LaMichael James was a Niner (CUT!)

Originally posted by DirtyP:

Originally posted by jreff22:
He would be 3rd string-Gore, Hunter, James, Dixon.

Where does Jacobs fit in then? I would much rather see a healthy Jacobs on the field than James at this point

Originally posted by jreff22:
talking about the previous 4 weeks

Originally posted by jreff22:
I would bet money on lack of talent. Neither has the ability to step into a starting role even in the short term. Only RJF has that ability and will be a FA along with Ice at the end of the year. So the primary backup at NT and DE will be a starter....think the Boone situation. Again I would bet we hit DE, NT, and OLB this year and the picks will be early. We like the current backups because we can use them at TE-FB-DL but its a way to save more spots on the roster. Its a smart idea but doesn't offer great potential at their primary spots. Think about it, they have roster spots because we can use them in other aspects, not because of their ability to play their first position well.

Originally posted by DirtyP:

Originally posted by jreff22:
talking about the previous 4 weeks

I'd have to guess that the reason we haven't seen him is because we are running the ball just fine without him and he can't play on the coverage units. Adding a rusher you don't need at the expense of one of your core special teams players is a good way to weaken a roster.

Originally posted by DirtyP:

Originally posted by jreff22:
I would bet money on lack of talent. Neither has the ability to step into a starting role even in the short term. Only RJF has that ability and will be a FA along with Ice at the end of the year. So the primary backup at NT and DE will be a starter....think the Boone situation. Again I would bet we hit DE, NT, and OLB this year and the picks will be early. We like the current backups because we can use them at TE-FB-DL but its a way to save more spots on the roster. Its a smart idea but doesn't offer great potential at their primary spots. Think about it, they have roster spots because we can use them in other aspects, not because of their ability to play their first position well.

We have 2 blue chip 34 defensive ends who never get tired. If other teams in the NFL had this luxury they wouldn't be trying to rotate backups onto the field.

Originally posted by jreff22:
Disagree.

During the Minny game they had well over 70 snaps. They were tired and it showed. During NY they were around 50ish snaps.....big difference.

Some numbers:
70 snaps over 16 games = 1120
60 snaps over 16 games = 960
50 snaps over 16 games = 800

the difference between 70 and 50 is 320 snaps...that would be an additional 4.5 games at 70 snaps.

Originally posted by DirtyP:

Originally posted by jreff22:
Disagree.

During the Minny game they had well over 70 snaps. They were tired and it showed. During NY they were around 50ish snaps.....big difference.

Some numbers:
70 snaps over 16 games = 1120
60 snaps over 16 games = 960
50 snaps over 16 games = 800

the difference between 70 and 50 is 320 snaps...that would be an additional 4.5 games at 70 snaps.

I'm not sure what defense is regularly on the field for 70 snaps a game but its certainly not the 49ers even if it happens once in a while. Everyone looked off during the Minnesota game from opening kickoff to the final whistle. That was a anomaly. I don't think rotating in backup defensive lineman would have changed the outcome of that game.

Originally posted by jreff22:
Having the ability to rotate when games are hard is a major asset. It would be nice to sub a player out without worrying that something bad will happen.

Originally posted by mike:

Originally posted by JustinNiner:

i dont really like this pick at all cuz james is about the same type of rb as hunter. Hunter did very well and now we have 5 freakin RBs on our roster. i would of like to address the DLine or Oline with our 2nd. O WELL

I didn't like it at first glance either.




Then I watched that^ and saw how consistently explosive he is. He may only be 2 inches taller than hunter and similar weight, but he brings a different kind of speed. Where hunter is more likely to use his size to "hide" then do shifty moves to get separation, James is more of a straight up speed back. Look at his legs move when he's running, he reminds me of the road runner.

Originally posted by Hopper:

Hunter may never be the same. We really need LMJ more than ever now.

Originally posted by father49er:
According to the listed physical attributes, LMJ is taller and heavier than Sproles. He sure doesn't look bigger than Sproles on the field.

Originally posted by father49er:
According to the listed physical attributes, LMJ is taller and heavier than Sproles. He sure doesn't look bigger than Sproles on the field.

Originally posted by sfout:
you just said the reason to the second half of your statement with the first half. Sproles is only 10 pounds lighter then LMJ but he is 4-5 inches shorter then him, making him basically the same weight but in a more compact package. Sproles is also 4-5 years into the NFL weight room experience so that listed weight in all reality is probably closer to 200, Sproles likely has more muscle mass then LMJ has or will have until he's been in the nfl for at least a year or 2.