Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Okay gentlemen, REAL talk...


Mr. Scot
 Share

Recommended Posts

56 minutes ago, ChibCU said:

Some are still experiencing doomed depression while witnessing clear franchise progress after a terrible decade-long decline.

Is your quality of life really improving to invest 95% of your posts shouting that our QB is the worst? You aren’t part of the decision team yet you act like it’s your full-time job and side hustle income.

Having positive signs of growth is necessary for a winning and contending culture. It also means we can maybe finally get some HC and GM stability. Then, the roster can get molded each year in the right direction.

Enjoy the progress and crack a smile in real life every once in a while. Damn. 

yeah, a lot of people voice excitement over the improvements and wins.  They just see how we can frankly continue to make strides and get better……by addressing the tiny elephant in the room.  And as soon as that is said, some folks lose their poo and do whatever you just did here with projecting that makes people miserable.  If we addressed QB this past offseason, we might actually be good this year.  Actual good. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mr. Scot said:

Purdy got a five year, 50 plus million dollar per year contract.

That may not be the best example to cite for your argument.

My point was neither QB is a Mahomes or Allen type who can just carry a crap team to wins and while the 49ers have mostly won during his time there because they have such a complete roster, he's still far more critical to the 49ers success than Bryce is to ours, another team that is winning because of the roster, not the QB.

He might not be THE reason they win games, but they certainly wouldn't be as good without him or have as high of a ceiling.  He allows Shannahan to call the game he wants to call and Purdy adapts around it, he doesn't need to adapt his gameplan around what Purdy isn't able to do like Canales has to do with Bryce.

The 49ers win less games the last few years without Purdy.

I don't think we win less games without Bryce, but I think we win/lose different games.  He's made a handful of clutch late game throws that a lot of back end starting QB's won't do.  But he's also played so poorly in other games where most other back end starters would have gotten us a win.

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, tukafan21 said:

My point was neither QB is a Mahomes or Allen type who can just carry a crap team to wins and while the 49ers have mostly won during his time there because they have such a complete roster, he's still far more critical to the 49ers success than Bryce is to ours, another team that is winning because of the roster, not the QB.

He might not be THE reason they win games, but they certainly wouldn't be as good without him or have as high of a ceiling.  He allows Shannahan to call the game he wants to call and Purdy adapts around it, he doesn't need to adapt his gameplan around what Purdy isn't able to do like Canales has to do with Bryce.

The 49ers win less games the last few years without Purdy.

I don't think we win less games without Bryce, but I think we win/lose different games.  He's made a handful of clutch late game throws that a lot of back end starting QB's won't do.  But he's also played so poorly in other games where most other back end starters would have gotten us a win.

I don't think Purdy is all that good.

  • Beer 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, tukafan21 said:

My point was neither QB is a Mahomes or Allen type who can just carry a crap team to wins and while the 49ers have mostly won during his time there because they have such a complete roster, he's still far more critical to the 49ers success than Bryce is to ours, another team that is winning because of the roster, not the QB.

He might not be THE reason they win games, but they certainly wouldn't be as good without him or have as high of a ceiling.  He allows Shannahan to call the game he wants to call and Purdy adapts around it, he doesn't need to adapt his gameplan around what Purdy isn't able to do like Canales has to do with Bryce.

The 49ers win less games the last few years without Purdy.

I don't think we win less games without Bryce, but I think we win/lose different games.  He's made a handful of clutch late game throws that a lot of back end starting QB's won't do.  But he's also played so poorly in other games where most other back end starters would have gotten us a win.

Have you seen the past two games he has played with Purdy?

He is adapting to working around Purdy, because he hasn't played well since his return from injury aside from the Arizona game. 

Now that isn't typically the case but he has clipped his wings a little it looks like.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, tukafan21 said:

My point was neither QB is a Mahomes or Allen type who can just carry a crap team to wins and while the 49ers have mostly won during his time there because they have such a complete roster, he's still far more critical to the 49ers success than Bryce is to ours, another team that is winning because of the roster, not the QB.

He might not be THE reason they win games, but they certainly wouldn't be as good without him or have as high of a ceiling.  He allows Shannahan to call the game he wants to call and Purdy adapts around it, he doesn't need to adapt his gameplan around what Purdy isn't able to do like Canales has to do with Bryce.

The 49ers win less games the last few years without Purdy.

I don't think we win less games without Bryce, but I think we win/lose different games.  He's made a handful of clutch late game throws that a lot of back end starting QB's won't do.  But he's also played so poorly in other games where most other back end starters would have gotten us a win.

This has nothing to do with Bryce but look at Mahomes record now that his side is at a Carolina Panthers the last half decade talent level. A good QB keeps you competitive but the rest of the side will make you a champion 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Mr. Scot said:

I'm not a Bryce fan, but I've seen enough to know it isn't just Bryce.

Our MO under Canales has been to open the season looking like refried dog sh-t but to get better as the season goes along.

That points to poor offseason prep. 

Everybody made too much of that. The CBA and the 17 game schedule is what kills the cohesion we see in teams across the league in the opening games. 
You decide, look at your depth and make informed decisions there or you get a an extra quarter or whatever two quarters with your ones. 
Teams that are set don’t have those openings as much down the roster to evaluate but that ain’t everybody. It is a quandary. I think they need that 4th preseason game back.

But as I said, I don’t lay that as the excuse for Bryce to come out looking like he does to start seasons. He has an entire camp. 

Edited by strato
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This feels a bit like 2022 when I had wanted to focus on building up the team even more, so that we could potentially make major moves in 2024. But we went in a different direction and it feels like it took this long just to get back where we were before.

So yes, I kind of see Canales/Young as a bridge for something even better because the inconsistency with those two are maddening. But another year with those two would at least mean we can use the next offseason to plug in even more holes in the roster. At least then, if you end up replacing Canales/Young, then it's a far more attractive job and you're giving the next QB an actual team around them from the start.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, strato said:

Everybody made too much of that. The CBA and the 17 game schedule is what kills the cohesion we see in teams across the league in the opening games. 
You decide, look at your depth and make informed decisions there or you get a an extra quarter or whatever two quarters with your ones. 
Teams that are set don’t have those openings as much down the roster to evaluate but that ain’t everybody. It is a quandary. I think they need that 4th preseason game back.

But as I said, I don’t lay that as the excuse for Bryce to come out looking like he does to start seasons. He has an entire camp. 

Every team in the league operates under those same conditions. But a number of other teams somehow manage to start the season looking way better than we do.

Offseason prep and pacing are a big part of coaching.

Tom Coughlin used to beat the sh-t out of his teams. They'd start the season looking like world beaters, then by late season they were done.

On the flipside, more "vet friendly coaches" would take it easier. They start looking slow and maybe a tad sloppy, but get better as seasons go along. 

The best coaches though, find a way to start looking crisp up front and keep it going all year. Belichick tended to be good at this. Reid has likewise become a master over the last few years.

Bottom Line: Having your team ready to play is a coach's responsibility, and not just on a weekly basis. It's important coming into the season also.

Canales...needs work 😕

Edited by Mr. Scot
  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, outlaw4 said:

This feels a bit like 2022 when I had wanted to focus on building up the team even more, so that we could potentially make major moves in 2024. But we went in a different direction and it feels like it took this long just to get back where we were before.

So yes, I kind of see Canales/Young as a bridge for something even better because the inconsistency with those two are maddening. But another year with those two would at least mean we can use the next offseason to plug in even more holes in the roster. At least then, if you end up replacing Canales/Young, then it's a far more attractive job and you're giving the next QB an actual team around them from the start.

I think Canales might end up being a long term answer.

Not convinced with Bryce...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/30/2025 at 4:06 PM, SmokinwithWilly said:

If we pick up the 5th year, Morgan needs to be shown the door. 

Tepper has been quiet, but he will make his thoughts known one way or the other if Dan Morgan decides to cut ties with Bryce. I think he has given Morgan and Canales a long leash, but he would have a say in this. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Sure it does, maybe not every position and not every draft.  You have to admit the hit rate goes down the further in the draft you get.  Would you more readily find a generational talent at the #2 pick or #19 pick?  High picks are considered "busts" if they doesn't pan out, whereas guys drafted later don't have that level of scrutiny upon them.  Different expectation levels.  If Styles does indeed go #2, I already listed the rarefied air that he would be in.  Maybe he doesn't set the League on fire, but my gut feeling is he does.  Again, you don't take an off-ball LB #2 if he is just a 'really good' player.
    • To illustrate my point, I watched (and commented on the Huddle) that Rozeboom would often wait a full second (or close to it) before taking his first step.  I assume that he probably had issues with false steps, a faulty practice that can take an ILB out of the gap completely.  Watch Luke and you see a step with the snap, and rarely was it a false step.  Rozeboom may have had 100 tackles (speculating) but initial contact was 2-3 yards on the defensive side of the ball.  Luke's 100 tackles were made 1-2 yards from the LOS.  Over the course of a year, Luke was much more productive (more fumbles, fewer long gainers, more OL penalties, fewer first downs, etc) that Rozeboom, but on the stat sheet, they both had 100 tackles.  In fact, Rozeboom's inefficiency kept him on the field more (more first downs, fewer OL penalties, turnovers, and punts) so he should have MORE tackles.   I would like to see stats that break down those things.   For example again, Josh Norman was slow--4.68 or so at CB.  However, his anticipation speed was incredible.  He made as many plays as a 4.4 CB.  I had one coach (college--later became the head coach at WCU) tell me that slower players have to use their brains more to still be around.  Elite athletes can just get by on their physical superiority.  He added, "Rarely does a football player run full speed.  Most of the time, they are not, so the 40 time is misleading stat.  Smart players overcome shortcomings--when the elite athlete becomes average (slows with age, advances in level of competition) they struggle against smarter (football IQ) competition.  
    • Obviously tongue in cheek hyperbole. But we do not need a first round RB to compete for a championship. We need intelligent roster building. That to me is the complete opposite of intelligent roster building because it is a prime resource at a devalued plug and play position when we have needs across the defense.
×
×
  • Create New...