There are 364 users in the forums

John Lynch - 49ers GM

Shop Find 49ers gear online
May 21, 2017 at 5:54 PM
Originally posted by dtg_9er:
Anyone can have two good years...


Each year you have success it proves it is less of a fluke.
May 23, 2017 at 8:51 AM
  • Jcool
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 44,453
May 23, 2017 at 8:56 AM
  • Kolohe
  • Hall of Fame
  • Posts: 65,656
Originally posted by Jcool:

Makes sense, it was unnecessary IMO. The league will go about the same way, few cuts here, few cuts there.
May 23, 2017 at 9:04 AM
  • Jcool
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 44,453
May 23, 2017 at 9:05 AM
Originally posted by GoldenGateGlory:
Originally posted by dtg_9er:
Anyone can have two good years...


Each year you have success it proves it is less of a fluke.

I don't look at individual years absent context of the previous years and changes made. This is the first year of a very promising management change, just as the Walsh hiring was exciting for many of us who abhorred the Thomas era. Bill Walsh's first year? 2-14. SEcond year? 6-10. What a horrible coach! He should have been fired according to these records. He had improvement but still a very bad year win wise.

On the other hand, we could see the change over of schemes, players, assistant coaches, money spent freely on needs and a very bright coach who could articulate what was going on with the team in a positive light. Shanahan gives me a similar vibe. He and Lynch are both bright and talented...so while we can't know the future, we can have more hope than in recent years.

And they are bringing back the offense of our super bowl years!
[ Edited by dtg_9er on May 23, 2017 at 9:06 AM ]
May 23, 2017 at 9:33 AM
Originally posted by Jcool:

More importantly, please just pass a resolution to increase the 53 by at least a few - would like to see it at around 57 so teams could hold on and develop talent they draft or find (UFAs, etc.) instead of possibly losing them on the PS.
May 23, 2017 at 9:51 AM
Originally posted by LottDMontanaO:
Originally posted by Jcool:

More importantly, please just pass a resolution to increase the 53 by at least a few - would like to see it at around 57 so teams could hold on and develop talent they draft or find (UFAs, etc.) instead of possibly losing them on the PS.

Naw they won't do that. Can't let teams try and stash away talent on their PS for a rainy day. A team like the Pats would abuse that in no time. Would also take power away from PS players and potentially rob them of a chance to be signed to a 53 if injuries hit another team.
May 23, 2017 at 9:52 AM
Originally posted by LottDMontanaO:
Originally posted by Jcool:

More importantly, please just pass a resolution to increase the 53 by at least a few - would like to see it at around 57 so teams could hold on and develop talent they draft or find (UFAs, etc.) instead of possibly losing them on the PS.

Just merge the PS into the main roster and have done with it.
May 23, 2017 at 10:20 AM
Originally posted by walker807:
Originally posted by LottDMontanaO:
Originally posted by Jcool:

More importantly, please just pass a resolution to increase the 53 by at least a few - would like to see it at around 57 so teams could hold on and develop talent they draft or find (UFAs, etc.) instead of possibly losing them on the PS.

Naw they won't do that. Can't let teams try and stash away talent on their PS for a rainy day. A team like the Pats would abuse that in no time. Would also take power away from PS players and potentially rob them of a chance to be signed to a 53 if injuries hit another team.

My wish for the increase of the 53 (won't happen, unfortunately) has nothing to do with stashing talent on the PS - you can't do that anyway as teams can sign away anyone from another team's PS. What I'm getting at is this: Limiting it to only a 53 that are team-protected penalizes teams that draft well and can identify talent in the later rounds (6th, 7th, etc.) or from UFAs. Those potential "hidden gems" that may just need some developing but aren't quite there yet for the 53 are exposed by going to the PS. The 53 as a total number isn't a lot if you really look at it considering all the injuries that happen over the course of a season...and, three of those spots go to the K, P, and LS as it is. So, increase it by 3 to 56 to account for those three (K, P, LS). I'd rather have teams that draft well and find that hidden talent rewarded by allowing them time to develop the player rather than possibly losing the player on the PS.
May 23, 2017 at 10:21 AM
Originally posted by English:
Originally posted by LottDMontanaO:
Originally posted by Jcool:

More importantly, please just pass a resolution to increase the 53 by at least a few - would like to see it at around 57 so teams could hold on and develop talent they draft or find (UFAs, etc.) instead of possibly losing them on the PS.

Just merge the PS into the main roster and have done with it.

Yes, would definitely be fine with this.
May 23, 2017 at 11:17 AM
Originally posted by Jcool:

Baalke is not happy..........somewhere.
May 23, 2017 at 11:21 AM
Originally posted by LottDMontanaO:
Originally posted by English:
Originally posted by LottDMontanaO:
Originally posted by Jcool:

More importantly, please just pass a resolution to increase the 53 by at least a few - would like to see it at around 57 so teams could hold on and develop talent they draft or find (UFAs, etc.) instead of possibly losing them on the PS.

Just merge the PS into the main roster and have done with it.

Yes, would definitely be fine with this.
that would go against the salary cap right, making it harder to keep players ?
[ Edited by 49AllTheTime on May 23, 2017 at 11:21 AM ]
May 23, 2017 at 11:43 AM
  • Giedi
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 33,371
Originally posted by LottDMontanaO:
Originally posted by walker807:
Originally posted by LottDMontanaO:
Originally posted by Jcool:

More importantly, please just pass a resolution to increase the 53 by at least a few - would like to see it at around 57 so teams could hold on and develop talent they draft or find (UFAs, etc.) instead of possibly losing them on the PS.

Naw they won't do that. Can't let teams try and stash away talent on their PS for a rainy day. A team like the Pats would abuse that in no time. Would also take power away from PS players and potentially rob them of a chance to be signed to a 53 if injuries hit another team.

My wish for the increase of the 53 (won't happen, unfortunately) has nothing to do with stashing talent on the PS - you can't do that anyway as teams can sign away anyone from another team's PS. What I'm getting at is this: Limiting it to only a 53 that are team-protected penalizes teams that draft well and can identify talent in the later rounds (6th, 7th, etc.) or from UFAs. Those potential "hidden gems" that may just need some developing but aren't quite there yet for the 53 are exposed by going to the PS. The 53 as a total number isn't a lot if you really look at it considering all the injuries that happen over the course of a season...and, three of those spots go to the K, P, and LS as it is. So, increase it by 3 to 56 to account for those three (K, P, LS). I'd rather have teams that draft well and find that hidden talent rewarded by allowing them time to develop the player rather than possibly losing the player on the PS.

I agree that this is a good move on the League's part. As for increasing the 53 man roster to help developing players - Harbaugh used to stash promising players on IR, I don't see why you can't do that nowadays so I'm kinda 50/50 on increasing the roster size. I mean I don't see the difficulty of having a guy like Matt Breida get a hangnail in practice and having the doctors call it a season ending injury and putting him on IR.
May 23, 2017 at 11:54 AM
Originally posted by Giedi:
Originally posted by LottDMontanaO:
Originally posted by walker807:
Originally posted by LottDMontanaO:
Originally posted by Jcool:

More importantly, please just pass a resolution to increase the 53 by at least a few - would like to see it at around 57 so teams could hold on and develop talent they draft or find (UFAs, etc.) instead of possibly losing them on the PS.

Naw they won't do that. Can't let teams try and stash away talent on their PS for a rainy day. A team like the Pats would abuse that in no time. Would also take power away from PS players and potentially rob them of a chance to be signed to a 53 if injuries hit another team.

My wish for the increase of the 53 (won't happen, unfortunately) has nothing to do with stashing talent on the PS - you can't do that anyway as teams can sign away anyone from another team's PS. What I'm getting at is this: Limiting it to only a 53 that are team-protected penalizes teams that draft well and can identify talent in the later rounds (6th, 7th, etc.) or from UFAs. Those potential "hidden gems" that may just need some developing but aren't quite there yet for the 53 are exposed by going to the PS. The 53 as a total number isn't a lot if you really look at it considering all the injuries that happen over the course of a season...and, three of those spots go to the K, P, and LS as it is. So, increase it by 3 to 56 to account for those three (K, P, LS). I'd rather have teams that draft well and find that hidden talent rewarded by allowing them time to develop the player rather than possibly losing the player on the PS.

I agree that this is a good move on the League's part. As for increasing the 53 man roster to help developing players - Harbaugh used to stash promising players on IR, I don't see why you can't do that nowadays so I'm kinda 50/50 on increasing the roster size. I mean I don't see the difficulty of having a guy like Matt Breida get a hangnail in practice and having the doctors call it a season ending injury and putting him on IR.

Especially now that they allow an extra player on I.R. to come back.
May 23, 2017 at 12:06 PM
Originally posted by English:
Just merge the PS into the main roster and have done with it.

Absolutely!
Search
YouTube
Flipboard
Instagram
Threads
✕
Open Menu Search Share 49ersWebzone