49ers Head Coach Kyle Shanahan Thread

Originally posted by Chance:

Originally posted by 5thSFG:

Originally posted by eastie:
Dude, who the F**k are you? Condescending with your 'understand the flow chart" bullcrap. It's not hard at all to figure out that there are those that want the loss to be the HC's fault. To rationalize that perspective, one must take quotes out of context, and, or, ignore al together what was said. Analytics has said that the 'advantage' was miniscule at best. Turns out, the reason we lost was that our defense couldn't stop KC's offense when it needed to. That s**t happens in every game played by every team all season long.

In this corner we have Earnie Adams, long time analyst and confidant to the GOAT, Bill Belichick. In the other corner we have, uhm, Eastie. This is shaping up to be a good fight, will be interesting to see how Eastie plans to attack the juggernaut. The predictable tactics of rapid fire nonsensical statements meant to muddy the topic may not work to his benefit against such a high profile analyst like Mr Adams. But he appears eager and full of energy… he may just pull off the upset!

get your popcorn ready

https://heavy.com/sports/san-francisco-49ers/bill-belichick-ernie-adams-super-bowl/amp/

Back your s**t up with statistical analysis, otherwise you're just cherry-picking (argumentative fallacy), and looking like a fool for puffing out your feathers.

Settle down and scroll back a few pages. I made my point the day before the article was posted 👍🏻

Smokeyjoe, help your boy out!!

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:
Kyle said outright that didn't factor. The decision was made in advance. In reality would it factor? Hard to say. The prior drive was a minute and 47 seconds and there's naturally time on the sideline getting from Q4 to Q5. I don't know if D rest was much of a thing here. Just my opinion.

Kyle absolutely said it was a part of the decision, just not in that initial interview where you pulled the quote.

Originally posted by 5thSFG:

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:
That's not to mention it's not just a consideration of the numbers, but also the fact that you're putting your defense out there for back to back possessions, after 4 full quarters of play, in our particular situation that game (if we defer)

Good point. They had to be gassed… not sure how much they would have recovered during the break between quarters.

oh well, always next year

I would suspect both Ds were gassed. That's just the nature of 5 quarters of football which is pretty insane normally, let alone in a SB. I recall SB 51, ATL lost the toss and their D was breathing heavy hands on hips. You could see it. These new rules are certainly better and more interesting than those old ones. Even tho we lost the SB didn't lack for drama, that's for sure.

Originally posted by 5thSFG:

Originally posted by Chance:

Originally posted by 5thSFG:

Originally posted by eastie:
Dude, who the F**k are you? Condescending with your 'understand the flow chart" bullcrap. It's not hard at all to figure out that there are those that want the loss to be the HC's fault. To rationalize that perspective, one must take quotes out of context, and, or, ignore al together what was said. Analytics has said that the 'advantage' was miniscule at best. Turns out, the reason we lost was that our defense couldn't stop KC's offense when it needed to. That s**t happens in every game played by every team all season long.

In this corner we have Earnie Adams, long time analyst and confidant to the GOAT, Bill Belichick. In the other corner we have, uhm, Eastie. This is shaping up to be a good fight, will be interesting to see how Eastie plans to attack the juggernaut. The predictable tactics of rapid fire nonsensical statements meant to muddy the topic may not work to his benefit against such a high profile analyst like Mr Adams. But he appears eager and full of energy… he may just pull off the upset!

get your popcorn ready

https://heavy.com/sports/san-francisco-49ers/bill-belichick-ernie-adams-super-bowl/amp/

Back your s**t up with statistical analysis, otherwise you're just cherry-picking (argumentative fallacy), and looking like a fool for puffing out your feathers.

Settle down and scroll back a few pages. I made my point the day before the article was posted 👍🏻

Smokeyjoe, help your boy out!!

I am referring to you a few pages back where you acted like you won an argument because one single point of evidence comported with your opinion. I'm just pointing out how it's cherry picking and you should be careful about how much you celebrate your opinions, lest you look foolish when the broad spectrum of evidence paints a different picture.

Originally posted by 5thSFG:
Settle down and scroll back a few pages. I made my point the day before the article was posted 👍🏻

Smokeyjoe, help your boy out!!

He's right though, you are cherry-picking opinion that agrees with yours (and mine before you forget again). One expert says it should be this way, another expert says it should be the other. The analytical community shows a 50/50 split in the numbers and informal polling showed the same among a sample of people working the job for various teams. There are plusses and minuses with either decision, and again that's not factoring the actual game situation (like our defense having just been on the field).

All this complaining about giving KC information and an extra down, but the actual play didn't put them in any real situation where either mattered. The only spot was the 4th and 1 and I think it's pretty safe to assume they are going in that spot on possession 1 anyway (especially if you buy they were willing to go for a win or lose 2pt conversion on a 2nd drive).

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:
Kyle said outright that didn't factor. The decision was made in advance. In reality would it factor? Hard to say. The prior drive was a minute and 47 seconds and there's naturally time on the sideline getting from Q4 to Q5. I don't know if D rest was much of a thing here. Just my opinion.

Kyle absolutely said it was a part of the decision, just not in that initial interview where you pulled the quote.

Not only was it a part of his decision, it was absolutely a factor despite what faithful believes. Gee let me think, would it be better to keep on the field a d that had just run ten plays in rapid succession, or give them a breather with an extended drive of our own. To pretend that is not an advantage is more of the same b******t from him that, at this point, has become pretty absurd.

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:
He's right though, you are cherry-picking opinion that agrees with yours (and mine before you forget again). One expert says it should be this way, another expert says it should be the other. The analytical community shows a 50/50 split in the numbers and informal polling showed the same among a sample of people working the job for various teams. There are plusses and minuses with either decision, and again that's not factoring the actual game situation (like our defense having just been on the field).

All this complaining about giving KC information and an extra down, but the actual play didn't put them in any real situation where either mattered. The only spot was the 4th and 1 and I think it's pretty safe to assume they are going in that spot on possession 1 anyway (especially if you buy they were willing to go for a win or lose 2pt conversion on a 2nd drive).

This is not entirely correct. It did matter considering we kicked a FG. Obviously, if we go 2nd, we don't kick a field goal, knowing they scored a TD. So we would have an extra down with the O on the field, if the decision was different.

Originally posted by Chance:

Originally posted by 5thSFG:

Originally posted by Chance:

Originally posted by 5thSFG:

Originally posted by eastie:
Dude, who the F**k are you? Condescending with your 'understand the flow chart" bullcrap. It's not hard at all to figure out that there are those that want the loss to be the HC's fault. To rationalize that perspective, one must take quotes out of context, and, or, ignore al together what was said. Analytics has said that the 'advantage' was miniscule at best. Turns out, the reason we lost was that our defense couldn't stop KC's offense when it needed to. That s**t happens in every game played by every team all season long.

In this corner we have Earnie Adams, long time analyst and confidant to the GOAT, Bill Belichick. In the other corner we have, uhm, Eastie. This is shaping up to be a good fight, will be interesting to see how Eastie plans to attack the juggernaut. The predictable tactics of rapid fire nonsensical statements meant to muddy the topic may not work to his benefit against such a high profile analyst like Mr Adams. But he appears eager and full of energy… he may just pull off the upset!

get your popcorn ready

https://heavy.com/sports/san-francisco-49ers/bill-belichick-ernie-adams-super-bowl/amp/

Back your s**t up with statistical analysis, otherwise you're just cherry-picking (argumentative fallacy), and looking like a fool for puffing out your feathers.

Settle down and scroll back a few pages. I made my point the day before the article was posted 👍🏻

Smokeyjoe, help your boy out!!

I am referring to you a few pages back where you acted like you won an argument because one single point of evidence comported with your opinion. I'm just pointing out how it's cherry picking and you should be careful about how much you celebrate your opinions, lest you look foolish when the broad spectrum of evidence paints a different picture.

I suppose intended childish sarcasm is often lost via text, but, overly celebrating my barely supported argument "victory" was exactly the intent, in accordance with forum traditions. Further examination of my posts would enlighten you to my lightheartedness regarding the topic, along with a couple concessions 👍🏻.

but, don't let me get in your way here. Fire away!

Originally posted by Chance:
Not only was it a part of his decision, it was absolutely a factor despite what faithful believes. Gee let me think, would it be better to keep on the field a d that had just run ten plays in rapid succession, or give them a breather with an extended drive of our own. To pretend that is not an advantage is more of the same b******t from him that, at this point, has become pretty absurd.

It's another point that should go without saying.

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:
This is not entirely correct. It did matter considering we kicked a FG. Obviously, if we go 2nd, we don't kick a field goal, knowing they scored a TD. So we would have an extra down with the O on the field, if the decision was different.

Kind of beside the point unless you think being forced into a have to have it conversion on 4th and 4 is a favorable position (It isn't). Had we kicked a fg on 4th and 2, I'd be agreeing with you.

The bottom line remains the same regardless of the order: you have to get a stop and outscore the opponent either by fg or td. KC did this and we didn't.

Originally posted by Chance:
Cool, then you admit that Kyle "lost" what amounts to a coin flip. Then why are you still skewering him? So convoluted and confusing are these arm-chair arguments.

Because it's Kyle and he's Captain SaveaHo when it comes to anything related to Jimmy or Steve Wilks. Therefore Kyle is to blame for it all.

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:
Kind of beside the point unless you think being forced into a have to have it conversion on 4th and 4 is a favorable position (It isn't). Had we kicked a fg on 4th and 2, I'd be agreeing with you.

The bottom line remains the same regardless of the order: you have to get a stop and outscore the opponent either by fg or td. KC did this and we didn't.

If only Steve Wilks schematic brilliance would've been allowed to be unleashed.

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:
This is not entirely correct. It did matter considering we kicked a FG. Obviously, if we go 2nd, we don't kick a field goal, knowing they scored a TD. So we would have an extra down with the O on the field, if the decision was different.

Kind of beside the point unless you think being forced into a have to have it conversion on 4th and 4 is a favorable position (It isn't). Had we kicked a fg on 4th and 2, I'd be agreeing with you.

The bottom line remains the same regardless of the order: you have to get a stop and outscore the opponent either by fg or td. KC did this and we didn't.

4th and 20 would be preferable to kicking a FG when you need 6, is more how I would look at it. Favorable is relative, this to that. We know the FG was doomed and not sufficient.

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:
4th and 20 would be preferable to kicking a FG when you need 6, is more how I would look at it. Favorable is relative, this to that. We know the FG was doomed and not sufficient.

What's preferable is getting a stop. Having the team do it's job, like KC did (on both sides of the ball).

KC walks right down the field and scores a TD on a tired defense forcing us to go the length of the field in response against an elite defense (now well rested). We get an extra down though that in effect only plays differently in low percentage conversion down and distances.

What an advantage. This to that, lol.

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:
4th and 20 would be preferable to kicking a FG when you need 6, is more how I would look at it. Favorable is relative, this to that. We know the FG was doomed and not sufficient.

What's preferable is getting a stop. Having the team do it's job, like KC did (on both sides of the ball).

KC walks right down the field and scores a TD on a tired defense forcing us to go the length of the field in response against an elite defense (now well rested). We get an extra down though that in effect only plays differently in low percentage conversion down and distances.

What an advantage. This to that, lol.

I think we know where we stand here. It was a good game. It's not all on Kyle, ppl often disagree on here but in reality, they agree. I think most ppl say Kyle did some right and some he may wish he had back. Matter of degrees, but we all pretty much feel the same.