Peon Awesome

No way San Fran takes Darnold straight up for Garroppolo. JG's contract is not guaranteed. If they wanted the cap space, they're not trading for Darnold's guaranteed $19 million. They're better off straight up cutting him, but they won't have to do that. They could easily net a 3rd for him but even a conditional 7th is better than trading for Darnold.

Steelers are giving off major Panthers offense vibes.

Deebo was just named 1st team all pro at receiver. CMC has missed 23 games over the last 2 seasons. It's not that outrageous of a sentiment. Honestly I think we're best served to use him like the Niners use Deebo. Might help him stay on the field and still be a dangerous weapon.

Aaron Rodgers is 0-3 against the 49ers in the playoffs. Do you not remember them getting completely smoked the last time they played, with the Niners getting what seemed like 500 rushing yards en route to their super bowl appearance? Was also involved in the legendary Kaepernick game where he had 200+ yards each passing and rushing.

And in 2 plays, Dallas ends up with better field position than if San Fran had gone for the 4th down and got stuffed.

4th and 1 from midfield, up 6, with one of the best rushing offenses in the NFL and you punt? That's a major NFL bad karma move.

Us picking a qb at 6 reeks of the Giants drafting Daniel Jones in 2019, right down to the pick number. There were no obvious franchise qbs at that point, but the Giants were desperate after not drafting one at pick 2 the year before. Keep in mind the next 3 qbs drafted were Jones, Haskins and Drew Lock. The qbs this year are getting similar evaluations as that crop. Everyone knows how important a qb is. But unless you want to be the Jets picking a new qb every 3 years with a top 5 pick, you don't reach for one out of desperation. We are looking at an opportunity to pick an elite offensive line prospect at 6, which beautifully overlaps massive need with BPA. Don't overthink it. Let 2022 be a down year, set yourself up for the franchise qb in 2023 (or use that high draft pick to trade for Russell Wilson perhaps if you don't love the 2023 QBs).

Enjoyed listening to Fitterer. Definitely inspires more confidence than listening to Rhule. Few takeaways I got. 1. Fitterer clearly doesn't see eye to eye with Rhule on the roster. You can tell he's almost trying to stifle some exasperation on how long it took for Christenson to see time at LT. Like if it was up to Fitterer, he would've been playing there weeks ago and the idea that a LT has to have some minimum arm length is primitive thinking. 2. He is trying to be political with his answers on Darnold which make sense. Darnold is still under contract. For better or worse, it doesn't help the team to diminish the value of someone you have under contract. He even doesn't really try to pretend he wouldn't undo the decision to guarantee Darnold's 5th year if he could. 3. I got the sense he was hinting that he's not going to break the bank on Reddick. He mentions right after someone asks about Reddick that his focus is controlling the line of scrimmage, almost like preferring a bigger guy on the line who is more stout against the run. I might be reading too much into it and Reddick clearly has tons of value as a pass rusher, but just a vibe I got.

I don't get the obsession with cap space. We're not contending and we're not 2 or 3 free agents away from contending. We should be focusing on accumulating draft picks and setting up for the future. In that context, we have more cap space than we need. Restructuring a bunch of contracts and cutting players, especially starters, to create more cap dollars doesn't make a ton of sense. We'll just end up with more holes, feel the impulse to fill those holes by signing past their prime vets whose teams didn't think they were worth keeping, and end up no better off than we are now, but with more dead cap tagged onto the future.

What a gut punch for the Chargers. Is there anyone outside of Pittsburgh who would rather see the Steelers in the playoffs over the Chargers? I'd be interested to hear the pressor from Staley on the timeout. I have to hope maybe he just wanted to give his defense a breather and give them the best chance to force a 4th down after getting gashed all game. The fact that he waited till there was less than 40 seconds to call it makes me think he wasn't necessarily playing for the win with that but who knows. Get the stop there and it's a moot point.

The only right ending here is a tie. Could make it interesting and each get a fg on their opening drive. And then for good measure, if a team gets it with less than 2 minutes left, they just start kneeling while the other team concedes and foregoes their timeouts to let the clock run out

I mean with only Taysom under contract, the Saints would be smart to offer a 6th, force us to eat 2/3rd of the contract, and probably have Payton get 10x more out of him than anyone else could. I think an agreement similar to what we did for Teddy is probably realistic. I don't like the idea of giving anything of value to dump Darnold just to free up capspace. But getting a nominal pick and freeing a bit of cap space, sure. It would mean we would have zero qbs under contract though and probably make us desperate to draft a qb despite a terrible draft to go all in for one. Realistically, our best long term option is probably trading back in the 1st for future 1sts, living with Darnold for 1 more year (with a cheap signing to compete with him, a la Mariotta), focusing on building an offensive line this offseason, and then drafting a qb in 2023 with our inevitable top 3 pick (Bryce Young anyone?)

A win or tie gets the 49ers in the playoffs. Could make for some interesting decision making by San Fran. Let's say they have the ball on the Rams 40 yard line with 90 seconds left and it's 4th and 3. Analytics would say go for it if you want to win. But if all you need is a tie, then a punt might make more sense. Similarly, let's say it's 4th and short in the redzone on their 1st drive. Seems more likely you go for the fg cause if you don't convert, the Rams just need to drive for a fg to win. Would be interesting to see if something like either of those scenarios comes up.

A key point is that we would mostly need to stay out of free agency. If we sign as many players as we lose, we don't get any comp picks. So the one thing we have to make sure we avoid is signing a bunch of JAGs just to fill out the roster.

Sure I guess but it's not like we went out and made a bunch of splash signings or high picks on offense. This wasn't the New England offseason where like $100 million were spent on new receivers/tight ends or Kansas City trading a first for an OT and paying a premium for Thuney. Our flashiest moves beyond Darnold involved dumpster diving for our O line, and spending one of the last picks of the 2nd round for a 3rd WR. Either way, when you don't have coaches capable of designing a NFL caliber offensive gameplan, it doesn't matter who you have.

For the trade back brigade, you have to be careful. Your one chance at drafting a franchise LT will be at our current pick, unless you're talking a trade back of like 2 or 3 spots. A top LT doesn't drop past 12 or so. And every year, there tends to be a clear cream of the crop of maybe 10-15 players. So do you give up what's likely to be a 90% probability perennial solid starter with all pro potential, for 2 players with maybe a 30-50% chance to say the same? Another way to think about it, would you have gone back and traded Horn (or Slater or whoever was in the mix) for Marshall, Christenson and Tremble? Personally I would only consider 1 of 2 trade backs: A) 2022 1st + 1-2 future 1sts, like the Giants did with Chicago for Fields or Miami's trade with San Francisco for Lance. This is ideal if we decide on a full rebuild where we stock up on extra picks in future years that could help us land our franchise qb, or surround him with protection if we opt to pick one in 2022. You're already seeing how valuable that could be with the Giants getting an extra top 10 (possibly top 5) pick from the Bears this year. Pittsburgh trading up to take the local Pickett to become the new face of the franchise after Big Ben retires makes way too much sense and would be great for both teams. And if Pickett struggles like most rookies do, that future 1st could easily land in the top 10. B) Drop back 3-5 picks and get an extra 2nd or 2 3rds. This is only an option if our top prospect is gone by our pick (e.g. top LT). If they're there, you don't take that chance and grab them at our original spot. What I don't want is something like trading back with the Chiefs for their late 1st and 2nd, or even the Jets for their two 2nds including the one we gave them. Too much of a chance that those 2 picks are no more than backups/below average starters for their careers when we could've had a franchise LT.

They really need to go ahead and fire Brady now. If Sean Ryan is on the short list, give him a 5 week audition and see how he does. With the bye week, it's a perfect opportunity for him to assume the new role and try to design his own offense over the next 2 weeks. I'm not super high on him right now given he's the QB coach and our QB play has been uninspiring to say the least, but I'm more than happy to give him a shot. Couldn't be much worse than what we've seen from Brady most of his tenure.

I don't really know anything about Hackett but it seems like LaFleur has his hand print on everything there, including playcalling duties. What is it about Hackett that makes him an attractive candidate? Honestly just curious. I'm not sure who I'd want really. At this point, maybe someone with a track record of success as a head coach in the NFL. Mike Tomlin if Pittsburgh moves on, maybe Jim Harbaugh or perhaps there'll be a surprise firing like Pete Carroll. I'm tired of being stuck with someone trying to learn on the job and clearly in over their head to start.

Generous to give us that extra second. Doubt it will end up mattering. This 2nd half Rhule better be coaching like his job is on the line with adjustments, cause it very well might be.

It's great that a thread highlighting the fact that we have the best pass rushing duo in the entire NFL, despite costing less than $10 million combined against our cap this year, devolves into a bitch session on their limitations.

The whole notion that there are games you can pencil in as wins and losses this year is completely out the window. We could sweep Tampa and beat Buffalo and get blown out by Miami. This NFL season has been completely unpredictable leaguewide. The Titans have beaten the Rams, Bills and Chiefs but lost to the Jets and Texans. The Bills lost to the Jags and got smoked by the Colts last week. The same Colt McCoy led Arizona team that got pummeled by the Panthers is undefeated otherwise, with convincing wins against the Seahawks and a surging 49ers team who have outscored their opponents 94-42 in their last 3 non-Cardinals games. The list goes on and on. Let's stop worrying about who is on our schedule and who we "should" or "shouldn't" beat and focus on just playing good smart football on offense, defense and special teams. Cause when we're clicking, there's not a team in the NFL that scares me. When we're not, we get blown out by the Giants.

Definitely joining the majority in disagreeing with you. 100% agree with the decision to go for it based on our inability to stop the run. Also, I disagree with your assessment that it played out to show it was the wrong call. It actually showed why it was the right call. Even though we didn't convert, we still got the ball back with nearly 2 minutes with the potential for a game winning TD. The upside is huge; the downside is surmountable. Conversely if we punt, we might get lucky and force a 3 and out and get a chance to send it to overtime with a fg (although probably not), but even then there's a good chance we still lose in overtime since our defense could not stop them all day. If anything, being down 6 may have helped cause it forced us to play for the win rather than play conservative and likely lose anyway. Ultimately we couldn't even get in field goal range so it's a moot point. But weighing pros and cons of each and judging the flow of the game to that point, it was a no brainer to go for it and it's sad Rhule didn't register that right away and had to waste a timeout.

It's score or bust this drive. Our defense isn't forcing a punt

Why do we not have Gilmore playing man coverage on McLaurin?

The last time we extended a player after one career season when we had a young capable player poised to take his spot, we ended up with the Robby Anderson extension. Let Jackson chase his payday elsewhere. We've set ourselves up well to buffer his loss. And he might recoup a 3rd round comp for good measure. There are a lot of cb needy teams. Plus we have to make room for Horn in the lineup. Hell, we don't need to even resign Gilmore but for the right price I'd be fine with it. But even he's a luxury. Horn, Bouye and Hartsfield are a trio that would have a lot of teams envious. Gilmore and Keith Taylor Jr are fantastic depth. Then whoever wins out between Thomas Oliver and Pride would complete the roster. Obviously you'd love to keep every good starter but finding opportunities to replace players with competent players on rookie deals is how you keep a healthy cap sheet and form a complete team.