49ers Head Coach Kyle Shanahan Thread

Originally posted by genus49:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by genus49:
Enough with this garbage.

What preparation was needed for OT that wasn't there? I asked you this before and you ignored it because you have nothing of substance behind this take.

Do the rules in OT change in terms of how many downs it takes to move the chains? Do passing vs rushing yards count more? What actually changes in the game they've been prepared to play in any way?

The only surprise was they wouldn't win with a TD. Does that mean they didn't want to score the TD on their opening drive? Did they not want to stop KC from matching or exceeding their points?

It made no difference on the execution. You can make the claim Kyle not going over it doesn't look good in comparison to Reid but considering there was no guarantee OT would even happen maybe Kyle felt their time was better served on planning and practicing the things they knew would actually happen?

We didn't go over OT, they did. This is documented. From ESPN:

Armstead added that he first realized that the postseason overtime rules were different when he saw them displayed on the scoreboard at Allegiant Stadium.
"They put it on the scoreboard, and everyone was like 'Oh, even if you score, they get a chance still,'" Armstead said.

The Chiefs, conversely, said they were well prepared for an overtime contingency in the postseason. Defensive lineman Chris Jones told reporters that Kansas City "talked for two weeks about new overtime rules," while safety Justin Reid said their preparation began in training camp.

"We've talked about it all year," Reid said. "We talked about it in training camp about how the rules were different in regular season versus the playoffs. Every week of the playoffs we talked about the overtime rule."

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/39511676/49ers-players-say-know-super-bowl-rules

I would expect us to go over it, particularly if they are, and also cuz Shanny has been in SB OT before (SB51). We in fact weren't prepped for any playoff OT (since the rule change).

Shocker…ignored the main question again and back to posting the same crap.

What rules does it change?

He just doesn't get it. Maybe Faithful thinks a different sport is played in OT, and it turns into soccer or baseball rules.

Originally posted by GoreGoreGore:

Originally posted by 5thSFG:
ok let me explain a little better since this appears more complicated to understand than I thought it would have. To illustrate my point, let's assume the chiefs received the ball first, and their drive went exactly the same as it did…. They scored a touchdown.

then, we receive the ball second and our drive goes exactly the same as it did. Do we still kick the field goal? Nope.

Getting the ball first was a tactical error, as it created an unknown and gave the chiefs a known

lol at the uproar here.

That's not what you said. You clearly f**ked up with your first post, didn't understand the rules, and now are changing what you said lol

Analytics and Reid, both said this wasn't some clear cut call, it was a very 50/50.

lol brochacho analytics help with future decisions, they don't help justify past mistakes. That's what results are for.

Also, I've been posting that same post since the day after the SB. It's ok to not have an educated response. Let's just fall back on the "analytics" 🤣🤣🤣

anyhow, someone asked rhetorically for an explanation of how it was a mistake for Shanahan to take the ball first. I provided one.

by all means, continue with your argument 👍🏻

those kids ain't happy about the OT

Originally posted by 5thSFG:
lol brochacho analytics help with future decisions, they don't help justify past mistakes. That's what results are for.

Also, I've been posting that same post since the day after the SB. It's ok to not have an educated response. Let's just fall back on the analytics 🤣🤣🤣

anyhow, someone asked rhetorically for an explanation of how it was a mistake for Shanahan to take the ball first. I provided one.

by all means, continue with your argument 👍🏻

No they didn't lol. The conversation is about how much of a problem it was that the players didn't know the rules and weren't properly prepared. Read the full conversation if you're struggling.

You interjected with an argument about a coaching decision at the start of OT. I told you from the jump that wasn't the point.

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by 5thSFG:
lol brochacho analytics help with future decisions, they don't help justify past mistakes. That's what results are for.

Also, I've been posting that same post since the day after the SB. It's ok to not have an educated response. Let's just fall back on the analytics 🤣🤣🤣

anyhow, someone asked rhetorically for an explanation of how it was a mistake for Shanahan to take the ball first. I provided one.

by all means, continue with your argument 👍🏻

No they didn't lol. The conversation is about how much of a problem it was that the players didn't know the rules and weren't properly prepared. Read the full conversation if you're struggling.

You interjected with an argument about a coaching decision at the start of OT.

Strange I may do that in the coaching thread. Based on your last few posts I'll spare myself the read.

Originally posted by 5thSFG:
Strange I may do that in the coaching thread. Based on your last few posts I'll spare myself the read.

Yea, It's my fault you missed the point.

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by 5thSFG:
Strange I may do that in the coaching thread. Based on your last few posts I'll spare myself the read.

Yea, It's my fault you missed the point.

Who said it was? You seem…. Reasonable 🤦‍♂️

Originally posted by 5thSFG:
Who said it was? You seem…. Reasonable 🤦‍♂️

My bad, when you say you won't read the conversation based on my last few posts, I tend to think that's a reflection on me.

My posts are so bad it makes your reading comprehension terrible apparently.

Originally posted by 5thSFG:

Originally posted by GoreGoreGore:

Originally posted by 5thSFG:
ok let me explain a little better since this appears more complicated to understand than I thought it would have. To illustrate my point, let's assume the chiefs received the ball first, and their drive went exactly the same as it did…. They scored a touchdown.

then, we receive the ball second and our drive goes exactly the same as it did. Do we still kick the field goal? Nope.

Getting the ball first was a tactical error, as it created an unknown and gave the chiefs a known

lol at the uproar here.

That's not what you said. You clearly f**ked up with your first post, didn't understand the rules, and now are changing what you said lol

Analytics and Reid, both said this wasn't some clear cut call, it was a very 50/50.

lol brochacho analytics help with future decisions, they don't help justify past mistakes. That's what results are for.

Also, I've been posting that same post since the day after the SB. It's ok to not have an educated response. Let's just fall back on the "analytics" 🤣🤣🤣

anyhow, someone asked rhetorically for an explanation of how it was a mistake for Shanahan to take the ball first. I provided one.

by all means, continue with your argument 👍🏻

We didn't know we needed a TD because we got the ball first.

Once again, that was a dumb take and you obviously didn't understand even the old OT rules. It was never a FG wins a the game, even with the old OT rules.

Originally posted by 5thSFG:
ok let me explain a little better since this appears more complicated to understand than I thought it would have. To illustrate my point, let's assume the chiefs received the ball first, and their drive went exactly the same as it did…. They scored a touchdown.

then, we receive the ball second and our drive goes exactly the same as it did. Do we still kick the field goal? Nope.

Getting the ball first was a tactical error, as it created an unknown and gave the chiefs a known

lol at the uproar here.

You don't know what you're talking about and taking it out on others not understanding your nonsense?

We all understand how it works and it has been spelled out multiple times here why there are pros and cons to each option.

Had the 49ers scored a TD on the opening drive and then held KC and won the game would it matter?

KC didn't have a long TD drive all game. Their only TD all game was cuz of a fumbled punt. Taking the ball first with KC's offense looking unlikely to score a TD you're giving your defense a chance to rest and regroup from allowing a quick game tying FG to push it into OT and you're giving yourself a sudden death possession chance if you and KC trade FGs.

Blaming Shanahan for the offense not scoring a TD is dumb when we saw a clear play there to be made had Burford not f'd up. Defense had to do their part and saved their worst for last.

Originally posted by GoreGoreGore:
We kicked a FG because if we go for it on 4th and don't get it it's game over. The defense held them to 1 TD in regulation. Defense was also just on the field for a long drive.

Analytics also had this as a 50/50 call, and if you want to ignore analytics, rven Reid said it was a 50/50 call and didn't know how the 49ers would elect to play out OT.

It's not like we played it safe in OT and didn't try and score a TD, we obviously tried to score on that 3rd down, and we would've had a walk in TD if Burford doesn't forget he has to block a player.

Once again, there wasn't a clear choice here, just like others have said, including Reid. If you let KC get the ball first, they get to play against the defense that was just on the field for a long drive, most likely outcome would've been the same. Then you also let KCs defense rest.

This wasn't a clear a case of what call was the correct call. Kyle said we took the ball first so if KC scores on their possession, we get to decide the game on the 3rd possession (a FG would've won the game if the game ended up being tied)

I'll be back in a month again to explain this again since we haven't beat the s**t out of this dead horse enough.

Please, take as much time off as you need

And don't forget Shanny will still be 0-2 in the Super Bowl when you're back.

Originally posted by genus49:

Originally posted by 5thSFG:
ok let me explain a little better since this appears more complicated to understand than I thought it would have. To illustrate my point, let's assume the chiefs received the ball first, and their drive went exactly the same as it did…. They scored a touchdown.

then, we receive the ball second and our drive goes exactly the same as it did. Do we still kick the field goal? Nope.

Getting the ball first was a tactical error, as it created an unknown and gave the chiefs a known

lol at the uproar here.

You don't know what you're talking about and taking it out on others not understanding your nonsense?

We all understand how it works and it has been spelled out multiple times here why there are pros and cons to each option.

Had the 49ers scored a TD on the opening drive and then held KC and won the game would it matter?

KC didn't have a long TD drive all game. Their only TD all game was cuz of a fumbled punt. Taking the ball first with KC's offense looking unlikely to score a TD you're giving your defense a chance to rest and regroup from allowing a quick game tying FG to push it into OT and you're giving yourself a sudden death possession chance if you and KC trade FGs.

Blaming Shanahan for the offense not scoring a TD is dumb when we saw a clear play there to be made had Burford not f'd up. Defense had to do their part and saved their worst for last.

I didnt say any of the things you just said lol. I just said that we wouldn't have kicked the FG had we the knowledge of the chiefs TD. Therefore, given the decision to kick or receive, its advantageous to kick.

if you don't agree… well… ok. Nothing else to discuss. About anything really. Because this is really as simple as it gets.

and I'm pro Kyle all the way. Like the rest of us, he makes mistakes sometimes

Originally posted by 5thSFG:
I didnt say any of the things you just said lol. I just said that we wouldn't have kicked the FG had we the knowledge of the chiefs TD. Therefore, given the decision to kick or receive, its advantageous to kick.

if you don't agree… well… ok. Nothing else to discuss. About anything really. Because this is really as simple as it gets.

and I'm pro Kyle all the way. Like the rest of us, he makes mistakes sometimes

you are exactly right and I agree.

It's a problem of information, lack thereof. Go first and you have a disadvantage. Going 2nd you have the advantage of knowing what you need. The team that went first, advantage swings to them should the game go to 3 possessions of OT.

This game would have a very hard time getting to 3rd possession. On account of by end of regulation Mahomes was starting to really move on us. And KC wouldn't be willing to hand us the ball and let us beat them. They would have trusted Mahomes 1 play from 2 yds, more. Even if we got the TD.

Originally posted by 5thSFG:

Originally posted by genus49:

Originally posted by 5thSFG:
ok let me explain a little better since this appears more complicated to understand than I thought it would have. To illustrate my point, let's assume the chiefs received the ball first, and their drive went exactly the same as it did…. They scored a touchdown.

then, we receive the ball second and our drive goes exactly the same as it did. Do we still kick the field goal? Nope.

Getting the ball first was a tactical error, as it created an unknown and gave the chiefs a known

lol at the uproar here.

You don't know what you're talking about and taking it out on others not understanding your nonsense?

We all understand how it works and it has been spelled out multiple times here why there are pros and cons to each option.

Had the 49ers scored a TD on the opening drive and then held KC and won the game would it matter?

KC didn't have a long TD drive all game. Their only TD all game was cuz of a fumbled punt. Taking the ball first with KC's offense looking unlikely to score a TD you're giving your defense a chance to rest and regroup from allowing a quick game tying FG to push it into OT and you're giving yourself a sudden death possession chance if you and KC trade FGs.

Blaming Shanahan for the offense not scoring a TD is dumb when we saw a clear play there to be made had Burford not f'd up. Defense had to do their part and saved their worst for last.

I didnt say any of the things you just said lol. I just said that we wouldn't have kicked the FG had we the knowledge of the chiefs TD. Therefore, given the decision to kick or receive, its advantageous to kick.

if you don't agree… well… ok. Nothing else to discuss. About anything really. Because this is really as simple as it gets.

and I'm pro Kyle all the way. Like the rest of us, he makes mistakes sometimes

lmao. SO WHY DIDN"T THE PLAYERS JUMP UP AND DOWN ON THE SIDELINES AFTER THE FG LIKE WE WON THE GAME??? WTF ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT

Originally posted by GoreGoreGore:

Originally posted by 5thSFG:

Originally posted by genus49:

Originally posted by 5thSFG:
ok let me explain a little better since this appears more complicated to understand than I thought it would have. To illustrate my point, let's assume the chiefs received the ball first, and their drive went exactly the same as it did…. They scored a touchdown.

then, we receive the ball second and our drive goes exactly the same as it did. Do we still kick the field goal? Nope.

Getting the ball first was a tactical error, as it created an unknown and gave the chiefs a known

lol at the uproar here.

You don't know what you're talking about and taking it out on others not understanding your nonsense?

We all understand how it works and it has been spelled out multiple times here why there are pros and cons to each option.

Had the 49ers scored a TD on the opening drive and then held KC and won the game would it matter?

KC didn't have a long TD drive all game. Their only TD all game was cuz of a fumbled punt. Taking the ball first with KC's offense looking unlikely to score a TD you're giving your defense a chance to rest and regroup from allowing a quick game tying FG to push it into OT and you're giving yourself a sudden death possession chance if you and KC trade FGs.

Blaming Shanahan for the offense not scoring a TD is dumb when we saw a clear play there to be made had Burford not f'd up. Defense had to do their part and saved their worst for last.

I didnt say any of the things you just said lol. I just said that we wouldn't have kicked the FG had we the knowledge of the chiefs TD. Therefore, given the decision to kick or receive, its advantageous to kick.

if you don't agree… well… ok. Nothing else to discuss. About anything really. Because this is really as simple as it gets.

and I'm pro Kyle all the way. Like the rest of us, he makes mistakes sometimes

lmao. SO WHY DIDN"T THE PLAYERS JUMP UP AND DOWN ON THE SIDELINES AFTER THE FG LIKE WE WON THE GAME??? WTF ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT

It's way over your head bro. You don't even understand what he's saying.