49ers Head Coach Kyle Shanahan Thread

Looks like I was correct 🤣🤣🤣🤣.

Eat it nerds!!

https://www.nbcsports.com/nfl/profootballtalk/rumor-mill/news/bill-belichicks-numbers-guru-ernie-adams-says-49ers-should-have-kicked-in-super-bowl-ot

The timing of that article is perfect. I'll scroll back through to see which if you stood strongest on the wrong side of the debate

Originally posted by 5thSFG:
The timing of that article is perfect. I'll scroll back through to see which if you stood strongest on the wrong side of the debate

Good luck with your research. I want your report on my desk by the end of the day.

Originally posted by BP13:

Originally posted by 5thSFG:
The timing of that article is perfect. I'll scroll back through to see which if you stood strongest on the wrong side of the debate

Good luck with your research. I want your report on my desk by the end of the day.

I screwed up the delivery on this one 🤣🤣. Got too anxious when I saw the article. Should have taken a moment to figure the best/funniest way to say "I told you so" on the zone 🤣🤣

Still hung up about the SB? Move on, people. It was two months ago.

Originally posted by captveg:
Still hung up about the SB? Move on, people. It was two months ago.

I will not let a reasonable post like this steal my glory.

Originally posted by 5thSFG:

Originally posted by captveg:
Still hung up about the SB? Move on, people. It was two months ago.

I will not let a reasonable post like this steal my glory.

Yea you'll find arguments for both sides of that argument. Our data analytics guy say taking the ball was the correct move. Wasn't there some official simulator that found that 51% of the time taking the ball first is the correct move?

I'm ok with taking the ball as long as you score a TD. We didn't so we lost. We score a TD I feel like we hold them because situational football is different.

Originally posted by Silky:
Yea you'll find arguments for both sides of that argument. Our data analytics guy say taking the ball was the correct move. Wasn't there some official simulator that found that 51% of the time taking the ball first is the correct move?

I'm ok with taking the ball as long as you score a TD. We didn't so we lost. We score a TD I feel like we hold them because situational football is different.

can find others like this. One of the national reporters polled a sample of analytics professionals currently with NFL teams and the results were split.

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by Silky:
Yea you'll find arguments for both sides of that argument. Our data analytics guy say taking the ball was the correct move. Wasn't there some official simulator that found that 51% of the time taking the ball first is the correct move?

I'm ok with taking the ball as long as you score a TD. We didn't so we lost. We score a TD I feel like we hold them because situational football is different.

This flowchart shows my results from simulating NFL playoff overtime, a hot topic since the Super Bowl.

My numbers indicate that there is effectively no advantage between choosing to kick or receive, which aligns with research done by @bburkeESPN and @StatsbyLopez .

Details⬇️ pic.twitter.com/G2HEZnKwSD

— Walker Harrison (@WalkWearsCrocs) February 18, 2024

can find others like this. One of the national reporters polled a sample of analytics professionals currently with NFL teams and the results were split.

Before I respond, answer me this. Aren't you the one who, just a few pages back, claimed that Kyle didn't make his OT decision due to wanting the ball third. And, when we posted the exact quote from Kyle "we wanted the ball third", claimed he didn't mean what he said?

Just want to make sure I'm speaking to someone that is able to change their opinion when presented with new information. If you're that guy, I'll just revert back to "I told you so" and let you stew in your befuddlement

Nevermind, found your post regarding the topic:

"On the tangential argument you presented, you're ignoring the counter argument that being forced to go on 4th downs in disadvantaged positions isn't actually a good thing.

Whether we kick or receive, our defense needs to prevent a touchdown drive. We're not going to assume we have to go for medium range fourth downs on the opening drive because the other team (who had one td all game long) is guaranteed to get one on the next possession, and we don't actually want to be forced into going on those 4th downs because our defense gave one up and we have no choice"

Worth asking, is this still your opinion now that Ernie Adams, the coaching GOATs analyst is of the exact opposite opinion? Gonna stick to those guns?

Originally posted by 5thSFG:
Before I respond, answer me this. Aren't you the one who, just a few pages back, claimed that Kyle didn't make his OT decision due to wanting the ball third. And, when we posted the exact quote from Kyle "we wanted the ball third", claimed he didn't mean what he said?

Just want to make sure I'm speaking to someone that is able to change their opinion when presented with new information. If you're that guy, I'll just revert back to "I told you so" and let you stew in your befuddlement

I know your reading comprehension isn't great, but what I said was that Kyle Shanahan wasn't planning to have a 3rd possession, but making a decision with it being a possibility. Faithful said multiple times Kyle wanted the OT period to go 3 possessions, both yesterday and multiple times before. That's absurd obviously. The ideal result is score, get a stop, and end the game in two possessions. It should go without saying.

You can read back and see the full discussion if you're capable.

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by 5thSFG:
Before I respond, answer me this. Aren't you the one who, just a few pages back, claimed that Kyle didn't make his OT decision due to wanting the ball third. And, when we posted the exact quote from Kyle "we wanted the ball third", claimed he didn't mean what he said?

Just want to make sure I'm speaking to someone that is able to change their opinion when presented with new information. If you're that guy, I'll just revert back to "I told you so" and let you stew in your befuddlement

I know your reading comprehension isn't great, but what I said was that Kyle Shanahan wasn't planning to have a 3rd possession, but making a decision with it being a possibility. Faithful said multiple times Kyle wanted the OT period to go 3 possessions, both yesterday and multiple times before. That's absurd obviously. The ideal result is score, get a stop, and end the game in two possessions. It should go without saying.

You can read back and see the full discussion if you're capable.

🤣🤣🤣. Good thing we're anonymous on here huh? I'm embarrassed FOR you. All in good fun. Go niners!

Originally posted by 5thSFG:
🤣🤣🤣. Good thing we're anonymous on here huh? I'm embarrassed FOR you. All in good fun. Go niners!

Your feelings mean something to somebody hopefully. Definitely not to me though. Read better.

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Kyle didn't say he was playing for a 3rd possession, lol.

help me with my reading comprehension 🤣🤣🤣🤣

that sentence is pretty definitive

Originally posted by 5thSFG:
help me with my reading comprehension 🤣🤣🤣🤣

that sentence is pretty definitive

Yes it is. He wasn't playing for a 3rd possession. He was making a decision with a 3rd possession being a possibility, as the linked quote clearly stated in full context.

'We just thought it would be better. We wanted the ball third. If both teams matched and scored, we wanted to be the ones who had the chance to go win. So got that field goal, so knew we had to hold them to at least a field goal and if we did, we thought it was in our hands after that.'

Again the operative word here is 'if'. If you are too stupid to understand the best case scenario is that the game ends in two possessions, but could possibly go a third, I can't help you.

Imagine arguing that Kyle didn't want to get a stop on that second possession…