Rep the Red & Gold: Shop 49ers Gear →

There are 650 users in the forums

An in-depth look at McCloughan's draft/trade/free agency moves (2005-2010)

Shop Find 49ers gear online
Gah! This is pathetic.

McCloughan was GM in '08. So his drafts begin THEN not '05. Please fix this GEEK, you're better than this.

~Ceadder
The only real judgements that should be made of McC's success or failure is this... No matter who was acquired to play football, the big failure from management was not being able to put these players in the best situation to succeed. The coaching carousel... the awful OL blocking... and injuries that have stunted so much progress. It's easy to place grades on player performance, but you'd be better served looking deeper into WHY the players performed poorly.

As was somewhat mentioned in this very thread... TBC leaves SF and goes to NE for double digit sacks. Doesn't take a genius to see that our scheme was to blame here. Giving the WRs 10 yard cushions isn't doing our pass rush any favors. We can blindly point to our sack totals to make ourselves feel better... but we'd just be kidding ourselves. We managed nice sack numbers, but in many games and crucial times, opposing QBs had all day to pick us apart.

On offense, you couldn't find a bigger mess than the likes of Nolan + Hostler... and then yet another change... and then another. It's no wonder that our offense looks like they don't belong. Our players don't suck... they are just confused and poorly developed thanks to all of the... say it with me... CHANGE.

I'm not saying all of our players are blameless... but without consistent and well crafted scheme... management failed to put the players in the best situations to succeed. Our boys would have had to overcome amazing amounts of incompetence... and that was apparently asking too much... at least early on from a development standpoint.

"to better days ahead!"
Darrell Jackson - WR
- A interesting trade when it occurred, but Jackson had injury concerns and attitude problems with the 49ers. This was known when McCloughan acquired him, and it backfield.


I believe you mean "backfired".

Anyway, good reading and detailed, too.
Originally posted by NinerGM:
Originally posted by lamontb:
Originally posted by NinerGM:
Originally posted by GEEK:
Originally posted by NinerGM:
Good post and I'll just quickly summarize some reactions:

1) No GM should get an A for selecting a contributor in the 1st round, especially within the top 10 picks. If you can't evaluate talent enough to know if someone isn't a bust in the first 10 picks, you shouldn't be a GM in the NFL.

2) Snyder to me isn't a B, he's more like a C-. If you're drafting a OL guy in the 4th round, he's contributing more than just depth.

Just my initial reaction.

Fair points. I don't agree with your first, but I think you are right about Snyder.

I would like to know your opinion on this - and no worries this won't become a flame-out discussion. I'm just curious as to why people think a GM in the NFL should get an A on a pick in the top 10 who becomes a contributor.

IMHO, the grading curve should reward GMs for finding contributors/starters in rounds 3 through 5 versus 1 through 2.

I don't necessarily disagree with you, but if GM's can get F's for not taking the right guy in the top 10 then he should be able to get an A also. For example you have to give somebody an A for taking Manning over Ryan Leaf. Conversely, somebody on Arizona should get a F for drafting Levi Brown, over Adrian Peterson. Just like Scot should get an A for taking Willis over Carriker. i do think GM's should be graded on a curve like you mentioned. But selected teh correct player in the top 10 shouldn't be diminished. In terms of Scot he has done a horrible job with 2nd and 3rd picks minus Gore. He pretty much flushes 3rd picks down the drain.

That's a great response! I get the logic - and that's true, the examples you gave are definitely within reason. You're right - it's not always an easy selection - many didn't know Leaf was a head case. Carricker is a very good example also....however when someone finds a gem in the 3rd or 4th I think that counts a bit more because that takes more skill no?

No doubt. You have to find those diamond in the rough picks b/c they are out there every year. In today's NFL you need to be drafting starters with your 1st, 2nd, and to a lesser extent 3rd round picks. That's why the Balmer pick was so puzzling. You don't draft "project players" when you are a team with only one 1st round draft pick and you are a losing team. You need to be drafting starters or at leas guys that can contribute on special teams or something. And folks are so upset about passing on Desean Jackson, but Eddie Royal was sitting right there also and I believe the team was high on him and scouted him out heavily(how they found Josh Morgan). But then again the former GM was about about size therefore some of these guys were never considered as it was mentioned they had Limas Sweed rated higher then those players just b/c of his size.
Thanks for taking the time to do this, Geek!
  • GEEK
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 19,417
Originally posted by mcbaes72:
Darrell Jackson - WR
- A interesting trade when it occurred, but Jackson had injury concerns and attitude problems with the 49ers. This was known when McCloughan acquired him, and it backfield.


I believe you mean "backfired".

Anyway, good reading and detailed, too.

That's what I get for writing the post at 4-5 am CST
Hilarious comment on TBC!
  • GEEK
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 19,417
Originally posted by Ceadderman:
Gah! This is pathetic.

McCloughan was GM in '08. So his drafts begin THEN not '05. Please fix this GEEK, you're better than this.

~Ceadder

I analyzed McCloughan's ENTIRE tenure with the 49ers, and indicated in my original post that in 2008 McCloughan was promoted to General Manager. I also credited Nolan as a factor to why the 49ers may have drafted better before McCloughan was promoted to GM.

Reading is fundamental.
Open Menu Search Share 49ersWebzone