Jump to content

To land Kyle Shanahan, 49ers must be willing to give


Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, falconidae said:

There's a reason that successful professional gamblers look at trends and past history when making bets. Doing the same thing here. You don't impress me with your feeble grasp of logical fallacies from  a wikipedia entry.

Didn't make any post about turning on KS. Where did I turn on Shanahan? Where did I assume he would fail?  Thinking that the SF FO would continue to be the dumpster fire it's been for the past several years implies nothing about Shanahan's ability.

I said it was a distinct possibility that he would get fired in 1 or 2 years. How is that any different than he MIGHT fail?

 

 

 

So lets review what I've said about Shanahan , in this thread and others.

In this thread:

"someone else: I'm "reading between the lines" of your post.  Saying getting fired in 2 years would indicate that you think he will not succeed.
 

Me: You're reading something that isn't there. Shanahan could actually be doing a great job and get fired because the FO is a mess."

So, not only is it wild speculation to assume something that isn't in the post, you double down by ignoring the true explanation given later.

 

Other threads:

"Would certainly understand if Shanahan left myself,  And, agree that he's not 2-3 years away. If he stays and the falcons have another great offensive year next year, be really hard to keep him then."

 

"You need an "all of the above" option. I described it earlier in the year as a perfect storm of Ryan's hard work, Shanahan's scheme,Oline coming together w/ Mack, the secondary targets being improved and a defense that forced them to score 30 points a game to win.

Don't see any reason for any of that to stop any time soon, if KS leaves, then they'll promote in house. Well, actually, the D should be much improved next year, but they'll still be able to score 30 points a game."

 

Where in that is an turning on KS?

The problem is not looking at trends. The problem is assuming because there is a trend, that the trend will necessarily continue. That is why it is fallacious. You now just made a false equivalency in your attempted rebuttal.

As for turning on Shanny, you did so when you assume he would fail and get fired. I pointed this out to you already and now you feigning ignorance. Once again, you made no attempt to take a skeptical position, or even appeal to a hypothetical. You ASSUMED the worst.

As for your comments in other threads, you are being unreasonable since I am not following every quote you ever stated. I was dealing what you said in THIS thread on THIS topic. Also none of your comments in those other threads have anything to do with what I said in this one. So you showed you like Shanny with the Falcons. Your response to me earlier about the assumed worst case scenario, shows the opposite IF Shanny went to SF. 

This is often the case with fans of any team. When a coach or player is on their team, the fan cheers for that person and hopes for the best. When that player or coach goes to another team, those same fans will assume or hope for the worst, and often times attack the player that left. They usually feel betrayed.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 135
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Just now, kiwifalcon said:

Nah Bro your not taking Rivers and a first round QB.

Id play the rookie and get a few pieces in FA upfront much like Seattle are going to do.Spend that money 18-20 plus on a o-line piece or 2 and wherever else the team I see weak.

Just build it round the new QB.

The only thing is, what if that QB busts?  A lot of pundits are claiming this to be a weak QB class.  It may do more damage to trot out a youngster that may not be ready than to bring in a vet, bring some stability to the position, and then unleash the young man in a year or two after he has had time to learn.

Not saying this is the way to go, just another way to go I guess.  I see your point.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Reggie_Kelly said:

I guess we are going to disagree with each other.

Last year he was actually a decent QB. I believe with Shanahan and the WCO .. Gabbert will benefit from it. Short quick passes and a strong zone run game and I can see Gabbert have Russell Wilson type numbers. 20 tds and 3k yds passing with some rushing yds. Gabbert is a plus athlete with a good arm.

Look at the situations he has been in. He was also hampered by injuries for 2 years while in Jax. The Jaguars were a mess when he was first drafted and the Niners are dysfunctional. No QB would succeed under that. 

 

I respect your opinion man. I just don't see the skills there. I agree, he hasnt been in the best of situations. I just think his failings as a QB go beyond situation. 

I wouldnt be shocked if he started another game so maybe he'll wind up in a good situation and turn it around. I'd be shocked though. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, NeonDeion said:

In 2008, we drafted Ryan. Without him, Smitty goes nowhere with our team. Is there a Ryan in this draft? No.

If they draft Watson they *might* have a shot. But outside of that, they aren't going anywhere.

Watson would be terrible for a quick turnaround with this system. He'd be great to sit behind Gabbert or Kap a year or two. 

If I were Shanny and I took this job, I'd hope Cleveland takes Watson and I'd draft Brad Kaaya. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, athell said:

The only thing is, what if that QB busts?  A lot of pundits are claiming this to be a weak QB class.  It may do more damage to trot out a youngster that may not be ready than to bring in a vet, bring some stability to the position, and then unleash the young man in a year or two after he has had time to learn.

Not saying this is the way to go, just another way to go I guess.  I see your point.

Goes with the territory man.That year there was only really 2 guys but we went for it.The Niners to me if they don't do it are asking for trouble.Heaven forbid there stop gap may work and get them to 500 and then you best believe when a good class does come around there not in position to get that guy.

Its no different in 08 when we took Ryan.You gotta take the risk man or your just band aiding a wound that needs stitches.Hence why the real pressure is on there FO and HC to get it right.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Intellectually Honest said:

The problem is not looking at trends. The problem is assuming because there is a trend, that the trend will necessarily continue. That is why it is fallacious. You now just made a false equivalency in your attempted rebuttal.

As for turning on Shanny, you did so when you assume he would fail and get fired. I pointed this out to you already and now you feigning ignorance. Once again, you made no attempt to take a skeptical position, or even appeal to a hypothetical. You ASSUMED the worst.

As for your comments in other threads, you are being unreasonable since I am not following every quote you ever stated. I was dealing what you said in THIS thread on THIS topic. Also none of your comments in those other threads have anything to do with what I said in this one. So you showed you like Shanny with the Falcons. Your response to me earlier about the assumed worst case scenario, shows the opposite IF Shanny went to SF. 

This is often the case with fans of any team. When a coach or player is on their team, the fan cheers for that person and hopes for the best. When that player or coach goes to another team, those same fans will assume or hope for the worst, and often times attack the player that left. They usually feel betrayed.

 

I never turned on Shanahan, your inability to understand my point doesn't make it any less valid.

Did you mean for your user name to be doubly ironic, or was it unintentional, which would be triply ironic?

Have fun with your psuedointellectual dribble. I'm going to keep talking to the adults who want to have actual discussions, not children that want to take words out of context, assign meanings to them that were never intended and refuse to acknowledge the other person's point of view as valid.

I'm just going to ignore you now.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, falconidae said:

I never turned on Shanahan, your inability to understand my point doesn't make it any less valid.

Did you mean for your user name to be doubly ironic, or was it unintentional, which would be triply ironic?

Have fun with your psuedointellectual dribble. I'm going to keep talking to the adults who want to have actual discussions, not children that want to take words out of context, assign meanings to them that were never intended and refuse to acknowledge the other person's point of view as valid.

I'm just going to ignore you now.

So you just assumed the worst would happen for what reason? So you run away to your safe space and play identity politics because things aren't working out for you. What a surprise.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, falconidae said:

I never turned on Shanahan, your inability to understand my point doesn't make it any less valid.

Did you mean for your user name to be doubly ironic, or was it unintentional, which would be triply ironic?

Have fun with your psuedointellectual dribble. I'm going to keep talking to the adults who want to have actual discussions, not children that want to take words out of context, assign meanings to them that were never intended and refuse to acknowledge the other person's point of view as valid.

I'm just going to ignore you now.

Hey falconaide I brought up about this guy in another thread lol.

Im telling you I don't waste my time on him and having a look what's gone on here only supports that fact.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Reggie_Kelly said:

I guess we are going to disagree with each other.

Last year he was actually a decent QB. I believe with Shanahan and the WCO .. Gabbert will benefit from it. Short quick passes and a strong zone run game and I can see Gabbert have Russell Wilson type numbers. 20 tds and 3k yds passing with some rushing yds. Gabbert is a plus athlete with a good arm.

Look at the situations he has been in. He was also hampered by injuries for 2 years while in Jax. The Jaguars were a mess when he was first drafted and the Niners are dysfunctional. No QB would succeed under that. 

 

He was ok last year. It should've carried over to this year. Instead he got benched midway through the season. Gabbert os just one of those guys that will always be decent. Kyle doesn't want decent. He's had decent his entire OC career until now with Matt. He'll never want another decent qb again. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, TheFatboi said:

Again, read between the lines. Key word is "situation". He loves the situation here. Why?? He has a qb that can run his system. The "situation" in SF may not be so and I'm sure he doesn't want his 1st HC gig to be a failure because he went into a "situation" where a vet qb wasn't in place that can learn his system as fast as Matt did. Takes vets 3 years to master the wco. 

If he does take the job, if I were Kyle I'd pick up Nick Foles. He's still young and pretty much grew up in a WCO with Andy Reid. I think Foles can still be a starter in this league.

Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, abstract said:

If Shanahan wants to go work for an insane owner he should just wait for the Colts job to become available.  He would at least have a quarterback then.

What if the Colts don't want him?  What if they don't fire their coach next year?

Man, I really hope all of you optimists are right, but I'm doing what I always do when it comes to Atlanta sports: hope for the best but plan for the worst. I hope Kyle turns down the SF job if offered, but I'm planning on him taking it (if offered) and the Falcons moving on successfully.

Link to post
Share on other sites

ESPN's Adam Schefter reports the 49ers will offer their head-coaching job to Kyle Shanahan at the conclusion of the Falcons' season.

The 49ers can't officially hire Shanahan until the conclusion of the Falcons' playoff run, but it appears there's already a wink/nod agreement. It's why Seahawks executive Trent Kirchner "withdrew" from the general manager search on Tuesday. Kirchner was believed to want to pair up with Seahawks assistant Tom Cable. Successfully coordinating offenses since 2008 in Houston, Shanahan has earned the chance to lead a team.
Related: 49ers
 
Jan 17 - 5:43 PM
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, fuego said:

I see it as the opposite. If he had said "But [being a head coach is] a goal of most people in our profession, and I'd be surprised if most people didn't tell you they were ready" FIRST, then I would say you were right. He then would have qualified that statement with 'but the situation needs to be right.' But he didn't qualify my bolded statement there, he qualified his 'the situation needs to be right' with my bolded statement. Order of the statement matters. The more I read about this the more I think he's gone. I hope I'm wrong. 

In any profession it's the goal to be at the top of it. But there are ppl who believe in setting themselves up for success. Like the Mannings with Eli being drafted to S D or Elway threatening to play baseball if Indy drafts him. Both of those guys were ready to be NFL qb's but only if the job was the one they wanted. So not everybody will just jump at any opportunity. That's what he's saying to me. I think he will think long and hard about taking the job. It will have to make sense for him. Like McDaniels pulling out. It's not a good fit for him and he's failed one time already. Kyle will take it that serious. He'll only make the move if it makes sense for him. Not because the opportunity is there. Sometimes patience is the key to getting that perfect job. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Seahawks assistant Tom Cable has withdrawn his name from consideration for the 49ers' head-coaching vacancy.

The news comes the same day it was reported Falcons OC Kyle Shanahan has emerged as the odds-on favorite to replace Chip Kelly. Cable will return to Seattle, where he has been one of Pete Carroll's top lieutenants since he made the jump from USC.
Jan 17 - 6:09 PM
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, TheFatboi said:

In any profession it's the goal to be at the top of it. But there are ppl who believe in setting themselves up for success. Like the Mannings with Eli being drafted to S D or Elway threatening to play baseball if Indy drafts him. Both of those guys were ready to be NFL qb's but only if the job was the one they wanted. So not everybody will just jump at any opportunity. That's what he's saying to me. I think he will think long and hard about taking the job. It will have to make sense for him. Like McDaniels pulling out. It's not a good fit for him and he's failed one time already. Kyle will take it that serious. He'll only make the move if it makes sense for him. Not because the opportunity is there. Sometimes patience is the key to getting that perfect job. 

So, looks like the 49ers are going to offer the job to Shanahan, which they'd be incredibly stupid to do if they weren't sure that he'd say yes. Everybody they interviewed either has another job or has withdrawn from consideration.  Pretty much what happened when the Falcons signed Quinn.

Now, if Shanahan stood them up at the altar, I'd be happy, but as incompetent as the SF FO is, don't think they'd make that kind of mistake. pretty sure it's happened before, but it's rare. Don't follow coaching searches that closely, don't remember the last time someone backed out.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, falconidae said:

So, looks like the 49ers are going to offer the job to Shanahan, which they'd be incredibly stupid to do if they weren't sure that he'd say yes. Everybody they interviewed either has another job or has withdrawn from consideration.  Pretty much what happened when the Falcons signed Quinn.

Now, if Shanahan stood them up at the altar, I'd be happy, but as incompetent as the SF FO is, don't think they'd make that kind of mistake. pretty sure it's happened before, but it's rare. Don't follow coaching searches that closely, don't remember the last time someone backed out.

 

Dude  took OC job in fricking dump Cleveland with little voice in personnel, but folks don't think he'll take a HC job on San Francisco with personnel say-so ala like Quinn has here?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Vandy said:

Dude  took OC job in fricking dump Cleveland with little voice in personnel, but folks don't think he'll take a HC job on San Francisco with personnel say-so ala like Quinn has here?

OC is different than HC. I assume they've given him promises of a long term contract and lots of power in the organization.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, falconidae said:

OC is different than HC. I assume they've given him promises of a long term contract and lots of power in the organization.

Of course. And owner need to say the right things about not meddling in football operations. 

Edited by Vandy
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, falconidae said:

So, looks like the 49ers are going to offer the job to Shanahan, which they'd be incredibly stupid to do if they weren't sure that he'd say yes. Everybody they interviewed either has another job or has withdrawn from consideration.  Pretty much what happened when the Falcons signed Quinn.

Now, if Shanahan stood them up at the altar, I'd be happy, but as incompetent as the SF FO is, don't think they'd make that kind of mistake. pretty sure it's happened before, but it's rare. Don't follow coaching searches that closely, don't remember the last time someone backed out.

 

They will offer. Doesn't mean he will accept. But if that's what they're hitching on they will make him an offer he can't refuse. How else can you lure him in. And he's gonna want a lot. I also think it will depend on if he finishes the job here or not. If we lose to GB something tells me he won't leave. If we win the SB he's out. 

Link to post
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.


×
×
  • Create New...