top dawg

I think that's a simply a simplistic perspective, and I seriously doubt that Shanahan and the 49ers are looking at it that way. They have a good problem based upon circumstance. If you're telling me that you would get rid of what you really wanted even though it dropped into your lap, just because you paid more for something that you believed that you could develop into what you want, I'm going to think that you have some screws loose.

The tweet said they're considering him for a coordinator position, so I don't believe this has anything to do with the Rooney Rule.

fug yeah. I don't know what it definitely means as far as the HC, but that we're probably hiring an OC as HC and getting a much-needed DC to pair up with him.

I disagree about Lance looking "abysmal." I think that's way over the top. Lance was way more raw, younger, and simply less experienced than most QBs when he entered the NFL. And yet, one of the brightest minds in the game gave up a king's ransom to acquire him. That's because he sees a lot of potential---maybe unmatched potential in the kid. And, just like Corral, Lance really hasn't had hardly any opportunity to show what he has. What, a couple of regular season games? Are y'all kidding me? Seriously? All that being said, the 49ers will never get the compensation back that they spent to acquire him (nor should they) if they put him on the trade block. If they decide to trade him, it will be more about Brock Purdy's surprising---some might even say sensational--ascension than Lance being or "trending towards being" a bust. Shanahan has supported Lance consistently and completely, and has honestly refuted any unsubstantiated rumors about Lance being unfit for the job. As far as that goes, I think that he still believes in him, but he likely believes in Purdy now also. So, if they decide to trade Lance, it will not be about Lance being a bust, but for any suitors it will be about the compensation. Just like any young QB with upside, if you can get Lance for a relative song and dance---basically at a value, then you should probably do that. The Devil is in the details.

Yeah, I don't know what Scot is talking about there. Perhaps he's putting too much stock into conflicting unsubstantiated rumors

Getting beat by Stetson and the Dawgs left a bad taste in his mouth. He doesn't realize that it's going to happen all over again. It will be Beck next time, and they won't have to come back.

Of course we'll knock (in on every deal). That hasn't changed. We're just going to be more selective in how we manage our compensation.

Yes.

I mean, the first year is the first year. We're hiring for the long haul.

Chuba has always broken tackles. He's got underrated power to be his size. I've consistently said that he's our most explosive back. The area he needs to improve is his hands. He may have made some nominal improvement, I don't know, but he'd be an awesome option in a RBBC situation if he could consistently catch. Now, I'd say he's just a good option. Although I'd like to upgrade the position, I think that we had better think twice before letting Chuba walk.

Not this again.

Interesting theory on Tepper. But what I will say is that I believe that Tepper was just frustrated, if not low-key infuriated, at being all loosey-goosey with our draft picks. I think that he thought that we needed to get that back and took a calculated risk of letting CMC go on his merry way, while also believing that Foreman and Hubbard had enough juice to keep the running game legitimate. I know that I always thought that both Foreman and especially Hubbard were being underutilized. I think that he was pleasantly surprised that we stayed afloat, but that actually playing to lose never crossed his mind. I believe that he was mentally prepared to see the team tank organically but that it wasn't his intention or desire to do so.

Yeah, the fanboys never ever mention the need for a DC. I could argue that we need a DC more than an OC. It's frustrating. They also never ever mention the total picture, like how all the victories came against teams with losing records, or how Wilks largely sat down when it was time to rise to the occasion in those key games that would have gotten the team to the playoffs. I'll give Wilks the moral victory. Hooray! But In the grand scheme of things, his performance was not extraordinary, it was extra ordinary.

So when did Fields turn into an incapable passer? That's bullshit! I can see the injuries perhaps, but their O-line can't pass protect worth a damn. Chicago writers and fans know that. Moreover, they need to upgrade their receiving corps. Better line and better weapons, as well as more experience, should lead to better results in the passing game. Fields was first and foremost a pocket passer at OSU, and he was historically accurate. You're not convincing me that he can't pass.

Ben Johnson is a young offensive mind...

I wonder what's going to happen to Pep Hamilton...

It was a terrible job before he got there.

Dude looks like he needs to eat more chicken.

I've seen some dumb threads over the years, but this one might be the dumbest.

Sounds kinda Machiavellian if you ask me.

No harm in competition. May the best man win.

No

Tankers are too dumb to see that players don't play to tank. It happens organically if you suck enough.

LOL Finger to the tankers!