Can Shanny/Lynch survive in San fran Trey Lance if he busts?

[biggie.]

They live and die by Lance.

Which probably means they're toast.

[stl4life07]

No. Name me one GM/HC that moved all that they did to get a QB at the top of the draft that if he bust would survive?

On top of that, its not like Lynch and Kyle have been a the model of success in San Fran. The Niners blew a 10pt 4th quarter lead in the Superbowl. They also blew a 10pt 4th quarter lead in the NFCCG which was the largest lead blown in an NFCCG in NFL history. They also had a legit chance to get Brady a few years ago but they choose to stay with Jimmy G. They couldve gotten Stafford last offseason but did. Both Brady and Stafford went on to win the Superbowl. They passed on both Watson and Mahomes in the 2017 draft by taking Solomon Thomas who isnt even on the team anymore. Both Watson and Mahomes are top 5 NFL QBs and Mahomes have won a Superbowl and been to another one. So just imagine all the possibilities the Niners organization couldve had if they wouldve drafted either Watson or Mahomes or at the very least signed Brady a few offseasons ago or traded for Stafford last offseason? They stuck with Jimmy G for this long and it ALMOST paid off but it didnt which is a big reason why it looks bad on Lynch and Kyle then they gave up alot to get Lance. He have to work out or else they dont survive. Ill give them three years. If Lance at the very least doesnt look like a legit top 10 QB and get the Niners to the playoffs and winning playoff games then yes I can see both Lynch and Kyle being gone during the offseason after three seasons of Lance being "the guy".

 

[Hunter2_1]

6 hours ago, Forge said:

I'd wager 0. Lance is the Shanny pick. He's the most powerful person in the 49er organization and Jed loves him and doesn't really incorporate himself into the player side of things. After the Washington fiasco there is 0 chance that a QB was foisted on him. 

With regards to the rumors that he may be underwhelming is probably more complicated. Lombardo is the only guy that has said anything in that regard any time recently. As ET said previously, the other chatter just seems to be poor deductive reasoning (oh, they must not be a fan because Jimmy is still on the roster).  His first source was "an exec who is close to the 49ers". Going to call BS on this one. The 49ers really just going to tell their competition "Yeah, we are really underwhelmed with our franchise QB" ? That doesn't pass the smell test in any way. That's like when people were reporting the pick was highly likely to be Mac Jones because that's what competing GMs thought. This seems like fluff to make it seems bigger and / or hide his real source. 

His second source was members of the coaching staff. This part is potentially true, though I'd wager they are former members of the coaching staff and the most reasonable choice is former QB coach Rich Scangerello. The 49ers are not known for leaks in the least under this regime. Lombardo is a philly based reporter and he's the one with Philly ties. As far as I know, Lombardo has no other ties through anyone else in the organization. This seems to me to be the most reasonable and logical choice. Not everyone in that building was going to be a Trey Lance supporter. It happens. Some I'm sure preferred Mac, others even Fields. 

The story with regards to how they feel is potentially true, potentially false, potentially meaningless. Some of what he says boggles my mind in how they could be disappointed. One of the things was they were disappointed in his arm strength, which legitimately makes no sense. Did they think that he could literally throw a ball through a battleship and then were surprised when he couldn't ? The other was his deep ball accuracy. If they were disappointed by that, they only have themselves to blame. That was on the tape lol. 

The truth is that until Jimmy is gone, they open themselves up to these kind of stories, regardless of whether or not they are true. Its going to get worse as it goes on because there is no deadline to spur activity on that front until the season starts, so he's not going anywhere any time soon even once he gets healthy (right now he has an injury guarantee in play if they cut him, so it actually makes financial sense not to cut him yet). 

Shifty Schefter doubled down on the whole Kyle wanting Jones thing. Says he “acquiesced” in the end in picking Lance

I don’t buy that Shanahan would settle for a QB he didn’t prioritize either

[SkippyX]

As of now all of Shanny's SF success is with Jimmy. Its pathetic when Jimmy does not play.

If Jimmy goes and they go 6-11 then expect him to be fired after the season.

It will be clear that he's not a good coach by then.

8-28 without Jimmy going to 14-39 without Jimmy = SF without Kyle.

[Forge]

37 minutes ago, SkippyX said:

As of now all of Shanny's SF success is with Jimmy. Its pathetic when Jimmy does not play.

If Jimmy goes and they go 6-11 then expect him to be fired after the season.

It will be clear that he's not a good coach by then.

8-28 without Jimmy going to 14-39 without Jimmy = SF without Kyle.

Feel like if their job was on footing that unstable, John Lynch would be an Amazon employee right now, tbh. 

As a top five paid head coach and no offset language to his contract and a year removed from an NFC title game, and given that jed loves him, I simply don't think he's pulling the trigger that fast inside of treys first 20 starts and first full season as a starter. 

[SkippyX]

I'm not sure Lynch and Shanny are tied together.

They could promote from within and move forward without the bad HC.

They could bring in a good CEO type and keep the offense and defense the same.

Shanny was abysmal on 4th down calls in that NFCCG.

[Forge]

1 minute ago, SkippyX said:

I'm not sure Lynch and Shanny are tied together.

They could promote from within and move forward without the bad HC.

They could bring in a good CEO type and keep the offense and defense the same.

Shanny was abysmal on 4th down calls in that NFCCG.

This would be a very interesting situation. 

Shanny is not a great in game decision maker. His entire coaching tree is ridiculously conservative it feels like

[SkippyX]

I also don't pretend to know anything about Jed York and Shanny so maybe Kyle proves he is 100% inept without Jimmy G but Jed writes off 2023 as well for the loyalty?

Mullens, Bethard, and Hoyer were not bums, but of course Lance has way more talent.

I'm not predicting that Lance will fail this year, just speculating on fair consequences.

Edited May 9, 2022 by SkippyX

[Duluther]

So in the implied scenario:

Ownership is mad they have no QB, so they choose to have no QB, HC, and GM.

 

I wouldn’t be for it.

[jofos]

7 hours ago, Forge said:

What hype? lol This is seriously a thread because of "grumblings that he's not the guy". And honestly, the cost to acquire him is potentially the very thing that would keep him in line to get more starts. People really don't like to admit they messed up in that big of a manner. 

SF fans don't have to be forgiving, they don't have a say. 

Jamarcus Russell still got 25 starts lol. They have built up equity from going to the NFC championship game the year before and fully guaranteed contracts and Jed York loves them. 

This is the kind of stuff that @ET80 was talking about. They go to two NFC championships and a super bowl in 4 years, but a bad Trey Lance first year is going to have Jed York throw down the gauntlet that they have to change QBs or get fired? lol what? 

Trey could very well take this regime down...it's not happening after 2022 even if Trey has a bad year. That's ridiculous. And it won't matter if the team decides to bring Trey back as the starter in 2023 or not. It may mean he gets the Teddy Bridgewater vet addition camp push though. 

Jamarcus got 25 starts because the Raiders had so much invested in him. His contact was double Lance's contract, and it was 15 years ago. 

First of all, I don't think Lance will be a bust but I also don't think he will ever be a top QB. So I'm not sure he will live up to his draft status.

Second reporters report the wrong information all the time. If I were a 49ers fan I wouldn't be concerned at this point.

[FinSting]

Don't you hate it when a team hires a staff who takes the team to the Super Bowl, then a couple years later the NFC Championship, and fans are like "what is WRONG with you?" Lol

[Forge]

30 minutes ago, jofos said:

Jamarcus got 25 starts because the Raiders had so much invested in him. His contact was double Lance's contract, and it was 15 years ago

Investment comes in different shapes. The niners invested 3 firsts and a third. Id say the second greatest draft pick investment in a prospect behind rg3.  They have a lot invested in seeing him succeed and it's just as important as the finances. The raiders didn't have to play him just because they were paying him

jake locker sat a year, still got 23 starts and he was awful. Darnold got 38 with the jets and he was terrible and then got more with the Panthers. Trubs got 3 years. Daniel Jones will get 4. High picks like that teams are especially reticent to move on from too quickly. And some of those guys didn't require an investment beyond the pick. Top 3, top 5, top 8... People with egos have a lot riding on them. 

THere are certainly outliers. Rosen comes to mind. Does he get moved if they don't have access to Kyler? I dunno. But for one Rosen, there's a gabbert and ponder. 

As you move down the first round teams more willing to just move on for sure. Ej Manuel, Lynch, Haskins... But those early picks? You don't see that happening too often

[jofos]

50 minutes ago, Forge said:

Investment comes in different shapes. The niners invested 3 firsts and a third. Id say the second greatest draft pick investment in a prospect behind rg3.  They have a lot invested in seeing him succeed and it's just as important as the finances. The raiders didn't have to play him just because they were paying him

jake locker sat a year, still got 23 starts and he was awful. Darnold got 38 with the jets and he was terrible and then got more with the Panthers. Trubs got 3 years. Daniel Jones will get 4. High picks like that teams are especially reticent to move on from too quickly. And some of those guys didn't require an investment beyond the pick. Top 3, top 5, top 8... People with egos have a lot riding on them. 

THere are certainly outliers. Rosen comes to mind. Does he get moved if they don't have access to Kyler? I dunno. But for one Rosen, there's a gabbert and ponder. 

As you move down the first round teams more willing to just move on for sure. Ej Manuel, Lynch, Haskins... But those early picks? You don't see that happening too often

I agree that Lance will bet plenty of opportunities. My comment on Jamarus was that the Raiders kept trying because there was so much money timed up, the comparison to Lance's contract was to show how crazy the Raiders were.  Also, a non QB example of a team holding on to a first round pick just because he was a first round pick is N'Keal Harry. That sort of thing happens all the time. I don't think it will happen to Lance because I don't think he is bad, but I don't know if he will ever justify the draft picks.

[SkippyX]

22 hours ago, FinSting said:

Don't you hate it when a team hires a staff who takes the team to the Super Bowl, then a couple years later the NFC Championship, and fans are like "what is WRONG with you?" Lol

Ask John Fox in Denver, Jim Caldwell in Indy, or Doug Pederson in Philly.

Coaching is a tough gig.

[Nabbs4u]

2 hours ago, SkippyX said:

Ask John Fox in Denver, Jim Caldwell in Indy, or Doug Pederson in Philly.

Coaching is a tough gig.

It's a what have you done for me lately league/fanbase for most Franchises.