49er argument: go all in now or be just good for a long time.

People here are upset we didn't get a couple of impact players or happy that we are building a solid team for many years.

Where do you stand and why?

I believe We do have a solid roster but that has only proved to make us competitive but not good enough to be the best. We had all the ammo to get an impact,starter but instead we have players that will contribute in 2-3 years when the guys we have now are done and proved not to be good enough to win Super Bowl. I just don't want to be the eagles or even the bills. SHEhawks went after traded for Lynch and traded for Harvin and I know he didn't contribute this past year but it's an example of trying to get over the top and going for the jugular.

Stay on top for a decade.

Thank you.

I feel this is an elite level team, with Superbowl talent. It is my opinion that Kapernick's development is incomplete, and as he learns to dump it off and spread the field wide as well as deep, he well be unstoppable. Harbaugh's Stanford run game and his NFL run game are different, at Stanford he ran inside to set up the outside run. The outside run is where you generate big plays. Frank Gore, is not a big play runner, our O-line is not an inside out run line. We need to be able to continue to hammer the ball inside, but it is my hope that we are starting to look for O-linemen that are more athletic, and less road grader. It looks like (from readining bios and watching highlights) the guts we picked up are suited to this style of run game. I am hoping that Latimore, and this new kid can work inside out.
So in closing, no not worried about starters, worried about true depth, and a more varied offensive attack. We have filled needs through trade, and free agency, added depth through the draft, it looks like a great offseason to me, now if Kaep can just learn to spread the ball around, we won't stop at 6!

Not good enough?
We've fallen short of two SBs by mere inches and one other by Williams's fumbles.
A lot of you guys need to pull your head out.

Originally posted by OKC49erFan:

Not good enough?
We've fallen short of two SBs by mere inches and one other by Williams's fumbles.
A lot of you guys need to pull your head out.

You only get so many chances. We may not ever get the chance again so we needed to capitalize while we were there.

Best S, C and RB and top OT and Stevie Johnson for free an signed through 2016? I'd say all four moves ARE impact moves for now and WELL into the future.

Applauds the Seahawks for Harvin and Lynch, ignores that we traded mid round picks for Boldin and Big Stevie J.

Fans complain we trade down not up, but do not mention Seahawks did the same thing. Or that the Patriots and Ravens have been contenders and essentially built a dynasties on this approach.

Fans want to land impact starters on a team that essentially has all it's starters penciled in.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Best S, C and RB and top OT and Stevie Johnson for free an signed through 2016? I'd say all four moves ARE impact moves for now and WELL into the future.

Absolutely!
With many players coming up on contract years, the team needs to prepare.
One common thread with Baalke's moves over the years; he doesn't like being boxed in needing a certain position/player.
He fills the spot through trades or FA to maintain flexibility come draft time.
Personally, I find it brilliant. Great approach to keep options open and always building the team.

Originally posted by rtj03:
You only get so many chances. We may not ever get the chance again so we needed to capitalize while we were there.

Which big name free agent do you think we could have or should have signed that would make us capitalize on those mere inches?

Talent is not what this team lacks so I totally disagree with the notion that we aren't "going for the jugular".

Originally posted by KRS-1:

Applauds the Seahawks for Harvin and Lynch, ignores that we traded mid round picks for Boldin and Big Stevie J.

Fans complain we trade down not up, but do not mention Seahawks did the same thing. Or that the Patriots and Ravens have been contenders and essentially built a dynasties on this approach.

Fans want to land impact starters on a team that essentially has all it's starters penciled in.

This. I don't mind being the Colts of Payton's era. We'll get there again. No worries.

rtj03 - worst thread starter US

Originally posted by English:
Stay on top for a decade.

Thank you.

We are not on top. We've been on the floor below for three years in a row.

This is the difference between being a successful GM and an armchair GM.

As an armchair GM, you always want to make the flashy move. The sexy move. The give-up-half-your-draft-for-Julio-Jones-or-Sammy-Watkins move. As a successful GM, you need to do what's best, not what's more alluring. The patience Baalke exercises is astounding.

Saying "we're close, but not good enough" is such a horsesh** argument. I'm sorry, but it is. Football is a game of inches, and the fact that we've nearly made it to the Super Bowl 3 years is a row in the league of a parity is a truly breathtaking accomplishment. We are good enough to win the Super Bowl, the bounces just haven't went our way. Simple as that.

Baalke needs to continue doing what he has been doing. He doesn't need to make a knee-jerk, mortgage-the-future type of move to get a player to "send us over the top". Don't try to tell me that the Seahawks acquiring Percy Harvin was the reason they won the Super Bowl. That is completely absurd. Percy played essentially one game for them this season. Yes, he impacted the Super Bowl, but he had literally nothing to do with them getting there. A complete non-factor up until then.

Originally posted by theduke85:
This is the difference between being a successful GM and an armchair GM.

As an armchair GM, you always want to make the flashy move. The sexy move. The give-up-half-your-draft-for-Julio-Jones-or-Sammy-Watkins move. As a successful GM, you need to do what's best, not what's more alluring. The patience Baalke exercises is astounding.

Saying "we're close, but not good enough" is such a horsesh** argument. I'm sorry, but it is. Football is a game of inches, and the fact that we've nearly made it to the Super Bowl 3 years is a row in the league of a parity is a truly breathtaking accomplishment. We are good enough to win the Super Bowl, the bounces just haven't went our way. Simple as that.

Baalke needs to continue doing what he has been doing. He doesn't need to make a knee-jerk, mortgage-the-future type of move to get a player to "send us over the top". Don't try to tell me that the Seahawks acquiring Percy Harvin was the reason they won the Super Bowl. That is completely absurd. Percy played essentially one game for them this season. Yes, he impacted the Super Bowl, but he had literally nothing to do with them getting there. A complete non-factor up until then.

THIS THIS THIS

Originally posted by rtj03:
I know he didn't contribute this past year but it's an example of trying to get over the top and going for the jugular.

So basically, they gambled by "going for the jugular" and their gamble failed. Instead of getting a contribution from a first-round pick (i.e. us with Reid), they got basically nothing out of Harvin. Sorry, that's not admirable or a good pattern to follow -- that's an example of precisely why you don't put all your eggs in one basket.