Mr. Scot

There are indications that they're looking at moving Young as well.

This is the kind of thing that helps understand why you really need a smart player in the quarterback spot.

Saw an analysis (will post it if I can find it again) about one of the issues with the defense Wilks is calling right now. Ideally, there should be a synch between what your front for and your back seven are doing. This analysis showed that's not happening with the 49ers right now. Generally speaking, even his biggest fans would agree that Wilks is much more of a motivator than a technician. The best coordinators are technicians.

A lot of us didn't.

Giving up two firsts but getting one back means only losing one first. Don't really get why that'd be difficult to understand unless you're deliberately trying to obscure the point.

They're getting set up to switch from Ron Rivera to Eric Bieniemy 🫥

A price so high Jerry Jones won't pay it?

Pro personnel is Morgan's area. Fitterer is primarily a draft guy.

We are rebuilding... always were. Doesn't matter how they described it publicly. That's what's happening.

Here's the incorrect portion of the post I originally replied to... I didn't address the full package. I corrected the notion that we gave up two firsts. The only first rounder we actually gave up was next year's. The 2023 transaction was a swap of #9 for #1. That isn't "giving up" a pick. Characterizing a pick swap as a net loss is incorrect.

There are things that NFL teams might conceivably find embarrassing. Giving a guy a workout (which is all we've done at this point) or even signing a guy to the practice squad doesn't really register on that level. That'd be like saying a bad seventh round pick ruined an entire draft.

Yes, you give one up. You also get one back. In our case, the one we got back was eight spots higher than the one we gave up. There's no "fuzzy math" in that. It's just an understanding of what "net" means.

Corner depth is primarily an issue because we've got two starters who have trouble staying healthy. That's not a scheme issue and it is definitely going to need to be addressed. On the line, McAdoo was an E-P guy while Frank and Brown are both West Coasters. WCO generally uses smaller, more agile guys and a zone blocking rather than big "bully" types. Summarized earlier where I think that went wrong. Ekwonu is arguably the guy least suited to our current scheme unless there's some thought of moving him to guard, but then you have to get another left tackle. As far as their outlook, I can't really say I see any "desperate" moves being made. Maybe if they were just taking whatever they could get for somebody like Burns I could see it, but we're not operating that way. (nor should we be just six games in)

Sorry, no. Thia is how the transaction breaks down as far as draft picks only: We gave the Bears our 2024 first round pick and 2025 second round pick. We exchanged our 2023 first round pick (#9) for their 2023 first round pick (#1). That's a net loss of only one first round pick. And again, what the organization says publicly doesn't really mean anything. None of us know yet what was said behind closed doors.

Damn, dude

I see this a lot, but reality is we didn't trade away two first round picks. We traded away next year's and swapped picks this year.

You're covering a couple of different things here that low expectations don't really have much to do with, but I'll try to answer. Anytime you switch coaches, there's going to be some roster flux since you're going from one system to another. Sometimes that's only on one side of the ball. In our case, it's both. You could also argue that it's probably a little more than usual because we're not going so much from an established pro-system to another. We're going from whatever the hell it was Matt Rhule had in place to actual pro schemes. What did they think it was? Realistically, we don't know. We know what they said, but it's not reasonable given the situation we were in. As far as Burns, that's no different than any other contract extension / franchise guy discussion that's had every year. Hell, we've had that before with Julius Peppers.

On topic...

Ben Albright says the mention of Sustain is a pure "bait and switch" tactic...

Remember he also was setting low expectations for this year. I hardly ever pay attention to stuff like that either way though because it's what they're expected to say. Nobody's gonna go into a season downplaying how good it's gonna be. The reality of a new coaching staff, new schemes on both sides of the ball and a rookie quarterback was always evident.

My guess would be they believed their guys could handle either scheme. And maybe with Corbett and Christensen both playing, it would have been a more reasonable possibility. Corbett likely has at least some experience in that area given his time in McVay's offense, and Christensen certainly isn't a "road grader" type. Hell, If he were healthy, It might have even been worth discussing a flip-flop between Christensen and Ekwonu at this point given their respective skill sets. The guys seemingly least suited to this scheme would be Ekwonu, Zavala, maybe even Bozeman. Moton seems to be doing at least a reasonable job of it. But ultimately yeah, there was a breakdown somewhere and here we are.

Not getting an offer they like seems like the most reasonable scenario. I do remember there being some chatter that maybe that decision was coming from "above" but I never knew how seriously to take that. In light of discussions about what role Tepper played in a quarterback selection though, It might make you wonder.