12 hours ago, Eriv20 said:

With a normal style QB? A good coach gets the most out of the talent he has. Look at the other side of the ball. Vic just made a backup defense look pretty good yesterday.

Steichen did wonders with hurts. I’d take it a step further and say Siri hasn’t developed hurts at all. This is Siri’s offense. It has been for a while. And it stinks. He’s wasted a collection of talent that no team can match in the league. Who’s his prototype Qb? Philip Rivers? Who built a HOF career before he even met Siri?

Siri is a clown. We should’ve hired Steichen or Moore and then we wouldn’t have to worry about finding another OC every year.

This just wasn't always correct. There were plenty of Super Bowl winning coaches who decided to get guys that fit what they wanted to do, rather than just roll with whatever they had. There's always been a balance between the two. On one hand, coaches should do their best to adapt to talent, on the other hand, coaches have the ability to be selective. If not, when having the opportunity to draft a QB, why not just blindfold yourself and choose your selection by pointing?

Why bother scouting at all?

I think a lot of people throw around these cliches, but in reality, it's just them saying "fix it" in different words, without considering the actual situation, or the history of the game. Jalen is kind of as weird as QBs come, and unless he develops further as a QB, a timing based offense really isn't it. Timing as a basis is fine for the majority of QBs in the league, but we don't have that. That's what I meant though by normal QB.

And also, I hope in both of those cases it'd work out, especially with Moore, because there's a lot of people who would want nothing to do with your organization if you fire a head coach directly after winning a Super Bowl. And one of those people might be Vic Fangio, just saying.

8 hours ago, jojodancer said:

Crazy take. I rather get the Rams at home, than the Bears on the road. Although, they have dipped since playing them. Their physicality on offense is the one that could beat us in a cold weather game and hang around and steal it. They play tight games. Ultimately, I like playing an immobile Matt Stafford. Rams have cooled off, but may get Adams back. But hammy injuries are tricky. I like beating the best teams. Just like beating the Chiefs and Patriots. No shying away here or backing into victories.

I don't care if they beat the browns, jets, and raiders on the way to the Super bowl. Who cares about strength of opponents? Give me the easiest, most stress free path

The Bethune injury, along with all the others that SF has suffered on their defense, would be enough for a lot of good teams to take advantage. But I don’t think this offense has taken advantage of a defense’s weakness all season long.

I said last week play the FN starters. At least Sirianni is consistent though, he consistently coaches scared and now the path to another SB just got a whole lot more difficult and it didn't have to be that way. Heads better role if they lose next week but I doubt they will other than MAYBE Patullo falling on the sword for his boy.

13 minutes ago, T-1000 said:

So.....anyone still want to blame Hurts and not the morons running the offense after watching that dogshite yesterday?

I know no one's going to listen to this, but I think that's a negative proof kinda game. If the backups look better than the starters, that's obviously very bad, but if they don't, that's not exactly bad. What's the proof, that McKee and the backups didn't look all that much better than the starters did against the same team?

None of that negates the fact of some offense issues, but I don't see how that proved in any way that the only thing to blame is the scheme. Until we get proper timing throws with at least some of the starters, we'll never know. But then again, some people feel like us needing that by itself is malpractice, and I get that.

1 minute ago, BDawk_ASamuel said:

The Bethune injury, along with all the others that SF has suffered on their defense, would be enough for a lot of good teams to take advantage. But I don’t think this offense has taken advantage of a defense’s weakness all season long.

Maybe their weakness is shotgun runs right up the middle out of bunch and we can finally take advantage!

6 minutes ago, devpool said:

7 minutes ago, devpool said:

I don't care if they beat the browns, jets, and raiders on the way to the Super bowl. Who cares about strength of opponents? Give me the easiest, most stress free path

Don't worry, there will be plenty of stress here, whichever way it ends up. I just hate the mentality of worrying about who we play. They should be worried about us. I fear no one. Bring on the opponent, whoever it is. They can only beat themselves in my mind.

Just now, AmericanEagle77 said:

I know no one's going to listen to this, but I think that's a negative proof kinda game. If the backups look better than the starters, that's obviously very bad, but if they don't, that's not exactly bad. What's the proof, that McKee and the backups didn't look all that much better than the starters did against the same team?

None of that negates the fact of some offense issues, but I don't see how that proved in any way that the only thing to blame is the scheme. Until we get proper timing throws with at least some of the starters, we'll never know. But then again, some people feel like us needing that by itself is malpractice, and I get that.

It has nothing to do with how they backups looked. It has everything to do with how the offense looked, the play calling, etc. It's obvious to anyone that this offensive staff gets LESS out of the talent they have and good coaches get more.

Just now, T-1000 said:

I said last week play the FN starters. At least Sirianni is consistent though, he consistently coaches scared and now the path to another SB just got a whole lot more difficult and it didn't have to be that way. Heads better role if they lose next week but I doubt they will other than MAYBE Patullo falling on the sword for his boy.

Ah, here we go. Now if they lose in the 2nd round, we'll get the delusional fan "They would have won if they were at home!" thing, and act with just as much PTSD as the collapse. Here we go again.

3 minutes ago, AmericanEagle77 said:

Ah, here we go. Now if they lose in the 2nd round, we'll get the delusional fan "They would have won if they were at home!" thing, and act with just as much PTSD as the collapse. Here we go again.

So, you'd rather play the 49'ers than the Packers and be on the road in the 2nd round if they happen to win next week? Got it, great logic on your part. Go look up my posts, I said play the starters a week ago so this isn't some 20/20 hindsight thing.

2 hours ago, ToastJenkins said:

#24 was killing him with the outside speed rush late in the game, but will be eager to see where he is at by camp next season

At guard I hope

Just now, T-1000 said:

It has nothing to do with how they backups looked. It has everything to do with how the offense looked, the play calling, etc. It's obvious to anyone that this offensive staff gets LESS out of the talent they have and good coaches get more.

It's not just this year's staff. I'd say that this year, 2023, and 2024 were all underperformances from the offense vs the talent presented. Hurts gets better during the playoffs, but in reality the only year in which he consistently took advantage of his talent was 2022, with Steichen in charge of play-calling, Sirianni with gameplanning and prep, and Hurts throwing timing the best of his career.

He hasn't thrown timing well since, and it's hurt him immensely. The reason is, if you can't throw timing in NFL schemes, frankly, you eliminate about 50% of the scheming and you have to replace that with off script plays. The only difference is that last year it was propped up by a historic run game, but we had issues passing the ball all the way until the NFCCG.

1 minute ago, T-1000 said:

So, you'd rather play the 49'ers than the Packers and be on the road in the 2nd round if they happen to win next week? Got it, great logic on your part. Go look up my posts, I said play the starters a week ago so this isn't some 20/20 hindsight thing.

Being honest here? We're screwed if we can't run the ball most likely. Maybe that'll change, but I think if we can't run the ball we're Fed - unless the defense goes all 2000 Ravens. Considering a big part of that was Cam Jurgens struggling all year, likely because of poor health, I don't know how much I would have liked to play the starters all game.

Also, no, that's not what I said, I'm poking fun at Philadelphia fan narrative where they assume the thing they disagree with is causative sometimes when in reality they might have just lost either way.

2 minutes ago, AmericanEagle77 said:

Being honest here? We're screwed if we can't run the ball most likely. Maybe that'll change, but I think if we can't run the ball we're Fed - unless the defense goes all 2000 Ravens. Considering a big part of that was Cam Jurgens struggling all year, likely because of poor health, I don't know how much I would have liked to play the starters all game.

Also, no, that's not what I said, I'm poking fun at Philadelphia fan narrative where they assume the thing they disagree with is causative sometimes when in reality they might have just lost either way.

Of course it MIGHT not matter. That doesn't mean you don't put yourself in the best possible situation to succeed. Being the 2 seed and playing the Packers in round 1 is a much better path to getting back to the SB and considering our backups almost beat Washington I see no why the starters wouldn't have done so.

2 minutes ago, T-1000 said:

Of course it MIGHT not matter. That doesn't mean you don't put yourself in the best possible situation to succeed. Being the 2 seed and playing the Packers in round 1 is a much better path to getting back to the SB and considering our backups almost beat Washington I see no why the starters wouldn't have done so.

Frankly you probably didn't even need all of the starters, you might have only needed like Goedert and Devonta.

But my point is, fan narrative often assumes causation when in reality that's just confirmation bias. Very common issue, also very annoying.

Like I said though, we're probably screwed if we can't run the ball, so at the very least key OL needed rest. I don't really mind either way, I'm much more concerned about how our offense performs than any opponent.

4 hours ago, bpac55 said:

No one is saying he was a bad draft pick. I started the conversation by saying I want to see more from him. Did you notice him at all? Are we just giving him the benefit of the doubt because he was a 1st round pick and we're slobbing any pick Howie makes now? There's some damn exciting tape from him at Bama. He flashed a few times before Dean came back. The fumble recovery last week was terrific hustle. Where he started the play to getting the ball is crazy to watch. He HAS talent. He's just been outplayed by every LB on the team as of late.

Ah, well…well i didn’t focus on him much yesterday. Saw a few flashes, one objectively bad play. I thought overall the LB’s had a fantastic game. Trotter Jr was clearly used in the Dean role…Campbell was in the Baun role. Typically if you’re not seen as a LB with the way camera cover games live, you’re having at least a good game. He’s a rookie who was playing mainly with soon to be cars salesman. Dumb PI’s committed by 2 dum dums really marred how ridiculously good the D played as a cohesive unit yesterday in shutting down the Commanders for most of the game.

3 hours ago, Connecticut Eagle said:

The Eagles can only play the Packers in the NFCCG. Beat SF. Then beat either Chicago, Carolina, or LA.

This isn't true. If CHI beats GB, we beat CHI, and LAR beat both CAR and SEA then we are hosting them.

2 hours ago, LeanMeanGM said:

They will never answer it. But likely because it’s safe and easy and falls in line with their paranoia of turning the ball over

Ironically, besides the out, I’d say it’s the 2nd easiest route to sit on. Thankfully AJ is elite at boxing and WR1 might be the best route runner in the NFL. The non stop running them short of the sticks is the most infuriating, at least give the WR a chance. So easy to sit on the LTG and jump the WR at the catch point.

35 minutes ago, T-1000 said:

Of course it MIGHT not matter. That doesn't mean you don't put yourself in the best possible situation to succeed. Being the 2 seed and playing the Packers in round 1 is a much better path to getting back to the SB and considering our backups almost beat Washington I see no why the starters wouldn't have done so.

Sounds like the starters wanted the time off. According to Mailata,whom nobody should ever question at this point in time, they wanted it for both the physical and mental break.

1 hour ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Thanks, I missed that. His answer sounds really weird

"He re-aggravated it, which, whether that looks like a setback or—I mean, I guess it's not a setback," Shanahan said. "It's just he re-aggravated it, which is usually what happens with PCLs."

Yeah, sounds like a word salad of ramblings by Shanahan. Frankly, I feel bad for him because he had that gun incident last year. But this year he gets injured like every time he plays. So i wouldn’t be shocked if he plays and leaves the game with an injury. Some niners fan posted this on Twitter. Made me laugh

32 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said:

This isn't true. If CHI beats GB, we beat CHI, and LAR beat both CAR and SEA then we are hosting them.

He means the only place we can play the Packers is the NFCCG

41 minutes ago, Wentz_Era said:

Ah, well…well i didn’t focus on him much yesterday. Saw a few flashes, one objectively bad play. I thought overall the LB’s had a fantastic game. Trotter Jr was clearly used in the Dean role…Campbell was in the Baun role. Typically if you’re not seen as a LB with the way camera cover games live, you’re having at least a good game. He’s a rookie who was playing mainly with soon to be cars salesman. Dumb PI’s committed by 2 dum dums really marred how ridiculously good the D played as a cohesive unit yesterday in shutting down the Commanders for most of the game.

I'll disagree with you there. I WANT to notice LB play. They should be making plays. LB isn't like the OL where if you don't hear their name it's a good thing. I want LB changing games. Making plays behind the LOS, breaking up passes, shutting down TE and RB in the passing game. NOT letting a 39 year old QB scramble for 45 yards (not blaming them for all of that).

5 minutes ago, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

Yeah, sounds like a word salad of ramblings by Shanahan. Frankly, I feel bad for him because he had that gun incident last year. But this year he gets injured like every time he plays. So i wouldn’t be shocked if he plays and leaves the game with an injury. Some niners fan posted this on Twitter. Made me laugh

He's the Silver Surfer?

1 minute ago, Aerolithe_Lion said:

He means the only place we can play the Packers is the NFCCG

congrats on being able to read. this place shocks me sometimes.