49ers Head Coach Kyle Shanahan Thread

Originally posted by boast:
the 49er QB position has been a s**t show since at least 2003 when Garcia was released. finding a FQB isnt as easy as just adding a "legit GM"

Neither is having a HC with all the power and no one to say hey, no we're not moving up for Beathard. No we're not drafting Joe Williams (who wasn't even on their draft board), no we're not moving 3 1sts for the 3rd QB in a draft with no clue who the pick was gonna be. Then dump him off after a handful of passing attempts.

Even guys like Reid and Walsh weren't/aren't beyond having a legit GM who doesn't think just like a HC. It's a good thing imo. Not a bad one. Again I love kyle the HC, literally no other guy I'd want. I would prefer to have a real GM that has say in roster building.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by boast:
the 49er QB position has been a s**t show since at least 2003 when Garcia was released. finding a FQB isnt as easy as just adding a "legit GM"

Neither is having a HC with all the power and no one to say hey, no we're not moving up for Beathard. No we're not drafting Joe Williams (who wasn't even on their draft board), no we're not moving 3 1sts for the 3rd QB in a draft with no clue who the pick was gonna be. Then dump him off after a handful of passing attempts.

Even guys like Reid and Walsh weren't/aren't beyond having a legit GM who doesn't think just like a HC. It's a good thing imo. Not a bad one. Again I love kyle the HC, literally no other guy I'd want. I would prefer to have a real GM that has say in roster building.

or it's a bad thing and creates internal power struggles that we've seen play out in the NFL many times before.

i'll take Kyle and what he's accomplished in building this team so far instead of "what if…"

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:
Mentioned it before, when you were saying this, but there were two critical mistakes we made that a high quality GM wouldn't have:

1. Not evaluating QB prospects at the top of the 17 draft.

- Evaluating them doesn't mean we would have taken one, but skipping out on the process is a categorical failure in the basic GM responsibility department.

2. Spending 3 1sts on a project QB with no experience when the team was in position to win right away.

Outside of those two things, and around them, I think their moves at the position have been fairly standard. And having a traditional GM may have prevented those mistakes but you potentially sacrifice the other gains they've made up to and including having Kyle as a HC at all.

Moving all in on Jimmy after 5 games should be on that list imo. Wanting to moving the 2nd overall pick for Kirk (apparently) was a bit extreme also.

there were misses all over the place at QB. The whole process that got them to Lance and how it was handled was a mess. Now handing the keys to a loaded roster to Brock? I mean I'm here for it and to see where it goes…but overall it's been a lot of head scratching stuff at that position.

I also don't want a GM that's unwilling to listen to kyle. There's got to be cohesiveness there, like all the great regimes.

overall I'm complaining about one thing, it's been a bunch of good & we're in a great spot.

Originally posted by NYniner85:
Neither is having a HC with all the power and no one to say hey, no we're not moving up for Beathard. No we're not drafting Joe Williams (who wasn't even on their draft board), no we're not moving 3 1sts for the 3rd QB in a draft with no clue who the pick was gonna be. Then dump him off after a handful of passing attempts.

Even guys like Reid and Walsh weren't/aren't beyond having a legit GM who doesn't think just like a HC. It's a good thing imo. Not a bad one. Again I love kyle the HC, literally no other guy I'd want. I would prefer to have a real GM that has say in roster building.

I agree with your bottom line opinion, but in addition to my last post I think it's worth discussing what actually happened the last time we tried to hire one.

To me this idea is moot because I don't think the organization could strip Kyle of being the top personnel guy and keep him, but also because I don't think a top GM candidate wants to come in and share the job with Paraag.

We haven't had a 'legit' GM since Scot.

Originally posted by NYniner85:
Moving all in on Jimmy after 5 games should be on that list imo. Wanting to moving the 2nd overall pick for Kirk (apparently) was a bit extreme also.

there were misses all over the place at QB. The whole process that got them to Lance and how it was handled was a mess. Now handing the keys to a loaded roster to Brock? I mean I'm here for it and to see where it goes…but overall it's been a lot of head scratching stuff at that position.

I also don't want a GM that's unwilling to listen to kyle. There's got to be cohesiveness there, like all the great regimes.

overall I'm complaining about one thing, it's been a bunch of good & we're in a great spot.

Jimmy contract was completely normal in my opinion. It was the timing of his FA, and the fact that he played really well and almost immediately helped reset the culture around the team. Of course they signed him. So would a traditional GM.

I'd agree to add in that trade for Cousins if it is actually real. It's the first we're hearing of it now and I'm not sold that it's legitimate just yet.

Brock played great… absolutely nothing odd about their decision to roll with him, and they did buy some insurance in any case.

Originally posted by boast:
or it's a bad thing and creates internal power struggles that we've seen play out in the NFL many times before.

i'll take Kyle and what he's accomplished in building this team so far instead of "what if…"

I mean clearly kyle was gonna have a ton of say. He hired the GM. Overall that's not really normal. Hiring a broadcaster is not normal. How they went about the most important position in sports was not normal. We're 7 yrs into it with like what 7 different starting QBs so far? Again love the roster, love Kyle the HC. Having someone look at it through the lens of a GM and with roster building experience (which neither guy did have)…I don't think that's a bad thing overall.

we got a GM who told everyone kyle didn't look at QBs in the 2017 draft and also that he defers to kyle at that position.

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:
Jimmy contract was completely normal in my opinion. It was the timing of his FA, and the fact that he played really well and almost immediately helped reset the culture around the team. Of course they signed him. So would a traditional GM.

I'd agree to add in that trade for Cousins if it is actually real. It's the first we're hearing of it now and I'm not sold that it's legitimate just yet.

Brock played great… absolutely nothing odd about their decision to roll with him, and they did buy some insurance in any case.

What player has ever been made the highest paid player in the NFL after 5 games? They could have tagged him all the same.

IMO kyle has no problem going all in then all out at the QB position very quickly. He thinks like a HC because that's what he is, he's not a GM and doesn't think like one, yet has the power to do everything.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:
Jimmy contract was completely normal in my opinion. It was the timing of his FA, and the fact that he played really well and almost immediately helped reset the culture around the team. Of course they signed him. So would a traditional GM.

I'd agree to add in that trade for Cousins if it is actually real. It's the first we're hearing of it now and I'm not sold that it's legitimate just yet.

Brock played great… absolutely nothing odd about their decision to roll with him, and they did buy some insurance in any case.

What player has ever been made the highest paid player in the NFL after 5 games? They could have tagged him all the same.

IMO kyle has no problem going all in then all out at the QB position very quickly. He thinks like a HC because that's what he is, he's not a GM and doesn't think like one, yet has the power to do everything.

Yeah lol, everyone jumped the gun with that contract. There was no holdout, no need to go all in at that point. As fans, a ton of us were fine with it because the play we saw through those games was the best that had been seen in the Bay Area in a looooong time. National media saw it as the foolish move it was, but just another "what if" moment for the Niners in their QB saga.

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:
I agree with your bottom line opinion, but in addition to my last post I think it's worth discussing what actually happened the last time we tried to hire one.

To me this idea is moot because I don't think the organization could strip Kyle of being the top personnel guy and keep him, but also because I don't think a top GM candidate wants to come in and share the job with Paraag.

We haven't had a 'legit' GM since Scot.

Trent was in control imo. Ownership basically picked him over Harbs.

I think if you're gonna pay someone to be the GM then they should do it. If Walsh can rock a legit GM, so can kyle. I'm also not saying strip kyle of everything and just coach…but having an equal could be a good thing. I agree I don't think it will happen at this point.

man if they would have hired Terry McDonough as GM josh Allen would be our QB right now. Is what it is.

Originally posted by NYniner85:
What player has ever been made the highest paid player in the NFL after 5 games? They could have tagged him all the same.

IMO kyle has no problem going all in then all out at the QB position very quickly. He thinks like a HC because that's what he is, he's not a GM and doesn't think like one, yet has the power to do everything.

They gave him a 5 year deal at what was his perceived market value and also gave themselves outs in the contract.

At what point do you think they would have moved on had they tagged him? Maybe they could have signed him for less money after he tore his ACL in '18 but they very likely would have wanted to keep him…because they did. You get less flexibility with the tag and in the end, it's not like his contract prevented us from doing something else. I would even say we got an ok return on it. It certainly wasn't a disaster.

Still agree with your bottom point, at least in the context of the draft. Starting Brock this season when he costs a million bucks and the team is cap strapped isn't some concerning move… and neither was trading a dysfunctional player that was incredibly expensive in his role. You probably believe there was no reason to trade Trey and view that move as going all in with Brock but the reality, to me at least, is Trey just doesn't fit this team's timeline and is probably never going to be a starter in this league wherever he goes. He was never going to be an answer if Brock flops or gets hurt.

Originally posted by SLCNiner:
Yeah lol, everyone jumped the gun with that contract. There was no holdout, no need to go all in at that point. As fans, a ton of us were fine with it because the play we saw through those games was the best that had been seen in the Bay Area in a looooong time. National media saw it as the foolish move it was, but just another "what if" moment for the Niners in their QB saga.

Yup…. Like I said kyle goes all in and all out on QBs fairly quickly. He's a HC to his core, not a GM who scouts/builds a roster with long-term intentions.

I mean it's been far more good than bad overall with the roster. The QB spot

Originally posted by NYniner85:
Trent was in control imo. Ownership basically picked him over Harbs.

I think if you're gonna pay someone to be the GM then they should do it. If Walsh can rock a legit GM, so can kyle. I'm also not saying strip kyle of everything and just coach…but having an equal could be a good thing. I agree I don't think it will happen at this point.

man if they would have hired Terry McDonough as GM josh Allen would be our QB right now. Is what it is.

Trent shared his job with the non accountables… that's why he had it. The hiring process when he got the job was a farce not unlike our 2015 coaching search. It wasn't Trent vs Jim. It was Jim vs Trent, Jed, and Paraag.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by TheWooLick:

Originally posted by NYniner85:
Yeah they had a f**k ton of cash to burn and overall they're the reason we are where we are. It's great, we have an amazing HC. My point is sometimes having a HC be the final say in everything with personnel building isn't the way to go.

even Walsh (while had a ton of say) had McVay

Lance losing the job to Purdy really turned you off.

Complete 180

The QB position overall has been a s**t show. Acting like it hasn't isn't being objective about the situation and how kyle has handled it. I love Kyle the HC and the roster overall is bad ass. I do think having a GM much like Walsh had would be an improvement. You don't?

Funny how it's now a s**t show

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
Bosa can't beat the chefs and the refs

And having a QB that was f**king awful in the 4th QR doesn't help either. Kyle put him there and passed on others along the way and after.

You wanted Jimmy before we even traded for him and you were loving it all the way to the SB that year

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:
They gave him a 5 year deal at what was his perceived market value and also gave themselves outs in the contract.

At what point do you think they would have moved on had they tagged him? Maybe they could have signed him for less money after he tore his ACL in '18 but they very likely would have wanted to keep him…because they did. You get less flexibility with the tag and in the end, it's not like his contract prevented us from doing something else. I would even say we got an ok return on it. It certainly wasn't a disaster.

Still agree with your bottom point, at least in the context of the draft. Starting Brock this season when he costs a million bucks and the team is cap strapped isn't some concerning move… and neither was trading a dysfunctional player that was incredibly expensive in his role. You probably believe there was no reason to trade Trey and view that move as going all in with Brock but the reality, to me at least, is Trey just doesn't fit this team's timeline and is probably never going to be a starter in this league wherever he goes. He was never going to be an answer if Brock flops or gets hurt.

How is 5 starts = highest contract ever? That's not market value, that's a freaking gift.

They had options and went with the highest amount of money after hardly doing anything. That cash tied them to him.

what I believe with Lance was the process from the beginning to them trading him was a mess. If you look back at what I actually wanted it was Fields. I thought Lance had potential and could grow on a great roster, he didn't have to be great out of the gate to win games. He did have to play to get better and that never happened overall (him playing).

people act like Brock is some proven vet, he's got 230 passes. He will have his developmental ups and downs like damn near every young QB has. So to say he fits the timeline, but Lance doesn't at all is silly. A qb was gonna be developing here. You honestly have no idea what Lance will or won't be, that's just the truth of it at this pt…but whatever there he's not here. How it was handled was icky and arguing about it isn't gonna change my opinion on how everything went.

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
Funny how it's now a s**t show

You wanted Jimmy before we even traded for him and you were loving it all the way to the SB that year

Yes looking back at it overall it was a s**t show and weird. It's okay to look back and change your opinion about all of it. I'm allowed to do that, no? I've watched you change your tune about Jimmy and Trey, which is fine.

I'm pro Kyle always have been. I think how the QB position has been handled had been weird and we're still trying to figure it out in YR7. Overall not a lot of GM/HCs get that long to do that. We've won almost in spite of having a good QB. Hopefully Brock is the real deal and we can stop arguing with each other about all of it. Wouldn't that be something