There are 717 users in the forums
Evolution requires failure
Oct 22, 2012 at 12:28 PM
- jreff22
- Veteran
- Posts: 67,311
Jim better stop experimenting, my brain cant take much more
Oct 22, 2012 at 12:37 PM
- qwestlove94
- Member
- Posts: 583
I dont know if I can agree with such a huge proclamation without examples to back up your theory. The only experiment ive seen so far is the the whole 2-qb Kapernick Wildcat thing, other than that it looks like we're running the same offense as last year only with a better o-line and better play from our recievers. The focus on every drive should be to score, the focus on every game should be to win, all the time. Exepriments are for pre-season.
Oct 22, 2012 at 12:44 PM
- Sinsation
- Veteran
- Posts: 803
i agree that they are trying some different things. i'm ok with it. i srsly think JH is just trolling the NFL.
Having a great regular season record isn't the goal, i think doing the things we have to do now; to figure out what works, what doesn't, how teams react, etc, will only help this team.
Having a great regular season record isn't the goal, i think doing the things we have to do now; to figure out what works, what doesn't, how teams react, etc, will only help this team.
Oct 22, 2012 at 12:46 PM
- NinerBuff
- The Election Dude
- Posts: 21,443
I fundamentally disagree with the title of this thread.
Evolution is based on natural selection. Which is to say, the winning gene pool wins out and procreates and their genetic code seeds future generations. So no, Evolution is based on winning not failing.
Evolution is based on natural selection. Which is to say, the winning gene pool wins out and procreates and their genetic code seeds future generations. So no, Evolution is based on winning not failing.
Oct 22, 2012 at 12:52 PM
- 49AllTheTime
- Veteran
- Posts: 72,245
The evolution will be televised !
Oct 22, 2012 at 12:53 PM
- ninerfan4life
- Veteran
- Posts: 26,810
The evolution is 5-2!
Oct 22, 2012 at 12:53 PM
- NineFourNiner
- Hall of Fame
- Posts: 77,784
Originally posted by NinerBuff:I fundamentally disagree with the title of this thread.
Evolution is based on natural selection. Which is to say, the winning gene pool wins out and procreates and their genetic code seeds future generations. So no, Evolution is based on winning not failing.
...but for one to win, another has to lose.
Oct 22, 2012 at 12:54 PM
- darkknight49
- Veteran
- Posts: 10,878
Originally posted by NinerBuff:I fundamentally disagree with the title of this thread.
Evolution is based on natural selection. Which is to say, the winning gene pool wins out and procreates and their genetic code seeds future generations. So no, Evolution is based on winning not failing.
Would the success of one not require the failure of another?
Oct 22, 2012 at 12:56 PM
- NinerBuff
- The Election Dude
- Posts: 21,443
Originally posted by darkknight49:
Originally posted by NinerBuff:
I fundamentally disagree with the title of this thread.
Evolution is based on natural selection. Which is to say, the winning gene pool wins out and procreates and their genetic code seeds future generations. So no, Evolution is based on winning not failing.
Would the success of one not require the failure of another?
Ok, so we are talking macroscopically, our Offense is an ecosystem, in which certain plays and players become genetically superior while others fall away. That does make sense.
Oct 22, 2012 at 1:35 PM
- stillpans4gold
- Veteran
- Posts: 440
Originally posted by NinerBuff:
Originally posted by darkknight49:
Originally posted by NinerBuff:
I fundamentally disagree with the title of this thread.
Evolution is based on natural selection. Which is to say, the winning gene pool wins out and procreates and their genetic code seeds future generations. So no, Evolution is based on winning not failing.
Would the success of one not require the failure of another?
Ok, so we are talking macroscopically, our Offense is an ecosystem, in which certain plays and players become genetically superior while others fall away. That does make sense.
Haha, ok, while I like the literal evolution discussion on the zone, I was using it as a metaphor. Clearly, if you take it literal in it's entirety, all analogies and metaphors brake down. I was using it as a thought process to show how teams they take more risks, learn more and are more dynamic in the post season. And rather than having a set "model" let the model expose itself naturally. Similar to how species evolution isn't planned, just happens as a result of the environment. I'm using the analogy on the environmental level, meaning how species adapt to environment. clearly, I'm not using it with the concept of genetic mutations, sexual selections... ext. ext.
I see us letting the environment shape who we are, by tossing a lot ideas/concepts/personel, rather than planning a shape before facing the environment.
Oct 22, 2012 at 1:57 PM
- English
- Moderator
- Posts: 41,369
More of a revolution?
Oct 22, 2012 at 1:58 PM
- ninersush
- Veteran
- Posts: 274
i think the test of evolution is putting the game on the QBs shoulder and seeing if he can win the game. that test did not go well. therefore i think we have toyed enuf with giving our QB too much control/influence on the game and are going back to a ball control game w the QB having as minimal effect as possible. i think this formula will be used pretty much throughout the season and will only be abandoned for periods during a game just to see what happens.
Oct 22, 2012 at 2:07 PM
- LasVegasWally
- Veteran
- Posts: 24,835
Think of the Beatles Song - Revolution, "Say you want an evolution..."
Sorry about that.
Interesting take that I never considered. Not sure BUT I can't shake the feeling that the coaches are holding back plays & schemes. Maybe they don't want to show all our cards?
I think, last week was our first screen play of the season.
Sorry about that.
Interesting take that I never considered. Not sure BUT I can't shake the feeling that the coaches are holding back plays & schemes. Maybe they don't want to show all our cards?
I think, last week was our first screen play of the season.
Oct 22, 2012 at 2:11 PM
- HearstFan
- Veteran
- Posts: 1,628
Fair point -- seems reasonable to assume that with only 1.5 seasons of installation that the offense is still growing, learning, experimenting. Shoot, the WCO under Walsh evolved EVERY year, and adapted to each game, with the personnell available. And there were some painful losses in those years as well!
Not comparing JH to BW - but willing to watch the evolution.
Not comparing JH to BW - but willing to watch the evolution.