track, and if it happens, fantastic. Meantime, we have rebuilt the D with a realistic shot at having a top 5 front 7, doubled the RB starters, pretty well solidified the OL, changed out retread WRs for much better ones( tho no #1), and obviously exponentially gotten better at HC/OC...with a good shot at DC becoming a way better one than since Fangio left.

What that leaves us with is Hoyer and a shot at his fundamentals and knowledge of Kyle's WCO, and CJ, a developmental project with good fundamentals, next yrs draft and FA. Can we fashion a Qb with Kyle as head man without getting the consensus #1 QB pick in the draft? I hope so. I also think so. Would Joe have been as successufl without Coach Walsh? Would Brady been as successful without Bellichek? I don't know, but paired wiht someone like tomsul, chip, singletary, etc, i bet not. We may not even know their names had it not been for the coach they were paired with...by luck, mind you.

So whether it is Hoyer/Barks/CJ/ next yr qB in draft/ FA(cousins)....i think we have the most important part taken care of ...right now. And that is kyle. Now he just has to find out can Hoyer carry the load...or CJ...or next yr's draft pick...or FA? If we got a Dak Prescott next yr and had tomsul or chip as HC, we would fail.

Therefore the HC/OC is of equal importance IMO, to the QB wiht good fundamentals. You have to have both...and we got the HC/OC part right. Meantime John and Kyle have put a team together that has the talent , but not the experience. That is what this yr is for. Experience. Now kyle just needs to find the guy who can be our long term Qb, or FR QB if you will, but he may not necessarily be one of the consensus top qB picks.

Getting the highest consensus QB pick is not as important as both the above. This team needs to play together for a yr, and we need to find who is /or isn't the Qb we need. But i do not think we need a brady. We need a Bill Walsh like HC/OC who can fashion his Qb and pick a talented one, much like Walsh did. And kyle has an eye for picking QBs and also for grooming them. He has done so at 3 previous stops.

I think we are a lot closer than most think to getting where we need to be. We got the hard part...a great HC/OC. The rest falls in place , whether this yr or next. The icing on the cake is we have a genuine virgin GM who in one yr has proven to be a fantastic pick...and is a good judge of talent. We are close.

Originally posted by pasodoc9er:

I'm probably going to hash this up but will give it a try, NY.

Since Mooch was unceremoniously dumped in 2001(or whatever yr it was) i assumed we would get another HC who came from an OC background, the idea being if you don't have your HC as an OC, then any great OC ends up as a HC elsewhere. Well, we didn't . At least if we had a HC during the last 16+ yrs, and he was an OC, then he wasn't a very good one. Chip is a prime example. Harbaw was supposed to be a hot shot at playcalling and a QB whisperer, and to this day, i think that was horse puckey.

Early 2017 we land a HC/OC, and arguably the best one out there. FINALLY. Now the question is does the QB matter that much, or does the HC/OC QB-Whisperer/playcaller matter equally? Kyle laid it out pretty succinctly. He wants a QB who has the fundamentals , pocket awareness, keeps eyes downfield, accurate, good leader, etc....heck, everyone knows the list by now. So my question is do we need the one best QB of a bunch of "can't miss QBs", just like this yr, when there were none... or do we need a guy , perhaps like CJ, who already knows and has the fundamentals, who we pair with the best QB-groomer/whisperer/playcaller....like Kyle...and put the two together and get the QB we need? I don't think we are getting "Tom Brady 2" next yr, because that would be an amazing piece of luck. And any of the 32 teams are just as likely to get the next Brady as we are. Besides, Brady was picked by sheer luck, not skill, or he would have gone as 1st pick in rd 1....and he went some 200+ picks later.

So my question is can we win with a super wunderkind OC/HC and a good fundamentals QB? And i mean win it all, and win repeatedly? Of do we have to have Montana, or Brady or Rodgers to win and then do it again? I ask because right now, NY, you seem to be putting everything on the picking the perfect Qb...when i wonder if the real goal should be best HC/OC /playcaller out there paired with a QB who has excellent fundamentals, but wasn't necessarily the top rated QB by the "experts" who pontificate during the draft?

Simply put, could it be that we have the OC/HC/ playcaller we absolutely had to have, and then matching him up with the best fundamentals QB we can find = road to winning the SB? And that means repeatedly. Maybe we already have him in CJ. Maybe he is in next yrs draft, altho not necessarily a top rated pick....but fundamentals wise, he is top flite.

Also i think most would agree that the one best guy for us at present is Cousins. But getting him is a shakey proposition, and to bet on Cousins being here next yr , and ONLY on that, is a bad bet. Danny Snyder will do anything to prevent that. He may cut off his nose to spite his face. So banking on Cousins is an entirely separate track, and if it happens, fantastic. Meantime, we have rebuilt the D with a realistic shot at having a top 5 front 7, doubled the RB starters, pretty well solidified the OL, changed out retread WRs for much ones( tho no #1), and obviously exponentially gotten better at HC/OC...with a good shot at DC becoming a way better one than since Fangio left.

What that leaves us with is Hoyer and a shot at his fundamentals and knowledge of Kyle's WCO, and CJ, a developmental project with good fundamentals, next yrs draft and FA. Can we fashion a Qb with Kyle as head man without getting the consensus #1 QB pick in the draft? I hope so. I also think so. Would Joe have been as successufl without Coach Walsh? Would Brady been as successful without Bellichek? I don't know, but paired wiht someone like tomsul, chip, singletary, etc, i bet not. We may not even know their names had it not been for the coach they were paired with...by luck, mind you.

So whether it is Hoyer/Barks/CJ/ next yr qB in draft/ FA(cousins)....i think we have the most important part taken care of ...right now. And that is kyle. Now he just has to find out can Hoyer carry the load...or CJ...or next yr's draft pick...or FA? If we got a Dak Prescott next yr and had tomsul or chip as HC, we would fail.

Therefore the HC/OC is of equal importance IMO, to the QB wiht good fundamentals. You have to have both...and we got the HC/OC part right. Meantime John and Kyle have put a team together that has the talent , but not the experience. That is what this yr is for. Experience. Now kyle just needs to find the guy who can be our long term Qb, or FR QB if you will, but he may not necessarily be one of the consensus top qB picks.

Getting the highest consensus QB pick is not as important as both the above. This team needs to play together for a yr, and we need to find who is /or isn't the Qb we need. But i do not think we need a brady. We need a Bill Walsh like HC/OC who can fashion his Qb and pick a talented one, much like Walsh did. And kyle has an eye for picking QBs and also for grooming them. He has done so at 3 previous stops.

I think we are a lot closer than most think to getting where we need to be. We got the hard part...a great HC/OC. The rest falls in place , whether this yr or next. The icing on the cake is we have a genuine virgin GM who in one yr has proven to be a fantastic pick...and is a good judge of talent. We are close.

Considering kyle's closest chance at winning a SB In his career so far was with the #3 overall pick in matt Ryan makes me think talent does matter in fact the only times he's gone to he playoffs it's been with a 1st rd pick (matt Ryan and RG3)...also who do you think is usually at the top of a draft for qbs? Some scrubs lol, nope it's usually qbs the possess the stuff kyle is looking for. Kyle has stated he wants a "pure thrower" at QB not just some dude who can run his offense. You think CJ was picked because he's gonna be our FQB? That's a huge reach imo, people throw out Kirk with him, but he wasn't even close to as consistent in college as him and Kirk actually improved in college CJ didn't...not every draft has a FQB just doesn't... and this past draft very well might not have one, hence kyle not going all in on one early.

Why wouldn't Kyle like Sam or Rosen? They both have a ton of characteristics that he values. Everyone acting like kyle can just crap out a FQB need to slow it down lol.

Close to where we need to be? What? We just came off a 2 win season man...we brought in a bunch of 2nd tier FAs and have a s**t ton of youth. If some of our picks from the past 3 yrs take it to the next level we have something, that's why I'm saying play all the young players.

This is yr one of a complete rebuild, we aren't on the cusp of going .500 or dare I say the playoffs imo...I'm just keeping it real my man

Originally posted by NYniner85:
"Shanahan went on to say that he isn't really looking at a timetable to turn things around in San Francisco. Team ownership has shown a commitment to him and Lynch and knows that the two are trying to rebuild the roster the right way."

"With that being said, 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." Did it look like they were aggressive with top end FAs this off season? We got a ton of lower tier FAs and one true pro-bowler and he is a FB.

Once again for the 100th time I didn't say tank...I've been saying play the young players more, play CJ at some pt to see what you have. We don't have to be a 7 win team this yr because we are literally starting from the ground up. Hoyer isn't the future and winning enough games to put us out of reach for one of the top QBs in a draft class, that I think will be on par with the 2004 isn't smart....you call in sabotage, I call it learning. Young players that ARE a part of this future need snaps and we aren't even close to a playoff team so who cares if we win 6-8 games. It's a process.

Easy trade up? Or future 1sts you mean lol....Mitch has zero to do with this upcoming draft class (and everyone has said this past draft was weak at QB) and it looks like they're eyeing the future, which at some pt you have to do if your team is dog s**t. A QB can change the franchise.

Your example isn't even close to what I'm talking about...bortles wasn't looked at as some no brainer FQB coming into the draft and most people were shocked that he was the pick( I also think shanny is better then Gus with developing a young QB, plus I remember shanny thinking Carr and Jimmy G were better than him) ...how about you look at the bucs and titans eh? TB was a 2-14 team and was playing Glennon which lead them to Winston, now their coming off a 9 win season and getting top end FAs like Djax to make a strong playoff push. The titans were playing mettenberger/whitehurst to a 2-14 record then got Marcus Mariota. They're coming off a 9 win season with a s**t ton of promise.

That's what I want, I don't want to win 7 games with hoyer only to screw ourselves out of a potential FQB next yr. I don't want to be the Bills every f**king yr, I don't want to be the Jets who constantly bring in bridge qbs and draft mid-tier qbs for whatever reason. I'm fine with doubling our win total this season and improving on our offense/defense ranks this yr.

I also believe the upcoming draft is gonna be very very good for qbs at the top next yr, unlike this past draft. If you don't think so that's fine....I'd love to get Kirk but that's far from set in stone.

You are aware I made that comment because we didn't go after fa's and Shanny could of been explaining that. Which pending the date could fall in line with the quote you posted too. Just how aggressive we we were going to be win right away. That's not necessarily saying we're playing rooks who aren't ready.

It's way too early to be saying how awesome the draft class is. Darnold I think stands but both Rosen and Allen could see their stocks tumble just like Kizer's did. Allen is in Wyoming so his production bar will be high, Rosen has personality and injury issues. What does Carr and Jimmy G have to do with this? They're 2nd round picks and your whole argument is we have to draft in the 1st because success rate? If Shanny can locate and develop a 2nd to 4th your whole premise is faulty.

You listed 2 teams that never made the playoffs 2 qb's who look to end up in the 10-16 range. Awesome.