There are 193 users in the forums

49ers Roster: The Glue, Dead Weight, and Trade Bait

Shop Find 49ers gear online ⇨
Originally posted by JaggedJ:
Originally posted by sapplegate:
Originally posted by JaggedJ:
Some aren't seen as "just bodies" no matter what your opinion of them, and others are 1st and 2nd year players who will develop while others won't and be replaced. Sone of those "just bodies" will become core or be long term players even as depth/role players as previously mentioned.

lol like who?

Are Brock Croyle and Adrian Colbert core and crucial to the future success of this team? No, they're not good players and they're completely expendable.

Yeah, that's who I was alluding to. Top work.

Lol right, so you're either a core player or expendable I guess need 53 players (and then some) not everyone is gonna be a pro-bowler, simply not realistic. SF needs more overall talent but they also need their players to be healthy, which they are not.
[ Edited by NYniner85 on Oct 14, 2018 at 5:01 PM ]
Originally posted by sapplegate:
I cannot believe all the people calling this "good stuff"

You have way too many guys that you consider core. There's no way we'll win anything if we consider the majority of those players "core"

Here's the only core players:

QB Jimmy Garoppolo
RB Matt Breida, Jerrick McKinnon, Kyle Juszczyk
WR Marquise Goodwin
OT Mike McGlinchey
TE George Kittle
DT DeForest Buckner
LB Reuben Foster, Fred Warner

Everyone else is completely expendable, or is too old at this point (Joe Staley) to be considered core for a team that needs to rebuild this much.

He was spot on with his assessment
Originally posted by btthepunk:
Good stuff.

I do think McGlinchey is our future LT though.

Ditto
Very good post OTC!
Originally posted by JaggedJ:
Every team needs and utilises vets, and ever team needs solid role players/depth to fill out the roster.

We may not have as many core players as we would like yet but calling everyone but 10 players completely expendable is a bit laughable.

I think he is right. There are only 10 or so core players. OTC has done a good job here but the definition is wrong. It should say keepers. Role players are not core players. How is Elijah Lee or Brock Coyle core players? My interpretation of core would mean we are building a team around them. We most certainly should not be.
Originally posted by sapplegate:
I cannot believe all the people calling this "good stuff"

You have way too many guys that you consider core. There's no way we'll win anything if we consider the majority of those players "core"

Here's the only core players:

QB Jimmy Garoppolo
RB Matt Breida, Jerrick McKinnon, Kyle Juszczyk
WR Marquise Goodwin
OT Mike McGlinchey
TE George Kittle
DT DeForest Buckner
LB Reuben Foster, Fred Warner

Everyone else is completely expendable, or is too old at this point (Joe Staley) to be considered core for a team that needs to rebuild this much.

Exactly this.

Our db corps is nonexistent
Originally posted by Rice-a-Ronnie:
Originally posted by JaggedJ:
Every team needs and utilises vets, and ever team needs solid role players/depth to fill out the roster.

We may not have as many core players as we would like yet but calling everyone but 10 players completely expendable is a bit laughable.

I think he is right. There are only 10 or so core players. OTC has done a good job here but the definition is wrong. It should say keepers. Role players are not core players. How is Elijah Lee or Brock Coyle core players? My interpretation of core would mean we are building a team around them. We most certainly should not be.

What's everyones obsession with Brock Coyle being used as an example?

It's pretty clear reading OTC's post what he meant. He even went into detail about positions that needed upgrading even though people were listed in the "core" section.

Getting hung up on terminology really wasn't the point of the OP and I would even question your terminology when you say a core player is someone you "build a team around". How can you build around 15+ players? Who's the one being built around and who are the blocks being built around him?

Not to mention that who is and isn't considered a core player can change very quickly in this league. All it takes is for a rookie to unexpectedly excel and the core guy in front of him is suddenly surplus to requirements in the effort to strengthen the roster elsewhere and free up cap space.

TLDR - The point of OTC's post was obvious. We should focus on that rather than getting hung up on his choice of terminology.
Originally posted by mayo49:
Good accessment, Clock - the offseason will definitely see a lot of changes I think.

Agreed. Looking forward to some very aggressive movements & roster changes this offseason
Pettis and James haven't shown enough yet to be in the promising category. Taylor's injury does concern the hell out of me.

Thomas and Garnett should be moved.

Blair is solid depth that should be kept.

Tartt needs to be replaced. I've been wanting a new SS for the last few years.
  • DaBum
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 2,050
Originally posted by jreff22:
Pettis and James haven't shown enough yet to be in the promising category. Taylor's injury does concern the hell out of me.

Thomas and Garnett should be moved.

Blair is solid depth that should be kept.

Tartt needs to be replaced. I've been wanting a new SS for the last few years.

Pettis absolutely has shown enough to be promising. How the he'll has he not shown that? He got hurt but what we saw and heard from TC, preseason and week 1 is promising.

Originally posted by JaggedJ:

Getting hung up on terminology really wasn't the point of the OP and I would even question your terminology when you say a core player is someone you "build a team around". How can you build around 15+ players? Who's the one being built around and who are the blocks being built around him?

Not to mention that who is and isn't considered a core player can change very quickly in this league. All it takes is for a rookie to unexpectedly excel and the core guy in front of him is suddenly surplus to requirements in the effort to strengthen the roster elsewhere and free up cap space.

TLDR - The point of OTC's post was obvious. We should focus on that rather than getting hung up on his choice of terminology.
Good point Jagged...and I completely agree. It might have been more clear to differentiate between "core" players and "good role" players, or put another way, players that are already on the roster that are good enough to be part of a playoff team. That is how I always think of players on a team that is rebuilding. (I hope I'm correct in this assessment of your intention OTC....please correct me if I'm wrong).

Back to the point....it appears now that for whatever reason....lack of talent, poor coaching in some areas, injuries...that the team has far more holes than was originally thought. Now, is it because of a lack of talent? Or, is the team simply under-performing? (in other words, not playing up to its talent level or the talent is not being developed by the coaching staff? To me, those are the main questions... The team does have players that are performing regardless of the circumstances and those were mentioned already.

I'm starting to ramble so I'll just say this....if you take the starting QB, top RB, and top WR off of any NFL team, in all likelihood, that team will suck....unless it has a veteran defense full of studs. Even then, in this era of great offenses, the team that loses those guys will be lucky to be a .500 team. This is where we are right now. It's OK...it's a lost season and the team should look at every young player on the roster to see if he is part of the future. By the second half of the season, the team will probably have a pretty good idea of what they have...and what they need. Thanks for the great post, OTC...

Cheers!
Originally posted by DaBum:
Originally posted by jreff22:
Pettis and James haven't shown enough yet to be in the promising category. Taylor's injury does concern the hell out of me.

Thomas and Garnett should be moved.

Blair is solid depth that should be kept.

Tartt needs to be replaced. I've been wanting a new SS for the last few years.

Pettis absolutely has shown enough to be promising. How the he'll has he not shown that? He got hurt but what we saw and heard from TC, preseason and week 1 is promising.

3 catches for 96 yards does not equal anything at this point.
Originally posted by tohara3:
Originally posted by mayo49:
Good accessment, Clock - the offseason will definitely see a lot of changes I think.

Agreed. Looking forward to some very aggressive movements & roster changes this offseason

Sad to have to read this before we have played our 6th game
  • okdkid
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 19,275
Originally posted by Hoovtrain:
Originally posted by sapplegate:
I cannot believe all the people calling this "good stuff"

You have way too many guys that you consider core. There's no way we'll win anything if we consider the majority of those players "core"

Here's the only core players:

QB Jimmy Garoppolo
RB Matt Breida, Jerrick McKinnon, Kyle Juszczyk
WR Marquise Goodwin
OT Mike McGlinchey
TE George Kittle
DT DeForest Buckner
LB Reuben Foster, Fred Warner

Everyone else is completely expendable, or is too old at this point (Joe Staley) to be considered core for a team that needs to rebuild this much.

He was spot on with his assessment

Nah. Too many mediocre depth guys in there. They are necessary, of course. But can be replaced in any offseason. So they can't be "core" players. We have...maybe...9-10 "core" players on this team.

If we are going to have such a broad brush to characterize "core" players, then we need to add a category above the definition as defined by the OP.
[ Edited by okdkid on Oct 14, 2018 at 10:20 PM ]
Originally posted by jreff22:
Originally posted by DaBum:
Originally posted by jreff22:
Pettis and James haven't shown enough yet to be in the promising category. Taylor's injury does concern the hell out of me.

Thomas and Garnett should be moved.

Blair is solid depth that should be kept.

Tartt needs to be replaced. I've been wanting a new SS for the last few years.

Pettis absolutely has shown enough to be promising. How the he'll has he not shown that? He got hurt but what we saw and heard from TC, preseason and week 1 is promising.

3 catches for 96 yards does not equal anything at this point.

Apparently you missed Pettis's touchdown where he improvised on a broken play and made a finger tip catch in the back of the endzone. You might also not be aware that he's had a knee injury. Add that to his collegiate career production and I would say that he's quite promising.
Share 49erswebzone