There are 130 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Coach Singletary: A Thorough Discussion of Why He Lost Me Today

Excellent, level headed post!!! We need a lot more of these.
Singletary is going to be on KNBR this morning.

What's embarassing these guys have a sports-talk show but they don't even remember/know what the K-Gun offense was with Jim Kelly. How can you be allowed to have a sports talk show and not know this. He didn't even know that Gore led the team in receptions.

Who are these guys??
Originally posted by NinerGM:
Singletary is going to be on KNBR this morning.

What's embarassing these guys have a sports-talk show but they don't even remember/know what the K-Gun offense was with Jim Kelly. How can you be allowed to have a sports talk show and not know this. He didn't even know that Gore led the team in receptions.

Who are these guys??

I am just listening to Sing's interview, not one serious question has been asked so far. Nothing but softballs, what a shame.
I would like to remember bigMike as the HOF player, the intensity, the chin rattling tackles, the toughness, the...well you know the rest of it. Instead, we saw a coach who is dissembling, or unraveling, up on the podium, and that is not the way Sing would like to be remembered. It is painfully obvious to any who have watched the singletary 49ers that the guy has no feel for O, has no way of fixing the O, has never had any formal training in O, and now is floundering, sticking to his "run the ball...smash mouth football" with a team that doesn't have the talent for that. Also, sing, in running the O in a c.s. way, by telling jimmyrae what to do, and then not taking responsibility for an O that is predictably going to fail trying to do what they were told to do, not what they do best...well, that is something bigMike cannot be proud of.

My image of bigMike has now become a raging, buffoon at the microphone, embarrassing himself with his lack of knowledge about his O and his O players. I would have thot a guy like sing would have read and studied like crazy to get up to par with other HC and OCs in the nfl, and it is obvious he didn't...instead choosing the CEO approach, where he just stands sphinx-like on the sidelines. He is rapidly making a joke out of himself, and all his hard won admiration, adulation, hero-worship is about to slip out the window. Were i in his shoes, i would look at the entire situation, not just with the 9ers, but consider his reputation as well, and while still able, retire now before he makes a bigger fool out of himself.

Yes, that would put a lot of pressure on jed and the yorks, but even the biggest mike diehard fan would admit that he is dragging this team(with a fair amt of talent, if you exclude the OL)...down the toilet with him. I can think of two quick stop gap solutions. Hire either Shanny or Gruden as OC, and let bigmike and jimmy rae just disappear into the sunset, and see what either of those 2 professionals could do with this team for the rest of the yr. My guess would be one helluva lot better than what has happened to date.

That would give jed a 6 week head start on other failing teams who also need OCs, HCs, and GMs, to thoroughly search for an OC, HC, DC, and most importantly, a GM. I would keep scot on as a chief scout, but GM, he certainly is not. You all realize that we did GM/HC just backwards from everybody else, and it shows. noln brot scot and bigmike here as underlings, then proved he couldn't GM, nor could he HC. Scot was then elevated to GM and noln's other hire was promoted to HC. Just how backwards can a team get?

I would like to remember the bigMike i enjoyed watching during the 80's. To see him continue like this, with no plan, no experience from which to make a plan, with an OC who is just doing bigMIkes bidding and worse, not taking blame for his ineptitude, with a GM who is just a glorified scout...well, big mike's reputation isn' t just going to suffer if he stays on...it is going to end up in the trash heap of the truly insignificant...And honestly, that is not the way i would like to remember a true HOFer, one who probably was the VERY best of all time. By staying on with no plan, he just damages his once bright reputation even more. He must be able to see that...or he thinks divine intervention will somehow occur, and the 9ers will magically turn everything around...with a bunch of inexperienced or lousy coaches & GM. If he chooses the latter, his reputation is kaput...forever.

Were i in his shoes, i would do the manly thing, own up to the yorks, admit i was a poor choice as HC, and salvage what is left of my otherwise stellar reputation. As it is now, his star power is fading fast. To stay on the remainder of the yr would just put the 9ers farther down the hole, and would permanently stain bigMike's rep. Do the right thing, bigMike, and exit prematurely. Your reputation will thank you, not to mention diehard 49er fans.

Oh, and even with a new ESPN contract, anybody out there really think Gruden wouldn't jump at the chance to come here, even as an interim OC initially? I think he would. Shanny, i don't know. If jed were able to get that 6 week headstart on looking for a HC, OC, DC, GM, under the guidance of his uncle and Eddie's braintrust, then i think even jed could get us good leadership at the top. If bigmike waits to get fired at season's end, then jed has no leg up on the other 8 or so teams in the market for new leadership. With a headstart, bigmike would be helping jed and the 9ers out.
  • jaghetersofie
  • Info N/A
I am listening to his interview on KNBR. Singletary on whether or not the team came out flat in Green Bay, "absolutely... I take full responsibility for that." Went on to say that if the players are flat it's due to flat coaching. Has admitted to being under-prepared. I'm a little more optimistic for next week but if it's a repeat of this Green Bay game I'm done
  • kem99
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 574
Originally posted by NinerGM:
Originally posted by kem99:
I hear what you're saying but not sure if it is truly a fair assessment:

1. Accountability and willingness to change course

You cannot objectively look at this season and say Singletary has not been accountable, held the players to be accountable and showed a willingness to change course. He changed from Hill to Smith when it became obvious Hill was not going to take the 49ers where they needed to go. Once Crabtree was signed, he moved him quickly into the starting line-up once he proved he could handle it. He demoted Bruce in favor of Morgan. He even took Clements out of the starting line-up.

Maybe accountable about certain players, but that's not what this thread is about. This is beyond just being a position coach and singling out individual players. It's a similar argument I have with the McCloughan apologists who only talk about the draft: a HC can't take a myopic view of the team. He has to be accountable for ALL of it, including the offensive game plan. Changing QBs was so obvious because Hill was completely ineffective and didn't have the arm strength nor athletic ability to escape the rush constantly allowed by a dreadful OL. So my question to you is, then who's ultimately responsible for fielding this line? Who's responsible for the repeated failures and reoccurring ineptitude of the game plan? When asked about this his response wasn't "yes, I'm responsible for getting this right"... it was "Mike Johns, Alex Smith and Jimmy Raye are all talking." What about the HC inserting himself and saying "hey guys, this isn't working so you need to change this." But the reason why he can't do that is because he simply doesn't have the coaching (X and O) chops to constructively critique, much like the Nolan/Hostler situation.

Of course, the HC is always accountable for the wins and losses. Beyond that, the answer to your question of who's responsible for fielding the line is mostly McCloughan with a little bit of Nolan thrown in. With the exception of Heitmann, everyone on the OL was brought in under McCloughan's watch or Nolan's watch while be aided by McCloughan. At the end of the day, Singletary can only play with the players provided to him, though it does appear he over estimated the OL generally and a change in the OL coach is probably coming in the off-season.

In terms of the game plan, look, I wasn't a big fan of the Raye hire at the time but I understood why they were going in that direction. At the end of the day, though, Singletary was looking at a turnover prone offense that consistently put its defense in bad positions last year. The best player on the offense was the RB. The QB situation was shaky at best. The WR's were either young and unproven, coming off of injuries or old. Under those circumstances, what kind of offense would you think would give you the best chance to win while also going to your 7th OC is 7 years and when you think your defense is going to be the strength of the team?

With all that said, this year's offense is about the same as last year's offense, which was about as productive as the 2006 offense under Turner. These 3 years are basically as productive as the 49ers have seen since Mooch left. During that time, the team has seen 7 OC's in 7 years with some WC systems, some digit systems and whatever Erickson was running his 2nd year and produced about the same or worse each year. At what point do you say perhaps its not the scheme or the game plan, perhaps its the players? Or the constant turnover of OC's and schemes? Or a combination of all three?

In terms of Singletary not having the X's and O's knowledge, not many HC's interject themselves into the side of the ball that isn't their specialty. Belichek does, apparently Rex Ryan is going to try but I can't think of too many more that actively gameplan, etc. when its not their specialty. Walsh wasn't known for generally interfering with his DC. Nolan got blasted for getting involved and he had actually coached at least one year on the offensive side of the ball.

Quote:
The 49ers are currently tied for last with the Bears for least number of rushing attempts, which is a staggering statistic given what was expected this year and what you read on these boards. One would think that notwithstanding the score, the 49ers have stuck to the 60/40 run/pass ration they aimed for at the start of the season.

The problem isn't the philosophy, it is the execution.

There's a simple and alarming explanation for this. The reason why the 49ers and Bears are last for the least number of rushing attempts because now in the majority of games, both teams are well behind and can't afford to run the ball to win. They HAVE to pass to catch up. This means your rushing attempts are going to tank and you have no balance in the 2nd half.

Except that even when the 49ers were 3-1 and had generally been ahead or close in all 4 games, they had still thrown more than they had run. Beyond that, my point was how people talk here about Singletary's philosophy, one would think that even when the team is down 21-0 or 23-3 at half, they would still be running the ball.

Quote:
2. Football logic/understanding of X's and O's

The gist of this point seems to be that the team has to be a passing team to win in today's NFL and Singletary doesn't understand so the 49ers are getting beat. In 2008, the 49ers were a passing team with Martz as the OC. They averaged 21.2 points per game, threw 31.8 passes per game, has a 21/19 TD/INT ration and a QB ratio of 81.4. In 2009, the 49ers are averaging 20.8 points per game, attempting 31.1 passes per game, have a 14/9 TD/INT ratio and a QB rating of 80.3. The numbers are pretty similar across 2 philosophies from 2 different OC's.

In 2008, 9 of the top 12 teams in terms of pass attempts per game did not make the playoffs. In 2008, 8 of the top 13 teams in terms of yards did not make the playoffs and one of the 5 that did was the Chargers who were 8-8.

This year, the QBs whose teams are near the top in passing and are at or near the top of their divisions are: P. Manning, Brady, Warner, Brees, Rivers, Favre and Romo. The other division leader is C. Palmer despite the Bengals being 20th in terms of passing yards. By comparison, the 49ers have had a combination of S. Hill and A. Smith.

Points per game mean nothing if your opponents score more points than you do. Yes, the 49ers score on average 20.8 points a game but giving up an average of 21 points a game. This is because during the first half of most 49er games, the opponent has scored more points. And what cements this fact? 3rd down conversion. The 49ers are 28th in 3rd down conversion percentage, joining Cleveland, Oakland, Buffalo and KC. That tells me the offense is not sustaining drives and explains why they're 23rd in the league in TOP. Furthermore, most of the 49ers scoring comes in the 2nd half of games - again proving that the offense led by Raye, accountable to Singletary is repeating the same repeatedly proven, failed offensive strategy.

Okay, you either intentionally or unintentionally missed the point all together. The point was the Raye "run first" offense has essentially produced the same as the Martz "pass" first offense. Beyond that, you skipped over that the recent history of passing teams in terms of making the playoffs is not as rosy its been made it out to be and that those teams that do pass more and are leading their divisions have much better and/or proven QBs than the 49ers do at the moment so, of course, they are more willing to open it up. Remember, Belichek did not let Brady throw 40 times per game when he first took over. I remember 49er fans calling Brady a "game manager" early on in his career. Notwithstanding their time in the league, given Hill's inexperience starting and Smith having essentially missed 2 years with his shoulder injury, at best, that's where the 49er QB situation stood in the off season, at the start of the season and we'll see where it ends up.

No question the failure to run the ball effectively has left the offense in a lot of 3rd and longs. But, teams stacked the box in 2006 and Gore was able to run for 1700 yards. The real difference is execution and perhaps the OL in 2006 was just that much better in run blocking that this year's version, which as we know has not been great either at pass blocking at times.

Quote:
Those criticizing the offense for its scheme and calling for a full-time use of the spread point to Smith's better numbers using that offense but never address exactly how many teams in the NFL run that kind of offense successfully. The Patriots probably use the shotgun-spread offense as much as anyone but, again, they have Tom Brady, have run it for a few years and have experienced receivers named Moss and Welker. The 49ers have Smith/Hill, are being asked by the fans to make it work on the fly when they prepared the entire off-season to run another offense and their best receivers are young and have had little time with their current starting QB. Even the Cardinals have been at their best, including their SB run, when they ran the ball well and had Warner under center more than in a shot-gun.

All of this is to say, it is not as easy to say the 49ers are behind the times in wanting to be a running team in a passing league and everything would be better if they just let Smith throw the ball more. What they are finding out is that they probably do not have the personnel to run the kind of offense Singletary wants. The OL is just not as good in its run blocking as it was in 2006. It is not the scheme, it is the execution. The OL has not run blocked or pass blocked consistently well.

This argument seem contradictory to me. You say the 49ers can't just become a passing offense, yet you argue above that the scoring average is up despite running less. Wouldn't that prove this argument moot? Don't your statistics prove that the 49ers are more effective when they pass vs when they get into a "Tiger" formation or I and try to pound the ball? Most of the 49ers TD have been receiving TD, not passing (Davis at one time lead the league in TD receptions). And it would seem you fall into the same trap as Singletary:

There is no RUN or PASS binary logic in the NFL. Teams adapt and (should) scheme to what accentuates their abilities the best. The 49ers most effective offense including Smiths TDs come mostly when he's out of the shotgun to Davis, the perfect seam pass between the safety, over the LB to the TE. When Alex reads this coverage, he's been almost money every time. Is it not possible as one reporter asked to run out of the shotgun? Singletary never answers this, but should be a question we all as fans ask of a long tenured OC. Can he be more creative to weave in runs with the shotgun formation? Where's the rule that you MUST run out of a running formation effectively and you MUST pass out of a passing formation effectively. Creativity is needed here. As long we convince ourselves that somehow the offensive strategy is limited to what we've seen, we buy into the same limited approach this coaching staff has taken.

Furthermore, what do you have to lose at 4-6? Really. Risk? Are you serious? Why NOT make it up on the fly. Who cares about statistics here. You're a team that's two games below .500 and 3 games out of the division title, and a very small chance of making it to the playoffs without some extreme help. Why not risk it? Why not become creative? Again this cements what we've seen - the "play not to lose" philosophy vs playing to win. I'd much rather have a loss and the team trying to execute a great game plan for 60 minutes than some hurried, sudden realization that what hasn't been working for 30 minutes needs to be re-evaluated. It will always create the question: "why didn't we do that from the start?"

First, I didn't argue the scoring average is up. The statistics actually show that the Raye "run first" offense is essentially the same as the Martz "pass first" offense.

Second, again, I ask, how many teams in the NFL run an offense out of the shotgun full time or near full time. The answer is none with the Patriots coming the closest and the Saints and Colts working it in as well, though both run most of their offense from a pro set. You ask for creativity and that's fine but no team has gone as far as you seem to want, much less doing it on the fly. For that matter, the QB has said to change the offense that much would take devoting an entire off-season to it and that it can't be done on the fly in the middle of the season to the extent you seem to want. Also seems to me that going to that type of offense full time would expose the QB to getting hit and sacked more which no one liked last year under Martz and apparently the rest of the NFL agrees since Martz can't get a job coaching.

Third, what's the risk? Well, let's see, if you believe in Smith or at least believe he has a chance to be at least better than average, you could end up getting him hurt again because he would be taking more hits. You could end up ruining his rebuilding confidence as teams game planned to take attack a shotgun based attack that no one else in the NFL is running or has ever run. You would be right if this was the last NFL season ever to be played or perhaps even if the team knew it would be bringing in new QBs next season but neither is the case. You also seem to be contradicting yourself. You criticize the thought process of the coaching and game plans but then you want them to just make it up on the fly??? Are you serious? So, if in next Monday's press conference Singletary says they just decided to make up the gameplans on the fly, you would be up clapping and cheering? Really?

Quote:
I felt from the beginning of this year that the most important thing to come out of this season was for the 49ers to find out if their QB of the future was on the roster or they needed to go get a new QB. That is still the case and it is still an open question on Smith. Until the 49ers solve that question, seasons like this are going to continue regardless of who the coach, GM or OC happen to be.

And this is where we disagree. I don't think it's just a player problem. My hope from the beginning of the season is that the 49ers would win - at all costs despite who was on the roster. I hoped that our GM would answer the questions set forth at the beginning of the off-season (RT, pass-rush, safety). I hoped that Jimmy Raye would actually be creative. I hoped that Singletary would have enough football knowledge to recognize when he could or could not implement certain philosophies given his team's abilities before declaring an approach. I had hoped he wouldn't keep starting damn Chilo Rachal! I had hope the HC would not have cut our best option at KR before solidifying his replacement. That act alone cost us at least one win (Houston).

I was, was a Singletary supporter. After today's presser however, he had no answers. He had no explanation. He had nothing but a motivational speech about "we will do it" but can never tell you how.

That's what we call where I'm from an empty sales pitch.

Okay, you say you don't believe its a player problem but then most of your criticisms are player related. You hoped the 49ers would win "despite who was on the roster." You win because of who is on the roster. The Patriots win because of Brady, Moss, Welker, etc. The Colts win because of Manning. You also lose because of who is on the roster. You're admitting here that it is a player problem.

Then you mention the off-season needs for a pass rusher, RT and safety, which again points to a personnel issue and the need for better players at those positions.

Then you point to hoping Raye would be creative. I'll give you that one but, again, how creative can you be with a shaky at best QB situation? And, if you wanted creative, then point me to where you said back in January that the 49ers should keep Martz because he was creative in his game plans.

Then you hoped that Singletary would evaluate the team's abilities before declaring an approach. I'd submit that he did and that given the personnel on offense and the QB situation, he determined that the best course was to win with defense and running the ball. Given the circumstances at the time, it was a reasonable determination with Hill as the likely starting QB, Smith's status being up in the air, not expecting to get Crabtree in the draft, the success in 2006 running the ball under Turner, which Singletary said he personally liked, etc.

Then you don't like playing Richal, which again is a player issue.

Then you don't like the cutting of Rossum, which I'll agree was curious though Dallas just cut him as well. But, again, the lack of a KR/PR is a player personnel issue.

And, you sidestepped the issue that this season is really about figuring out where the 49ers are at QB. They know Hill is not the future. They need to figure out if Smith is going to become a good QB or if he is going to be on that "Steve DeBerg just good enough to get you beat" level. They need to know if he can operate under center as well as he can out of the shotgun. They need to know if he can turn his back to his receivers on play-action and then go through his progressions. They need to know if he can anticipate throws and throw receivers open instead of holding the ball and not being willing to let it go. They need to know if he can find other receivers when Davis is covered down the middle. They need to know if he can start in the NFL and not throw at least 1 INT in every game he's played in this year.

They have 2 No. 1 picks in the upcoming draft that is likely to be rich with QBs. Its their next best shot to get the QB of the future if they do not believe that QB is not on the roster at the moment.

So given all of that, exactly how again is it not a player personnel issue? And, how is it not about answering the QB question?
I just think Singletary is over his head as head coach. It's really scary and I think we have not seen the worse yet.
Originally posted by NinerGM:
Singletary is going to be on KNBR this morning.

What's embarassing these guys have a sports-talk show but they don't even remember/know what the K-Gun offense was with Jim Kelly. How can you be allowed to have a sports talk show and not know this. He didn't even know that Gore led the team in receptions.

Who are these guys??

I hope they ask him about challenging the spot on the ball before the 2 minute warning. Thus giving away our last TO.
Originally posted by kem99:


Okay, you say you don't believe its a player problem but then most of your criticisms are player related. You hoped the 49ers would win "despite who was on the roster." You win because of who is on the roster. The Patriots win because of Brady, Moss, Welker, etc. The Colts win because of Manning. You also lose because of who is on the roster. You're admitting here that it is a player problem.

Kem, you're not winning this argument dude and you're using circular logic; coaches are, will be, and always have been responsible for the product that's on the field. If a coach knows a player can't execute, you start someone else. You argue as if coaches are these helpless figures solely at the mercy of those starting. If that's the case why is the coach responsible for selecting the 53-man roster? Why is it coaches who are responsible for submitting an injury report each week to the NFL? Becuase they are ultimately responsible for the players on the field and how they perform. If a player repeatedly shows that he can't execute (i.e. Rachal), the only person who has authority to bench him is the HC.


Quote:
Then you mention the off-season needs for a pass rusher, RT and safety, which again points to a personnel issue and the need for better players at those positions.

Yes because I'm talking about how Jed needs to clean house. Read the post in a linear fashion and the argument makes a lot more sense that way. Jed needs to clean house, including the GM.

Quote:
Then you point to hoping Raye would be creative. I'll give you that one but, again, how creative can you be with a shaky at best QB situation? And, if you wanted creative, then point me to where you said back in January that the 49ers should keep Martz because he was creative in his game plans.

So Alex Smith is a "shakey at best" QB? Do you realize the coach your defending said, and I quote "Alex is throwing as well as any QB in the league". Do you realize that? That's more than just a vote of confidence, that's something you should consider given that you're arguing to keep someone who fundamentally disagrees with you. Furthermore, Raye has proven he's handicapped by the current personnel that Singletary won't change. Part of the reason why there's no protection is because Singletary chose to keep Chris Forester. Oops. I've documented Forester's horrid OL production over the years in other threads.

Quote:
Then you hoped that Singletary would evaluate the team's abilities before declaring an approach. I'd submit that he did and that given the personnel on offense and the QB situation, he determined that the best course was to win with defense and running the ball. Given the circumstances at the time, it was a reasonable determination with Hill as the likely starting QB, Smith's status being up in the air, not expecting to get Crabtree in the draft, the success in 2006 running the ball under Turner, which Singletary said he personally liked, etc.

Again, I think you're mixing two issues that are fundamentally separate; QB and OL. In order to declare you want a power rushing offense that manages the game, you need to have 100% proof that your guys can pull that off. The quick and frank exposure of the OL has to conclude one of two things: either Forester is completely inept as a talent evaluator and was so horribly duped into thinking this line was good going into the offseason or Singletary is completely unable to assess this for himself and is relying too much on coordinators for this insight. I was one of the many fans here who saw the OL bust train roaring down the tracks in the off-season - and that was just at RT. How could Rachal be this bad? The b-word. I don't watch nearly as much film as those guys (position coaches, HC, GM) but to not see this complete collapse, AND the insistence at a continued start of this player is downright unacceptable. He declares Smith must be protected, but Rachal still starts. Right.

Quote:
Then you don't like playing Richal, which again is a player issue.

Then you don't like the cutting of Rossum, which I'll agree was curious though Dallas just cut him as well. But, again, the lack of a KR/PR is a player personnel issue.

I don't quite sure if you understand how football management works. The HC cut the player. Player Personnel guys identifies prospects and does the research, presents that to the coaching staff and a decision is made - or at least that's how it should work. Singletary cut Rossum. Singletary also made the decision that we should keep Spurlock and 6 other receivers on a "power-rushing" team ..... in September.

Quote:
And, you sidestepped the issue that this season is really about figuring out where the 49ers are at QB. They know Hill is not the future. They need to figure out if Smith is going to become a good QB or if he is going to be on that "Steve DeBerg just good enough to get you beat" level. They need to know if he can operate under center as well as he can out of the shotgun. They need to know if he can turn his back to his receivers on play-action and then go through his progressions. They need to know if he can anticipate throws and throw receivers open instead of holding the ball and not being willing to let it go. They need to know if he can find other receivers when Davis is covered down the middle. They need to know if he can start in the NFL and not throw at least 1 INT in every game he's played in this year.

I didn't sidestep this question at all; I just disagree with the premise. Every season should be about winning. Finding out whether we have a QB or not to me is secondary. You play the game to win. And again, your veiled critique of Smith's play is contradicted by the coach you're defending.

Quote:
They have 2 No. 1 picks in the upcoming draft that is likely to be rich with QBs. Its their next best shot to get the QB of the future if they do not believe that QB is not on the roster at the moment.

So given all of that, exactly how again is it not a player personnel issue? And, how is it not about answering the QB question?

I can have $2 million dollars but I spend it all on candy what good does it do me? Sorry but I have absolutely no confidence this current regime will use those two draft picks wisely. Remember the 49ers can picks some 1st round busts - Rashaun Woods anyone? Kentwan Balmer folks? It's not outside the realm of possibility that the 49er select two talented guys but then don't use them in the best way possible - that is if GM McCloughan makes the right decision. Look at your vaunted offensive line; Baas is a 2nd round pick! Snyder is a 4th (?). Chilo Rachal - another 2nd rounder. LOL! You guys have confidence that with 2 1st rounders we're suddenly after years of getting it wrong are going to get it right simply because we have 2 firsts?

That's quite a leap of faith for me.
  • TFSP
  • Member
  • Posts: 315
Originally posted by NinerGM:
Originally posted by TFSP:
So if Sing goes 7-9, 8-8, and NO playoffs, he's supposed to be fired your saying? You mentioned Scott MC, well, what GMs took a trash ass team like the 2004 roster, and brought them to the playoffs in 5 years. Who can you compare to what that track record looks like?

Just asking...

Tony Sporano's Dolphins, (who didn't have a qb or an OL), Andy Reid's Eagles (I lived in Philly at the time), Lovie Smith's Bears - those are just teams off the top of my head.

Those teams, and this years talent is the same, your saying?

  • TFSP
  • Member
  • Posts: 315
Originally posted by NinerGM:
Originally posted by TFSP:
Originally posted by 49Gorillas:
He had to reach far today to explain things, and at the end of it he looked stupid. I said it in another post and i'll say it again. Regardless of what you did in training camp you have one of the best receiving TE in Vernon Davis, you have one of the best receiving RB in Frank Gore then you have Crabtree, Morgan, Hill, Bruce, Battle and Jones, Walker, Robinson... All this with a QB built for the spread offense... and our line is injured and cant run block for s**t!

With all that said, coach Sing would rather stick to our preseason plan and put half those guys on the bench, have the other half block, make our spread QB hand it off just so Frank can get 3 yards and a cloud of dust. The best coaches use the tools they have and play to there strengths... He isn't doing it.

Actually looking at this thing as a whole knowing what we know today I am now very curious as to what would have happened with our franchise if Martz was Chosen instead of Sing.

We'd have 70 sacks and 47 ints.


So? We're already on pace to have something close to that. I'd much rather go down fighting than looking repeatedly inept.

Your coach doesn't know what a "Spread" offense is. No seriously. He doesn't KNOW what it is.

Martz's offensive is mostly a 5-7 drop step! That's not a spread offense. Also, Martz wouldn't dare to have VD, and DW in on a shotgun formation 65% of the time like the 9ers need to, compared to having 3-4 wrs in the shotgun. We can actually run with VD, and DW in this formation. But, they need continuous practice at this formation. They can only call plays that they practiced with this second string o-line.
Originally posted by TFSP:
Originally posted by NinerGM:
Originally posted by TFSP:
So if Sing goes 7-9, 8-8, and NO playoffs, he's supposed to be fired your saying? You mentioned Scott MC, well, what GMs took a trash ass team like the 2004 roster, and brought them to the playoffs in 5 years. Who can you compare to what that track record looks like?

Just asking...

Tony Sporano's Dolphins, (who didn't have a qb or an OL), Andy Reid's Eagles (I lived in Philly at the time), Lovie Smith's Bears - those are just teams off the top of my head.

Those teams, and this years talent is the same, your saying?


No, not the existing teams. You asked the question:

Well, what GMs took a trash ass team like the 2004 roster, and brought them to the playoffs in 5 years. Who can you compare to what that track record looks like?

And I answered it if you compare when all those coaches intiially ARRIVED at those teams they looked similar to the 49ers of 2004; Tony Sporano's Dolphins, (who didn't have a qb or an OL), Andy Reid's Eagles (I lived in Philly at the time), Lovie Smith's Bears.

All had QB issues. All had WR issues. All had DL issues. All had issues with their secondary and all were bottom-feeding teams and perennial play-off no-shows except for a couple of times (Eagles under Kotite). They were turned around in 5 seasons - some less than that.
[ Edited by NinerGM on Nov 24, 2009 at 10:42 AM ]
  • TFSP
  • Member
  • Posts: 315
Originally posted by NinerGM:
Originally posted by TFSP:
Originally posted by NinerGM:
Originally posted by TFSP:
So if Sing goes 7-9, 8-8, and NO playoffs, he's supposed to be fired your saying? You mentioned Scott MC, well, what GMs took a trash ass team like the 2004 roster, and brought them to the playoffs in 5 years. Who can you compare to what that track record looks like?

Just asking...

Tony Sporano's Dolphins, (who didn't have a qb or an OL), Andy Reid's Eagles (I lived in Philly at the time), Lovie Smith's Bears - those are just teams off the top of my head.

Those teams, and this years talent is the same, your saying?


No, not the existing teams. You asked the question:

Well, what GMs took a trash ass team like the 2004 roster, and brought them to the playoffs in 5 years. Who can you compare to what that track record looks like?

And I answered it if you compare when all those coaches intiially ARRIVED at those teams they looked similar to the 49ers of 2004; Tony Sporano's Dolphins, (who didn't have a qb or an OL), Andy Reid's Eagles (I lived in Philly at the time), Lovie Smith's Bears.

All had QB issues. All had WR issues. All had DL issues. All had issues with their secondary and all were bottom-feeding teams and perennial play-off no-shows except for a couple of times (Eagles under Kotite). They were turned around in 5 seasons - some less than that.

No. None of those teams had talent issues, coaching issues, injury issues, like our 2004 team and on. I will just throw some names out there...Ken Dorsey, Terry Donahue, Rashun Woods(don't care about the spelling of these trash dudes)...etc...

Our first step towards success was 2006. Then look back at what happened since then. Our last playoff coach inherited a talented team. WE WERE A EXPANSION TEAM IN 2004. I KNOW YOU DON'T WANT TO REMEMBER THAT PAIN AS A FAN, BUT ITS TRUE.
NinerGM,

I think you are on the money, with every post.
  • TFSP
  • Member
  • Posts: 315
Originally posted by GoldandGarnet:
NinerGM,

I think you are on the money, with every post.

you can let go...