49ers Cut thread, scrap signings, final 53 discussion

[48 1/2ers]

Looks like McNichols is the 9th guy and they still have one open spot. I'd be down for Calitro or Connor Harris released by the Jets, Nate Gerry released by the Eagles

[GW21]

2 minutes ago, 48 1/2ers said:

Looks like McNichols is the 9th guy and they still have one open spot. I'd be down for Calitro or Connor Harris released by the Jets, Nate Gerry released by the Eagles

I like Gerry and think he would be awesome in that SS spot, but i think the eagles signed him to their PS.

[rudyZ]

1 hour ago, big9erfan said:

I guess now that we're down to 2 qbs putting Mullins on the PS makes sense.  He knows the offense, and maybe there's something there that can be developed.  But while watching his one half of play last game I must admit I was thinking it was nice of Shanny to give him some playing time so he could tell his kids and gradkids that he once played a game in the NFL.

I didn't feel he had an NFL arm at all. Maybe he's only there so he can play the role of the "elusive" QB when gameplanning against an actual elusive QB. He ran some read option during his half, so maybe that's his purpose on the team. But he's not an NFL QB to me.

[J-ALL-DAY]

See, I disagree there. I'll probably have to watch the game again, but thought his arm was fine. In fact, he had much more zip on his throws than Beathard did. Mullens problem is everything else. Widely inaccurate and suspect decision making. 

[TecmoSuperJoe]

8 hours ago, rudyZ said:

I'm much happier with Kyle than I would be with Harbaugh in his seventh season of good-but-not-good-enough coaching. Sure, Harbaugh was a better option than Baalke, but I don't believe he would have won us a championship. He peaked in his second season, and I doubt there was another peak in his hypothetical future. Baalke peaked in his first offseason, then it simply went downhill real fast from there. So sure, Harbaugh was better, but neither was the answer. It's early, and Kyle might be. In a way, maybe Baalke helped make it happen, by sucking this much.

Weird. Kyle hasn't accomplished anything yet. Sure a lot of people were happy with Mike Nolan before he coached a single game too when comparing him to Dennis Erickson. 

We don't know how Harbaugh would have done if Baalke left either. Completely speculative, but based on his overall record here and how the team fell apart after he left...I'd say he deserves the benefit of the doubt. 

But yeah, point still stands about Harbs over Baalke. And I'm still laughing at the people that wanted Baalke sticking around instead. Kyle is kind of irrelevant to the point I was making. 

[y2lamanaki]

8 hours ago, PapaShogun said:

We don't know how Harbaugh would have done if Baalke left either. Completely speculative, but based on his overall record here and how the team fell apart after he left...I'd say he deserves the benefit of the doubt. 

 

I'd say based on the fact that the team fell from perennial Super Bowl contender to an 8-8 club on the brink of disaster due to a few injuries in 2014 plus the fact that the roster became said disaster starting in 2015 indicates just about all we need to know about how much benefit of the doubt he needs. He'd have been better than Tomsula/Kelly, but I have a hard time believing he'd have won anything given how poorly the far more gifted 2014 team performed. 

[Incarcerated_Scarface]

I'm really exited to see what this new regime can be capable of. It seems as if they're doing/saying the right things so far. I'm a realistic fan so no playoff talk from me but I can see it happening in a few years if we go about it right.

[TecmoSuperJoe]

31 minutes ago, y2lamanaki said:

I'd say based on the fact that the team fell from perennial Super Bowl contender to an 8-8 club on the brink of disaster due to a few injuries in 2014 plus the fact that the roster became said disaster starting in 2015 indicates just about all we need to know about how much benefit of the doubt he needs. He'd have been better than Tomsula/Kelly, but I have a hard time believing he'd have won anything given how poorly the far more gifted 2014 team performed. 

Ummm...ok? That doesn't mean a good coach can't bounce back. All good coaches, even HOF coaches have had lackluster seasons. Even after Super Bowl winning ones. Your expectations are way to high to think that something like that couldn't possibly occur to a quality head coach.  

Oh don't forget to add Jed's whisper campaign against Harbs as to what went wrong in 2014. That didn't help in the slightest. And Harbaugh wasn't around in 2015 so I'm not sure why that is being held against him. Anything beyond the 2014 season is irrelevant seeing as he was no longer around as coach and making coaching decisions. Baalke was here pulling the trigger and Harbaugh shouldn't be held accountable for his continued solo screw ups. Also Tomsula's in game coaching regardless of roster talent was atrocious. 

But anyways at the end of the day Jed made the wrong decision putting all his marbles with Trent instead. Which is my point. 

[y2lamanaki]

9 minutes ago, PapaShogun said:

Ummm...ok? That doesn't mean a good coach can't bounce back. All good coaches, even HOF coaches have had lackluster seasons. Even after Super Bowl winning ones. Your expectations are way to high to think that something like that couldn't possibly occur to a quality head coach.  

 

It absolutely could. You are correct. But HOF coaches with lackluster seasons typically have lackluster talent, even after winning Super Bowls. See John Harbaugh and the Ravens. Great coach, but with subpar talent, the Ravens have struggled. Once the talent started depleting in 2014, Jim's record went down as well. Bill Walsh would not have won anything with the rosters assembled in 2015 and 2016. That's absolutely Baalke's fault, but to think Jim was some sort of savior who would have been able to do much with nothing. He wasn't. He was a good coach who had plenty of flaws that were always very obviously on display. The offense in 2014 (Jim's specialty) was already ranked 25th in the NFL before losing Michael Crabtree, Stevie Johnson, Brandon Lloyd, Frank Gore, and Mike Iupati, who would all be downgraded in 2014. The lackluster defense also lost Patrick Willis, Chris Borland, Justin Smith, Aldon Smith, and Chris Culliver, who were all downgraded on defense. Sure, Willis/Aldon didn't play a full season in 2014 (and were not at their best when they did), but they still would were improvements over their backups in 2014, and losing them were major losses in 2015. 

There is no "benefit of the doubt" that Harbaugh needs when he was lackluster with all of the above. 

[TecmoSuperJoe]

2 hours ago, y2lamanaki said:

It absolutely could. You are correct. But HOF coaches with lackluster seasons typically have lackluster talent, even after winning Super Bowls. See John Harbaugh and the Ravens. Great coach, but with subpar talent, the Ravens have struggled. Once the talent started depleting in 2014, Jim's record went down as well. Bill Walsh would not have won anything with the rosters assembled in 2015 and 2016. That's absolutely Baalke's fault, but to think Jim was some sort of savior who would have been able to do much with nothing. He wasn't. He was a good coach who had plenty of flaws that were always very obviously on display. The offense in 2014 (Jim's specialty) was already ranked 25th in the NFL before losing Michael Crabtree, Stevie Johnson, Brandon Lloyd, Frank Gore, and Mike Iupati, who would all be downgraded in 2014. The lackluster defense also lost Patrick Willis, Chris Borland, Justin Smith, Aldon Smith, and Chris Culliver, who were all downgraded on defense. Sure, Willis/Aldon didn't play a full season in 2014 (and were not at their best when they did), but they still would were improvements over their backups in 2014, and losing them were major losses in 2015. 

There is no "benefit of the doubt" that Harbaugh needs when he was lackluster with all of the above. 

There a few examples of HOF coaches with talented rosters having lackluster seasons after winning the Super Bowl: 

- 1982 49ers. Bill Walsh's team didn't even make the playoffs. They were one of the most talented teams in the NFL. It was a strike shortened season, but overall they just weren't clicking as a unit. Especially on defense.

- 1988 Redskins with Joe Gibbs. Didn't make the playoffs after winning the Super Bowl. Had a ton of talent. Injuries and a tough schedule held them back. 

- 2006 Steelers. Also a very talented roster that won the Super Bowl the season before with most of the same players intact. 

- 2002 Patriots and 1980 Steelers are also good examples. Both teams didn't make the playoffs the year after winning the Super Bowl despite the coaching namesake and talent on the roster. 

You can have A+ talent and coaching, but still a disappointing season due to a variety of factors. Several close losses, injuries to key players, or a unit just not clicking. Same way teams go on a roll, get hot, or just get all the lucky breaks for a prolonged period of time.

We don't know the exact moves/roster to a certainty that Jim and his staff would have assembled if he was retained and Baalke wasn't. Again, 2015 is irrelevant because Jim and his staff were completely removed from the equation. I don't know why 2015 and beyond keeps getting brought up. It has nothing to do with Harbaugh. 

Jim had flaws. I never argued against that. But he was still a top coach, and getting rid of him in favor of Baalke was stupid. That's the point. The offense sucked in 2014. Ok. Bill Parcells' defenses weren't always great every year either. Same with Bill Belichick. Even with talent to work with. Doesn't mean they deserve to get fired. And using 2014 to say the end was near, so his dismissal was justified is pretty weak. By this logic any coach that ever slips up and has a season low of expectations should see the door. Would kind of be like the Rooneys kicking Bill Cower to the curb after he had three straight seasons with no playoff appearances from 1999-2000. Instead he gets a three year extension. The Rooneys are great owners though. The Yorks aren't. 

Harbaugh deserves the benefit of the doubt because of his overall record in SF and making it to the NFC Championship or the Super Bowl in his first three seasons as head coach. Letting him go in favor of Baalke was stupid because the 49ers have had a retarded ownership the last 15 years. This continues to be my main point which for whatever reason seems to have turned into a statement of why Harbaugh wouldn't have continued to win big moving forward (which I don't necessarily agree is foreseeable but that is a DIFFERENT conversation). My initial statement was describing how I found it hilarious that people thought that retaining Baalke was the right choice compared to Harbaugh. Not how Harbaugh would have done continuing with rosters he had no involvement in organizing. Bill Walsh doing whatever with our 2014 and 2015 rosters is again irrelevant because it theoretically puts him in Harbaugh's irrelevant position of 2015 and beyond with the 49ers. This is about the decision being made at the time it was made. Not the ensuing ramifications. 

 

[y2lamanaki]

There are a lot of smart things said in this post. Among them, injuries to key players being a cause for a team's struggles. Injuries tend to harm a team because it means a less talented player will be playing in that spot. Also close losses being a possible explanation. 

In 2014, 5 of the losses came by at least two scores. So not the culprit. And if losing key players is a sign that your team will struggle, then certainly losing Patrick Willis, Justin Smith, and Chris Borland from an already lackluster 2014 team would have hurt. 2015 matters (despite what you want to believe), because no amount of Jim Harbaugh sticking around was going to stop those three losses. Jim Harbaugh being around wasn't going to stop Aldon from getting in trouble...again...and being cut. That was going to happen regardless of who the GM was. Maybe Harbaugh saves Anthony Davis from quitting, but that's debateable.  Would he have resigned Gore, Crabtree, Iupati? Would they have wanted to resign? Maybe. But he didn't really win with any of those players in 2014 either. He wasn't going to suddenly go on a spending spree that Baalke didn't with limited cap space. And what players in the 2015 draft would have changed anything? Even Marcus Peters wasn't going to make up for a totally absent pass rush. There's no pass-rusher in the draft. There were no available big-time receivers in the draft that would have played over Boldin. There were no quality offensive linemen in the draft available that would have greatly improved the offensive line. Hyde was always going to be the starting RB once Gore left. So how exactly are you improving the 2015 roster if the team lets go of Baalke and keeps Harbaugh? Basically, you're not.

So given that close games weren't the problem in 2015 (in fact, 6 of the 8 games the team won were within 1 score, while only 3 of the losses were), and given that we've established that injuries cause worse players to play. And given that worse players were inevitably going to HAVE to play in 2015, there leaves absolutely zero reason to believe that Harbaugh should get any "benefit of the doubt" with the 2015 team, other than someone trying really hard to convince someone else that Harbaugh was a mastermind. He wasn't. He would likely not have altered the record by any meaningful number. 

[Forge]

http://www.phillyvoice.com/ranking-nfl-teams-age-after-53-man-cutdowns-2017-edition/

 

Interesting that we are still only the 10th youngest team in the league, and still older than a playoff team in the Texans, and the same age as another in the Packers. I would have thought after having 14 rookies on the 53, we'd be much younger. Also interesting to see that while we are younger than we were last year, we are still essentially on par with where we were two years ago under Tomsula. 

[y2lamanaki]

2 minutes ago, Forge said:

http://www.phillyvoice.com/ranking-nfl-teams-age-after-53-man-cutdowns-2017-edition/

 

Interesting that we are still only the 10th youngest team in the league, and still older than a playoff team in the Texans, and the same age as another in the Packers. I would have thought after having 14 rookies on the 53, we'd be much younger. Also interesting to see that while we are younger than we were last year, we are still essentially on par with where we were two years ago under Tomsula. 

Well, keep in mind that Hoyer, Dumervil, Garcon, Gould, and Paulsen were all added over 30. 

[Fureys49ers]

Can even add in Staley and Mitchell to that group. 

Edit : I see now you said added, either way those guys you listed plus Mitchell, Staley and Beadles are all guys over 30.

[big9erfan]

3 hours ago, y2lamanaki said:

There are a lot of smart things said in this post. Among them, injuries to key players being a cause for a team's struggles. Injuries tend to harm a team because it means a less talented player will be playing in that spot. Also close losses being a possible explanation. 

In 2014, 5 of the losses came by at least two scores. So not the culprit. And if losing key players is a sign that your team will struggle, then certainly losing Patrick Willis, Justin Smith, and Chris Borland from an already lackluster 2014 team would have hurt. 2015 matters (despite what you want to believe), because no amount of Jim Harbaugh sticking around was going to stop those three losses. Jim Harbaugh being around wasn't going to stop Aldon from getting in trouble...again...and being cut. That was going to happen regardless of who the GM was. Maybe Harbaugh saves Anthony Davis from quitting, but that's debateable.  Would he have resigned Gore, Crabtree, Iupati? Would they have wanted to resign? Maybe. But he didn't really win with any of those players in 2014 either. He wasn't going to suddenly go on a spending spree that Baalke didn't with limited cap space. And what players in the 2015 draft would have changed anything? Even Marcus Peters wasn't going to make up for a totally absent pass rush. There's no pass-rusher in the draft. There were no available big-time receivers in the draft that would have played over Boldin. There were no quality offensive linemen in the draft available that would have greatly improved the offensive line. Hyde was always going to be the starting RB once Gore left. So how exactly are you improving the 2015 roster if the team lets go of Baalke and keeps Harbaugh? Basically, you're not.

So given that close games weren't the problem in 2015 (in fact, 6 of the 8 games the team won were within 1 score, while only 3 of the losses were), and given that we've established that injuries cause worse players to play. And given that worse players were inevitably going to HAVE to play in 2015, there leaves absolutely zero reason to believe that Harbaugh should get any "benefit of the doubt" with the 2015 team, other than someone trying really hard to convince someone else that Harbaugh was a mastermind. He wasn't. He would likely not have altered the record by any meaningful number. 

Let's not forget that the "Who's got it better than us" kind of mentality was beginning to wear off on the team.  Let's also not forget that Jim never adjusted during his tenure here and his scheme became easier and easier to predict, and to defend.  Most importantly, let's not forget his biggest mistake - thinking that Kap was a better QB than Smith.  Aside from a 10 to 12 game span during which the league had no idea how to defend the read option he was not a good QB.  Even more Jim left here we were a mediocre team under Kap while Smith went to a last place team and took them straight to the playoffs.

OK, aside from all that Baalke destroyed our roster over time.  No coach was going to win with the group of bottom of the barrel talent Baalke assembled.  Jim would probably even have done better than Tomsula and Kelly, but we'd still be a lousy team.  Jim was not anywhere near a bad coach, but neither was he anywhere near a great coach.