There are 118 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

If Roman Leaves, how about Chud?

  • kem99
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 570
Originally posted by NCommand:
Originally posted by Marvin49:
Originally posted by NCommand:
Originally posted by Marvin49:
Originally posted by NCommand:
Originally posted by Marvin49:
...which he won't do. He's been running HIS offense forever...he's not going to change.

Harbaugh likes good coaches. He attracts them as well. There is a reason Mangini is here.

If there is someone out there he really likes, he may look outside the team...but that guy will have to be a West Coast guy and it would have to be an extraordinary circumstance. The system will not change again. I just don't see it happening. Its alot to ask for a name guy to come in and change everything he has done to be a part of this team. I guess it COULD happen, I just don't think it will.

I agree...the longer we wait to see what happens with Roman the more likely we end up staying in house with the same system/offensive philosophy.


I think the system/offensive philosophy will stay the same regardless. That's Harbaugh. Roman is the OC, but the offense isn't all Roman. Harbaugh was hired to bring in HIS system. There may be a different guy calling the plays, but it will be a guy who runs the offense the way Harbaugh wants it run.

If peeps want the run first, TE loving offense to go away, then they better hope someone lures HARBAUGH away, not Roman. I for one love this offense even if there are calls here and there that frustrate me.

To all those "it's a passing league" guys, take a look at who the final 4 are right now in the NFC.

Yeah, this is why I always call them HaRoMan but if I had to guess, it starts with Harbaugh and this is his Schemblacher/Stanford system (Roman's added wrinkles...Q formatons, some WCO designs, etc.) but this is his system and what he knows and subscribes mostly too; heavy run-focused with intermediate team-passing concepts and a mobile/running QB. And I agree...the only caveat here is if Baalke steps in here and makes Harbaugh go another direction. Then, would Harbaugh want to stay LT with "less control?" So odds are, it is what it is whether it's Roman as the symbolism of it all or not....it will STILL most likely end up being the same playbook, same system, same game plans next year with the same 6 or 7 men contributing to the compartmentalized game plans and in-game play calling.


...and I just don't see Baalke doing that.

For all the complaints about the passing O and odd calls in the redzone and short yardage, this is the 11th best scoring offense in the NFL that was missing some pretty significant pieces for large portions of the season. They still had the 3rd largest point differencial in the NFL (and yes, defense is a part of that stat as well).

For all of our Roman complaining, his offense was pretty damned effective this year and has improved steadily since Crabtree returned.

Bottom line, the formula works. Thats why the Niners were in the NFC Championship in 2011, the SB last year, and are in the Divisional Round this year. The defense is a big part of that but good defense isn't everything. That same defense had major issues late last year and it was the offense that saved the day vs GB and ATL.

Roman is this sites biggest whipping boy. While I admit there are times that he frustrates me, he is probably the best OC this team has had since Shanahan.

That isn't the question here anymore though.

The question is, "Can this system/philosophy/game planning/play calling WIN the Superbowl?"
Regardless of the site's collective view of Roman as the OC, the answer to that question has to be "Yes".

First, to win the SB, you first need to get there and the offense is not the reason why the 49ers have not won the SB the last 2 years. In 2011, the offense was more conservative but that was largely due to personnel -- maximizing Alex Smith strengths, limited options at WR (Crabtree was dinged most of the year, Morgan got hurt, Edwards didn't work out), the defense and special teams became great as the year went along -- and specific game circumstances (e.g. Williams' two fumbles in the NFC Championship Game).

In 2012, the offense became much more explosive after Kaep took over, but due to injuries to the DL that killed the pass rush, fatigue and whatever else, the defense took a step back towards the end of the season, as did the special teams. But for the offense, the 49ers probably don't make it to the SB last year. We can debate the last 4 play calls at the end of the SB but the defense and special teams (i.e. Jacoby Jones' kick-off return) did give up 34 points and given the way that game was going, there was no guarantee that even if the 49ers had scored that Flacco couldn't have gotten the Ravens in position for a game winning or game tying FG.

Even this year, for all of the complaints and hand wringing about Kaep's play, Roman's play calling, Crabtree's injury, the first significant injuries to the OL in 3 years, etc., the 49ers still scored more points than they did in 2012. Granted, some of that is due to the defense's overall revival and more consistent special teams play, but still, it is not like the 49ers scored 100 less points than 2012 or won less games. They scored more points and won 1 more game.

Lets also not forget that the 4 teams the 49ers struggled against and lost to this year are all made the playoffs and are still playing among the final 8 and 3 of those teams are among the top 5 overall in defense by both yards allowed and points allowed, which the 49ers played before Crabtree returned and we all know how much better the offense has looked since Crabtree came back. So, 3 of the 4 worst offensive performances of the year came against 3 of the best defensive teams in the league. What a shock.

Could the offense be better. Sure, but it is a huge leap from that to questioning whether it is holding the 49ers back from winning the SB. The reasons the offense has struggled this year are varied. I am sure there are play calls Roman would like to have back or game plans he would do differently but there are plenty of other contributing factors (e.g. Crabtree's injury, the league adjusting to Kaep, the OL not playing as well overall or being as healthy as in past years, protecting Kaep with no real confidence in the back-up QB options, etc.).
If he doesn't get the Vikings job good chance Roman is coming back.
Originally posted by Jcool:
Originally posted by NCommand:
That isn't the question here anymore though.

The question is, "Can this system/philosophy/game planning/play calling WIN the Superbowl?"

Considering the offense put up 31 points in the Superbowl... Yes this "system/philosophy/game planning/play calling" can WIN the Superbowl.


If I recall, it's the most points ever scored by a team who LOST the SB.

Lets be real...if going into the game we'd been told we'd get 31 points, 99% of us would have expected to win the game. I've never thought the offense was why they lost. It was lapses on D that they'd been able to overcome in their two playoff games and the Kick Return that did them in.
Originally posted by Marvin49:
If I recall, it's the most points ever scored by a team who LOST the SB.

Lets be real...if going into the game we'd been told we'd get 31 points, 99% of us would have expected to win the game. I've never thought the offense was why they lost. It was lapses on D that they'd been able to overcome in their two playoff games and the Kick Return that did them in.

Please, don't act like the offense was blameless. This team came out flat and absolutely laid an egg early on, just as they had done in the Atlanta game a few weeks prior to that. If not for that sustained blackout, that game easily could have been a rout, that is what so many are forgetting, 49ers were well on the way to getting the ever-loving s**t kicked out of them. It was alarming that it took a whole half and all the stadium lights going out for the offense to finally wake up, this happens far too often against better teams, they come out flat and then struggle to adjust.


They depended far too much on late game theatrics rather than executing consistently, 1st and 2nd half. I saw a massive opportunity blown, a team that looked utterly unprepared and confused in the 1st half, fell into a hole too recover from. That is on the coaching staff. This is twice they've been out-coached and looked unprepared against the Baltimore Ravens, at least for the first game they had the excuse of it having been a Thursday night game.
Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:
Originally posted by Marvin49:
If I recall, it's the most points ever scored by a team who LOST the SB.

Lets be real...if going into the game we'd been told we'd get 31 points, 99% of us would have expected to win the game. I've never thought the offense was why they lost. It was lapses on D that they'd been able to overcome in their two playoff games and the Kick Return that did them in.

Please, don't act like the offense was blameless. This team came out flat and absolutely laid an egg early on, just as they had done in the Atlanta game a few weeks prior to that. If not for that sustained blackout, that game easily could have been a rout, that is what so many are forgetting, 49ers were well on the way to getting the ever-loving s**t kicked out of them. It was alarming that it took a whole half and all the stadium lights going out for the offense to finally wake up, this happens far too often against better teams, they come out flat and then struggle to adjust.


They depended far too much on late game theatrics rather than executing consistently, 1st and 2nd half. I saw a massive opportunity blown, a team that looked utterly unprepared and confused in the 1st half, fell into a hole too recover from. That is on the coaching staff. This is twice they've been out-coached and looked unprepared against the Baltimore Ravens, at least for the first game they had the excuse of it having been a Thursday night game.

That's sort of my point...we all know we HAVE the ability to be explosive when/if we need too...we've proven it even in a smoke-screen year where no DC knew what kind of offense we had or CK's own abilities...but can we do it on a more consistent basis to the point where we can bury teams early AND put the nail in the coffin against a playoff caliber team? Therein lies many many of the concerns. We have proven more that we can be a bipolar offense, in a win or loss. This is the year where the offense is proven b/c it's a known product.

So let's hope this scheme/philosophy/game plan/play calling is that extra X-factor in two equally talented teams in our favor this year.
I'll show u my chud
Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:



Being a great player doesn't mean you're likely to be a great coach. Look up Mike Singletary for further details on that. I doubt most of these guys have any interest in being involved in any sort of formal coaching position as well.

Opinions can agree to disagree, Bill Walsh prior to his coaching career was a Running Back and Quarter Back, Tom Landry was a punter, Mike Ditka although not great had a great season and a few good seasons as coach and started off as a tight end, Vince Lombardi was a former tackle/guard, Bill Cowher is a former linebacker, Bill Parcells was a former linebacker, Jimmy Johnson was a former defensive lineman, Steve Mariucci is a former qb, in my opinion (now opinions can agree to disagree, this is just for the argument sake) not being a former player actually blinds the coach into not seeing certain aspects of the game, that would be handy to know if someone was a coach.
Originally posted by Hopper:
If he doesn't get the Vikings job good chance Roman is coming back.

lol it is pretty much a lock if Roman does not get the Vikings job he will come back. I am more worried about Tomsula getting that job
Originally posted by JackPardeePants:
Originally posted by Hopper:
If he doesn't get the Vikings job good chance Roman is coming back.

lol it is pretty much a lock if Roman does not get the Vikings job he will come back. I am more worried about Tomsula getting that job

Rumors have it that Vikings want Roman which is a great fit imo but I also believe he will take tomsula as his D coordinator and trade up and get Johnny Football
Originally posted by Harbaalke:
Rumors have it that Vikings want Roman which is a great fit imo but I also believe he will take tomsula as his D coordinator and trade up and get Johnny Football

Agreed!!!! If Roman leaves, he's going to take some our staff.
Originally posted by pdizo916:
Originally posted by Harbaalke:
Rumors have it that Vikings want Roman which is a great fit imo but I also believe he will take tomsula as his D coordinator and trade up and get Johnny Football

Agreed!!!! If Roman leaves, he's going to take some our staff.

While Tomsula is one of my favorite positional coaches of all time, and i would hate to lose him, i think he has earned a shot at a promotion.
I think this is the guy if Harbaugh looks outside of the team-
Mike Bloomgren
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/8894452/mike-bloomgren-named-new-offensive-coordinator-stanford-cardinal
Promote Geep.
Originally posted by Memphis9er:
Kubiak

boom
Originally posted by bzborow1:
We have seen the impact of changing coordinators can have on a young QB - See: Smith, Alex

This argument is - and always has been - overblown. This was an excuse for poor play when Alex was here, but he seems to have done fine under new coordinators the last 2 times he's had one (2011 in SF, this year in KC). The reality is it just took Alex a lot longer to bloom than other QBs. His backups usually did as well - or better (see Hill, Shaun) - under the same revolving door of coordinators. Did it help matters? Probably not, but it isn't the main reason for Alex's early failures.

That being said, not every QB is the same and you can't just assume Kap would have the same struggles that Alex did with a new coordinator. As I said, just look at Alex himself. He's done fine under his last 2 new OCs.