49ers Head Coach Kyle Shanahan Thread

Originally posted by dtg_9er:

Originally posted by evil:

Originally posted by dtg_9er:
How alike is Kyle's approach to his father's? This is a serious question for those who have followed Kyle more closely than I have. What positions does he fill with lower draft picks, for instance.

Mike Shanahan found RBs in mid rounds who became very successful. Will Kyle use that same strategy? That sort of thing.

Honestly we still do not know. How much were his opinions with regards to the draft valued or accounted for by HC's and GM's is an unknown.

Hope he has the success his father did!

This for sure.

No doubt about it that KS has been influenced by his dad.

I also think, he's out to carve his own path of excellence - his own way.

Originally posted by JTsBiggestFan:

Originally posted by Giedi:
Great point! Jimmy GQ is competitive as hell. I can see him definitely doing extra to prove he was the right choice vs Captain Kirk.

There's absolutely nothing to prove.

If JG weren't available for trade last year or this year, I'd say go for Cousins.

But the knocks against Cousins are sorta similar to the knocks that Tony Romo used to get and Alex Smith could get too -- can't win the big game.

Redskins fans themselves will tell you that no way Cousins goes 5-0 on the Niners last year the way JG did.

JG has IMO shown more than Cousins in certain aspects. The actual production part I'm not worried about.....I think this year will come together nicely for JG.

I agree. the draft nerds last year in the Trade section of the WeBzone, were putting up links to Kirk's highlights and his lowlights - I wasn't impressed at all in comparison to Jimmy's picture passing during the 5-0 run. Whether the John Lynch comments affect Jimmy or not, I think if he can replicate his performance last year he'll be simply unstoppable this season. Because with an upgraded OLine and more passing weapons, it's going to be hard to stop this offense. Kyle has made the right decision to roll the dice with Graoppolo. Kirk's a good QB, but I don't think he's at superbly polished level of Jimmy. I can only Aaron, Ben Rothlesburger, Tom Brady, and Drew Breese as QB's that are at his level or above.

Originally posted by dtg_9er:

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by Giedi:
If Kyle can get that edge rusher we need, he's bound to have a lot of success, the way Harbaugh had success when Aldon was on the team.

Also had a HOF ILB along with a burgeoning All Pro at other spot. Brock Coyle and Malcolm Smith aren't those guys.

Personally I don't know I'd you need the all pros at the ILB spot in today's pass happy game. I'd relocate those to Corner and maybe safety. But I agree - you need good inside backers that at least can cover the pass and decent against the run.

One of the reasons I like LB R Smith is his speed and ability to play all over the field. He is perfect for the modern game and doesn't have to come off the field on obvious passing downs...sort of a better version of Tartt. Foster and Smith together would be a formidable LBing duo. The real need is edge rush and/or a guy like Justin Smith who makes great plays when they are most needed. Coyle and M Smith may be good, solid LBs but they do not remind me of Willis or Bowman, let alone Aldon. Imagine if Aldon was a stable person! He'd still be a niner and making more than JG!

It is really sad Aldon Isn't/wasn't able to get the help he needs.

I like R. Smith also. But as you said, we have zero pass rush and thats gonna hurt us.

love reading this s**ttt

http://www.49erswebzone.com/articles/114884-schrager-49ers-make-nfc-championship-game-season/

Originally posted by defenderDX:
love reading this s**ttt

http://www.49erswebzone.com/articles/114884-schrager-49ers-make-nfc-championship-game-season/

goddamit they are hyping us way too much, the team doesn't need this added pressure

the expectations should be just be in contention for a playoff spot.

Originally posted by DonnieDarko:

Originally posted by defenderDX:

love reading this s**ttt

http://www.49erswebzone.com/articles/114884-schrager-49ers-make-nfc-championship-game-season/

goddamit they are hyping us way too much, the team doesn't need this added pressure

the expectations should be just be in contention for a playoff spot.

Super Bowl or bust!

Originally posted by dtg_9er:

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by Giedi:

If Kyle can get that edge rusher we need, he's bound to have a lot of success, the way Harbaugh had success when Aldon was on the team.

Also had a HOF ILB along with a burgeoning All Pro at other spot. Brock Coyle and Malcolm Smith aren't those guys.

Personally I don't know I'd you need the all pros at the ILB spot in today's pass happy game. I'd relocate those to Corner and maybe safety. But I agree - you need good inside backers that at least can cover the pass and decent against the run.

One of the reasons I like LB R Smith is his speed and ability to play all over the field. He is perfect for the modern game and doesn't have to come off the field on obvious passing downs...sort of a better version of Tartt. Foster and Smith together would be a formidable LBing duo. The real need is edge rush and/or a guy like Justin Smith who makes great plays when they are most needed. Coyle and M Smith may be good, solid LBs but they do not remind me of Willis or Bowman, let alone Aldon. Imagine if Aldon was a stable person! He'd still be a niner and making more than JG!

Those are good points. However, I simply can't remember any HOF inside linebackers on any of our 5 super bowl winning defenses.

If you want to start covering pass recievers, just play nickel and have a great edge rusher and a strong safety that can play linebacker. You don't need the WLB or the OLB to be man to man, just have them sit in zone. You have two corners, three safties (one being a hybrid LB/SS) WLB - who should be a decent cover linebacker, OLB - who can deal with strong side runs and can sit in zone or blitz, and of course the all important LEO.

That's how I remember Seifert playing his defenses. Of course times have changed to more of a passing game, but still I can see the 4-3 under being not too different from Seifert's super bowl winning defenses.

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by Giedi:

Personally I don't know I'd you need the all pros at the ILB spot in today's pass happy game. I'd relocate those to Corner and maybe safety. But I agree - you need good inside backers that at least can cover the pass and decent against the run.

With all the throws to backs and tight ends you absolutely do need top level backers. A dominant fron 7 is the most important thing to have on D.

Agree to a certain point. Having a franchese QB changes the calculations a little bit. If you have a franchise QB that can pass and convert 3rd downs, you won't be playing the run a lot. You will be facing teams that need to pass to catch up with you, hence I would emphasize more of a nickel defense set up than a dominating front seven that is geared to stop runs.

Having said that, if the Franchise QB faces a good strong defense, that's when the 49er defense might play more runs because an opposing defense that can keep the score close, will run more. That's when you need run stuffers that can move and cover also.

Still, a dominant edge rusher can turn those defensive games around with a good sack that knocks the ball loose or he generates pressure for a interception. Teams with good defenses but no offense can be defeated if you get a +1 turnover ratio against them. Teams with good defenses *and* good offenses are usually playoff caliber teams.

Originally posted by ninerfan4life:

Originally posted by DonnieDarko:

Originally posted by defenderDX:

love reading this s**ttt

http://www.49erswebzone.com/articles/114884-schrager-49ers-make-nfc-championship-game-season/

goddamit they are hyping us way too much, the team doesn't need this added pressure

the expectations should be just be in contention for a playoff spot.

Super Bowl or bust!

How wz writers allowed plagiarize others words and pass them off as articles.

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by dtg_9er:

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by Giedi:
If Kyle can get that edge rusher we need, he's bound to have a lot of success, the way Harbaugh had success when Aldon was on the team.

Also had a HOF ILB along with a burgeoning All Pro at other spot. Brock Coyle and Malcolm Smith aren't those guys.

Personally I don't know I'd you need the all pros at the ILB spot in today's pass happy game. I'd relocate those to Corner and maybe safety. But I agree - you need good inside backers that at least can cover the pass and decent against the run.

One of the reasons I like LB R Smith is his speed and ability to play all over the field. He is perfect for the modern game and doesn't have to come off the field on obvious passing downs...sort of a better version of Tartt. Foster and Smith together would be a formidable LBing duo. The real need is edge rush and/or a guy like Justin Smith who makes great plays when they are most needed. Coyle and M Smith may be good, solid LBs but they do not remind me of Willis or Bowman, let alone Aldon. Imagine if Aldon was a stable person! He'd still be a niner and making more than JG!

Those are good points. However, I simply can't remember any HOF inside linebackers on any of our 5 super bowl winning defenses.

If you want to start covering pass recievers, just play nickel and have a great edge rusher and a strong safety that can play linebacker. You don't need the WLB or the OLB to be man to man, just have them sit in zone. You have two corners, three safties (one being a hybrid LB/SS) WLB - who should be a decent cover linebacker, OLB - who can deal with strong side runs and can sit in zone or blitz, and of course the all important LEO.

That's how I remember Seifert playing his defenses. Of course times have changed to more of a passing game, but still I can see the 4-3 under being not too different from Seifert's super bowl winning defenses.

My point is that R Smith is quick and smart enough to play in the nickle. I see him at any LB position, with the only limitation as a plugger in the middle. Pluggers are much easier to find, so why wear Smith down by keeping him inside on run downs. I'd put him outside where he can either rush or contain on that side.

With Foster and R Smith the team could play 4/2/5 with the offense having no idea who will comver and who will rush. Or they could cover with 7.

Originally posted by dtg_9er:

How alike is Kyle's approach to his father's? This is a serious question for those who have followed Kyle more closely than I have. What positions does he fill with lower draft picks, for instance.

Mike Shanahan found RBs in mid rounds who became very successful. Will Kyle use that same strategy? That sort of thing.

It remains unknown because this is the first time he's been a key decision maker on any team. If you're an OC or DC the HC and GM will take your preferences into account but there is no telling how they will prioritize them.

Originally posted by dtg_9er:

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by dtg_9er:

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by Giedi:

If Kyle can get that edge rusher we need, he's bound to have a lot of success, the way Harbaugh had success when Aldon was on the team.

Also had a HOF ILB along with a burgeoning All Pro at other spot. Brock Coyle and Malcolm Smith aren't those guys.

Personally I don't know I'd you need the all pros at the ILB spot in today's pass happy game. I'd relocate those to Corner and maybe safety. But I agree - you need good inside backers that at least can cover the pass and decent against the run.

One of the reasons I like LB R Smith is his speed and ability to play all over the field. He is perfect for the modern game and doesn't have to come off the field on obvious passing downs...sort of a better version of Tartt. Foster and Smith together would be a formidable LBing duo. The real need is edge rush and/or a guy like Justin Smith who makes great plays when they are most needed. Coyle and M Smith may be good, solid LBs but they do not remind me of Willis or Bowman, let alone Aldon. Imagine if Aldon was a stable person! He'd still be a niner and making more than JG!

Those are good points. However, I simply can't remember any HOF inside linebackers on any of our 5 super bowl winning defenses.

If you want to start covering pass recievers, just play nickel and have a great edge rusher and a strong safety that can play linebacker. You don't need the WLB or the OLB to be man to man, just have them sit in zone. You have two corners, three safties (one being a hybrid LB/SS) WLB - who should be a decent cover linebacker, OLB - who can deal with strong side runs and can sit in zone or blitz, and of course the all important LEO.

That's how I remember Seifert playing his defenses. Of course times have changed to more of a passing game, but still I can see the 4-3 under being not too different from Seifert's super bowl winning defenses.

My point is that R Smith is quick and smart enough to play in the nickle. I see him at any LB position, with the only limitation as a plugger in the middle. Pluggers are much easier to find, so why wear Smith down by keeping him inside on run downs. I'd put him outside where he can either rush or contain on that side.

With Foster and R Smith the team could play 4/2/5 with the offense having no idea who will comver and who will rush. Or they could cover with 7.

The choice between R. Smith or Landry, I'd take Landry (I'm grading the pass rusher as BPA vs a straight linebacker that isn't primarily a pass rusher). In a nickel scheme, you are playing the pass and I'd rather have a LEO that can consistently put pressure on a QB vs another Fangio zone blitz variant that can't put the pressure on the QB if the LEO drops into coverage. Instead I'd play mind games with the QB by allowing the SS/hybrid WLB to drop in into short zone, deep, man the TE, or blitz. Shaquil Griffen would meet my criteria of a hybrid SS/LB. He has the speed to get to the QB in a blitz, and he has the speed to cover, and I think he's one of the fastest players in the combine. Which means, I think, he's faster than R. Smith. so the 5-2-4 Seifert defense has pressure *and* also can screw with the QB's reads on a pass play that might result in interceptions. Against the run, it won't be a strong formation, but you aren't going to play that scheme on base plays anyway.

Originally posted by Giedi:
The choice between R. Smith or Landry, I'd take Landry (I'm grading the pass rusher as BPA vs a straight linebacker that isn't primarily a pass rusher). In a nickel scheme, you are playing the pass and I'd rather have a LEO that can consistently put pressure on a QB vs another Fangio zone blitz variant that can't put the pressure on the QB if the LEO drops into coverage. Instead I'd play mind games with the QB by allowing the SS/hybrid WLB to drop in into short zone, deep, man the TE, or blitz. Shaquil Griffen would meet my criteria of a hybrid SS/LB. He has the speed to get to the QB in a blitz, and he has the speed to cover, and I think he's one of the fastest players in the combine. Which means, I think, he's faster than R. Smith. so the 5-2-4 Seifert defense has pressure *and* also can screw with the QB's reads on a pass play that might result in interceptions. Against the run, it won't be a strong formation, but you aren't going to play that scheme on base plays anyway.

I am very confused by the experts on Landry. He was up and then down, and now up again. Is he a sure thing edge? Or a guy without a position in the 4/3? R Smith is so good I really don't care what system he's in...he will excel. But you are correct that edge is the most important position.

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

It remains unknown because this is the first time he's been a key decision maker on any team. If you're an OC or DC the HC and GM will take your preferences into account but there is no telling how they will prioritize them.

See Baalke comma Trent.