Week 2 GDT - San Francisco 49ers @ Seattle Seahawks

[big9erfan]

12 minutes ago, y2lamanaki said:

Someone else mentioned it earlier, and I'd agree - Armstead is fine, as long as he's rushing from the inside. He's fine outside on base downs, but rushing from the outside is something he just doesn't seem to be very good at. But he was a big part of the good play of the defensive line this week. 

FIne.  Yep, agreed.  Special?  RIght now I don't think so, but we'll see.  I remember when we drafted him that there were comparisons to an  odd stat about Calais.  He is the only guy in the NFL that had 50+ tackles and 5+ sacks for ??? (I'm not sure) something llike 8 straight years, or maybe it was every year of his career after his rookie year?  something like that.

[big9erfan]

6 minutes ago, Forge said:

Doesn't matter what you care about. That's a large part of Kaep's game that is being left out, and a large part of his effectiveness and worth as a quarterback. Your preference can be for a pocket passer, that's fine. Mine actually is as well.. But the original comment was made about who was better, there were no provisions on that. When you discount something that accounts for a large part of his effectiveness, it's misleading. 

No. I'm not talking about my preference for a pocket passer.  I'm talking precisely about how I,, personally, view QB effectiveness. This is the part I'm disagreeing with.  Forget the first few games he played when the league had no idea how to defend the read option.  After that I do not agree that running was part of his effectiveness.  I believe it was his primary weakness, and made him worth less as a QB not more. There probably wasn't a game day thread where I didn't mention him bailing too early, or even on a phantom rush where his line had him adequately protected. I probably noted an equal number of times that all he needed to do was move a step or two up, left or right to have more time, but he always chose to bail.  I even was the one that suggested that he needed to practice with his ankle strapped to a doggie stakeout chain to make sure he couldn't move more than  a couple yards in any direction.  And I'm not talking about the results of any one  play, I'm talking about the sum total of all his running that simply kep his passing game from developing. The fact that he was so much faster than the guys he played against growing up gave him a bad habit that he was never able to break as an NFL player.

[Oregon Ducks]

How have Armstead and Buckner looked thus far?

[Forge]

1 minute ago, big9erfan said:

No. I'm not talking about my preference for a pocket passer.  I'm talking precisely about how I,, personally, view QB effectiveness. This is the part I'm disagreeing with.  Forget the first few games he played when the league had no idea how to defend the read option.  After that I do not agree that running was part of his effectiveness.  I believe it was his primary weakness, and made him worth less as a QB not more. There probably wasn't a game day thread where I didn't mention him bailing too early, or even on a phantom rush where his line had him adequately protected. I probably noted an equal number of times that all he needed to do was move a step or two up, left or right to have more time, but he always chose to bail.  I even was the one that suggested that he needed to practice with his ankle strapped to a doggie stakeout chain to make sure he couldn't move more than  a couple yards in any direction.  And I'm not talking about the results of any one  play, I'm talking about the sum total of all his running that simply kep his passing game from developing. The fact that he was so much faster than the guys he played against growing up gave him a bad habit that he was never able to break as an NFL player.

But it still provided results. That's objective. what you're talking about is completely subjective. You're the one who brought stats to the table to indicate effectiveness, then disregarded a section of stats that provides results for one of them (including fumbles) and supports some of their effectiveness. So they have very similar passing stats, but one brings 1300 yards rushing to the table as well, but that doesn't matter? What sense does that make? It would have somehow been better or more effective  if every time he ran he had just thrown an incompletion or taken a sack? 

Basically what you're saying is that he could be far more effective if he weren't a runner, but because he didn't live up to that potential effectiveness because he is a runner, that it somehow makes him less effective than a pocket passer that has similar stats over the same time period but doesn't run at all? I would get this argument if Hoyer had considerably better stats...he doesn't. 

[Forge]

Just now, Oregon Ducks said:

How have Armstead and Buckner looked thus far?

Buckner is a beast. 

Armstead is hit and miss depending on where he's at and what his job is on any given play lol

[Aussie9er]

Just finished watching the game. Struggled to get up at 4am my time to watch it live. Glad i slept in too wasn't the most entertaining game but we kept them close and our defence showed signs of improvement just wish the offence were showing the same signs at this stage. 

I think the rams will likely beat us this week so best chance for a win might be week 5 against colts if they don't have luck back by then

[Oregon Ducks]

6 hours ago, Forge said:

Buckner is a beast. 

Armstead is hit and miss depending on where he's at and what his job is on any given play lol

So pretty much the same as college, nice!

[y2lamanaki]

On 9/17/2017 at 11:00 PM, Miami49er said:

Yea Shanny loves passing the ball. apparently even when his qb and offense overall is terrible. we definitely should lean the on the running game much more until we get a capable passing offense.

@Miami49er - Good to see you around these parts again!

[Miami49er]

22 minutes ago, y2lamanaki said:

@Miami49er - Good to see you around these parts again!

Ha thanks! I'll try to start posting more. 

[big9erfan]

22 hours ago, Forge said:

But it still provided results. That's objective. what you're talking about is completely subjective. You're the one who brought stats to the table to indicate effectiveness, then disregarded a section of stats that provides results for one of them (including fumbles) and supports some of their effectiveness. So they have very similar passing stats, but one brings 1300 yards rushing to the table as well, but that doesn't matter? What sense does that make? It would have somehow been better or more effective  if every time he ran he had just thrown an incompletion or taken a sack? 

Basically what you're saying is that he could be far more effective if he weren't a runner, but because he didn't live up to that potential effectiveness because he is a runner, that it somehow makes him less effective than a pocket passer that has similar stats over the same time period but doesn't run at all? I would get this argument if Hoyer had considerably better stats...he doesn't. 

I just reduced my very long response to this. If we're talking about "effectiveness" then that needs to apply to his overall impact on the offense, not to a simple individual stat. Our offense was bad and totally ineffective last year.  For the  games Kap played in which of these seems more right to you ... our offense was as effective as it was because of Kap's running, or it was as ineffective as it was because of his inability to pass. Is it more true that his running ability made us harder to game plan for and to defend, or that our terrible passing game made us easier to game plan for and to defend. Maybe our answers to those questions would be different. My feeling is that every time he bailed out of the pocket when  he had time, every time he bailed out rather than move up/back, right or left, every time he felt phantom pressure that wasn't even there he hurt the overall effectiveness of our offense. I believe that every DC watching the tape on us rubbed his hands with glee knowing that if Kap couldn't pass well they could care less about his running.  Or maybe better put it would allow them to stack their D for the run which made our entire running game ineffective and at the same time lessened the threat of Kap himself running.

[Forge]

26 minutes ago, big9erfan said:

I just reduced my very long response to this. If we're talking about "effectiveness" then that needs to apply to his overall impact on the offense, not to a simple individual stat. Our offense was bad and totally ineffective last year.  For the  games Kap played in which of these seems more right to you ... our offense was as effective as it was because of Kap's running, or it was as ineffective as it was because of his inability to pass. Is it more true that his running ability made us harder to game plan for and to defend, or that our terrible passing game made us easier to game plan for and to defend. Maybe our answers to those questions would be different. My feeling is that every time he bailed out of the pocket when  he had time, every time he bailed out rather than move up/back, right or left, every time he felt phantom pressure that wasn't even there he hurt the overall effectiveness of our offense. I believe that every DC watching the tape on us rubbed his hands with glee knowing that if Kap couldn't pass well they could care less about his running.  Or maybe better put it would allow them to stack their D for the run which made our entire running game ineffective and at the same time lessened the threat of Kap himself running.

I see a lot of maybes, a lot of hypotheticals and a lot of "feelings". You brought something into the conversation that was objective - statistics to support how good two "anonymous" players are. You cherry picked stats and ignored a division of stats that favors one of the parties. The problem with your argument is that Hoyer isnt a superior passer to Kaepernick. They are largely similar. He's just a pocket passer. So now you have two guys that are pretty similar passing the football, but one brings that running to the table. It's just a cherry on top. He's still the same passer as Hoyer for the most part, just adds the running. So yeah, that's beneficial and meaningful. You act as though Hoyer doenst have any of those same flaws - not feeling pressure, getting frantic in the pocket, etc. That's just inaccurate. 

Lets put it this way...on 3rd down and 4+ to go, Kaep has converted roughly 29% of his opportunities into first downs through the air. Hoyer meanwhile, in a smaller sample size, has converted 29% (I didnt' include third down touchdowns, as I'm unsure if they include that in the first downs category as well. For the record, if you include touchdowns, Kaep has a slightly superior 33% conversion rate vs Hoyers 31.4%) . Kaep has also added an additional 50 first downs in those situations on the ground. Are you trying to tell me that doesn't mean anything in comparison to Hoyer? That those 50 additional first downs are meaningless because he bailed the pocket early as opposed to stayed in the pocket and threw the ball away like Hoyer may have? There's no value in those additional first downs he picked up? 

Now obviously, this is just a single cherry picked stat. But I'm using it to kind of relay what it sounds like you're saying - that his running is completely meaningless when comparing two guys who are pretty similar throwing the football. 

[rudyZ]

I missed 35 pages in this thread, but my comment about the game is: Hoyer is plain terrible. There are things he does better than our previous QBs, namely moving in the pocket. But he's just so inaccurate. What's the point of playing just well enough to overthrow your receivers every single time... even in the preseason, on a play Goodwin tipped into an interception, I think it was Hoyer at QB, and I can't really entirely blame Goodwin, because the pass was behind him. I honestly can't recall an accurate throw from Hoyer.

This might be early, but I'm already on the starting Beat Hard bandwagon. There's nothing more I wish to see from Hoyer. Unless the plan is just for Hoyer to guarantee us a top 3 pick, he's a waste of time.

[N4L]

3 hours ago, rudyZ said:

I missed 35 pages in this thread, but my comment about the game is: Hoyer is plain terrible. There are things he does better than our previous QBs, namely moving in the pocket. But he's just so inaccurate. What's the point of playing just well enough to overthrow your receivers every single time... even in the preseason, on a play Goodwin tipped into an interception, I think it was Hoyer at QB, and I can't really entirely blame Goodwin, because the pass was behind him. I honestly can't recall an accurate throw from Hoyer.

This might be early, but I'm already on the starting Beat Hard bandwagon. There's nothing more I wish to see from Hoyer. Unless the plan is just for Hoyer to guarantee us a top 3 pick, he's a waste of time.

I dont necessarily agree with that. He missed some throws but he wasnt horrendous from where I was sitting. I dont expect a lot from him but he made some solid checks at the line and had some decent plays. Started poorly but got better once the run game got established. Seattle is just a tough place to play as a qb, especially under those conditions. I still think QB is need #1 however.

 

I really liked how we were able to mix up the snap count even while going silent count to the point where we had them jumping off sides. It means we weren't completely unprepared. I thought the gameplan was pretty good for the most part. It felt like we were the tougher team out there. when is the last time we could say that?  

[Miami49er]

5 hours ago, rudyZ said:

I missed 35 pages in this thread, but my comment about the game is: Hoyer is plain terrible. There are things he does better than our previous QBs, namely moving in the pocket. But he's just so inaccurate. What's the point of playing just well enough to overthrow your receivers every single time... even in the preseason, on a play Goodwin tipped into an interception, I think it was Hoyer at QB, and I can't really entirely blame Goodwin, because the pass was behind him. I honestly can't recall an accurate throw from Hoyer.

This might be early, but I'm already on the starting Beat Hard bandwagon. There's nothing more I wish to see from Hoyer. Unless the plan is just for Hoyer to guarantee us a top 3 pick, he's a waste of time.

Agreed. And it make it worse, Hoyer was brought in because of his "familiarity with the offense". And he does things that just seems like he doesn't have full grasp of the offense. I already said earlier, Cutler or even Kap were better options than Hoyer. Hoyer is god awful. There's a reason he's a career journeyman. Kyle named Hoyer as the unquestioned starter because he knows the offense? He's trash. These players are professional quarterbacks, Cutler or Kap or any other veteran qb who's a better option than Hoyer can pick up the offense. I'm honestly not really sold on Kyle as a HC either. Atlanta's offense is just humming along just fine without him. So was it Kyle making that offense great or just the fact that the players were that great? 

I know it's early in the regime but we have 60 million freaking dollars in cap space and we had high draft picks. More could have been done to at least make this team competitive and fun to watch. Especially now that the NFC West is weak again. 

[N4L]

5 hours ago, Miami49er said:

Agreed. And it make it worse, Hoyer was brought in because of his "familiarity with the offense". And he does things that just seems like he doesn't have full grasp of the offense. I already said earlier, Cutler or even Kap were better options than Hoyer. Hoyer is god awful. There's a reason he's a career journeyman. Kyle named Hoyer as the unquestioned starter because he knows the offense? He's trash. These players are professional quarterbacks, Cutler or Kap or any other veteran qb who's a better option than Hoyer can pick up the offense. I'm honestly not really sold on Kyle as a HC either. Atlanta's offense is just humming along just fine without him. So was it Kyle making that offense great or just the fact that the players were that great? 

I know it's early in the regime but we have 60 million freaking dollars in cap space and we had high draft picks. More could have been done to at least make this team competitive and fun to watch. Especially now that the NFC West is weak again. 

I disagree with the bolded. Lynch has done a really good job bringing in talent this offseason. We are miles ahead of where we were a year ago with regards to the talent on this team. We just lost to seattle, a team with legitimate Superbowl aspirations, on the road by three points after leading in the 4th quarter, and you want to complain about not being competitive enough? Where the hell have you been the past two seasons? 

Lynch went out and spent money. He added talent throughout every portion of the offseason and made several key signings. Earl Mitchell has excelled so far, so has juice. Matt breida was a nice find, a udfa that appears to be starting material. Taylor seems like he could thrive in a wes Weller roll. Goodwin has dropped some passes but you can tell the big play potential is there. Garcon is a very steady receiver in his own right. Ruben foster has HOF potential. What more did you want lynch to do? 

Not even going to address the cutler/kaep statement because it's ludicrous.

Hoyer has his deficiencies, no doubt. I don't expect much, and we don't get much. I do think we aren't too far from getting into a nice rhythm offensively. We just played two of the top 6 or 7 defenses in the NFL. We have a lot of new faces, these things take time. 

Atlanta is still running Shanihan's system. That was a prerequisite to whoever they hired, that they had to run the same system. Sark literally adapted kyle's playbook and had to learn the system from Matt Ryan. They have a ton of talent there so I'm sure they would put up points regardless. Guys like Julio jones transcend scheme. That may be what Kyle is most well known for but he has increased offensive production wherever he has gone. Just because their offense still puts up points doesn't mean that Kyle wasn't a major reason why they put up historic numbers last year.

Does he have things to improve on? Absolutely, but it's hard to not feel good about the fact we hired a guy who was literally bred to be a head coach in this league...