Ruminations on the 49ers Game.

[Hockey Guy]

Maybe this was already brought up ; but SF could of taken a knee 3 times on their last possession and forced a tie ; which would of maintained their 2 game lead .

They were trying to win the game. You have to respect that.

 

[olyfan63]

SF came within one Shaquill Griffin great defensive play of (probably) winning the game. IF their kicker had settled down by then. Respect to them for playing to win.

Now, with fantasies of eclipsing the '72 Dolphins undefeated season dashed, the Niners can get back to just playing football. The do have an interesting stretch of games coming up.

 

[bbsplitter]

This might be a very unpopular opinion, but I am fine with Taylor going forward. Nickel CB is one of the easiest positions to have a bad game at, and I am very snake-bitten with the prospect of "the grass is greener" at that position. I love Blair, but he would not be the answer at that position. SS yes, FS maybe, but definitely does not have the fluidity for Nickel.

 

[sutz]

The truth is that both teams made enough mistakes to lose the game.

Only one team was able to overcome their own mistakes and take better advantage ot the other guy's.

:2thumbs:

 

[Tusc2000]

Maybe this was already brought up ; but SF could of taken a knee 3 times on their last possession and forced a tie ; which would of maintained their 2 game lead .

With 1:40 to go in the game, only a wuss takes a knee.

 

[Mad Dog]

Penny is wildly disappointing especially knowing Chubb was available. He may be a #1 for a different team but he just cannot run the style Pete wants. I understand why they took a RB with Carson's injury, hindsight is just a b!@ch.

For sure, Chubb is a better back, like a faster Carson, in hindsight, and Ronald Jones II did a decent job against us for Tampa, got way more touches than Penny and looked solid.

I'm doing my best to hang in there with Penny, but it's just hard to tell if he has the heart, the makeup, to run inside the way Pete wants him to, and hang onto the ball in the process.

Pretty sure Chubb was down on a lot of draft boards for medical reasons. Everyone knew he was very talented but he needed a complete knee reconstruction and that’s really hard to predict recovery from. I’ve no problem with the FO taking a pass.

But I’ve lost total faith in Penny. By now he should be splitting reps with Carson. Carson is great but he’s not so great you don’t spell him on occasion to save him for the playoffs. It’s year 2 for Penny and he needs to compete and take reps from Carson. It doesn’t look like a talent issue. Looks mental.

Schneider has been an awesome GM but his swings for the fences in round 1 have been terribly problematic. Need to really evaluate the first round grades they put on players.

 

[Sports Hernia]

Maybe this was already brought up ; but SF could of taken a knee 3 times on their last possession and forced a tie ; which would of maintained their 2 game lead .

With 1:40 to go in the game, only a wuss takes a knee.

True but I wouldn’t have given RW the ball back. I’d still try and win the game and I’d melt the clock at the same time where if we can’t score any points it’s a tie. It doesn’t have to be an either or situation. The “genius” that is KS screwed the pooch with their last possession, for which I thank him for.

 

[olyfan63]

I was thinking SF might do a couple run plays in the mix, just to avoid leaving too much time for Russell if they have to punt. Bet they would have gotten 10 yards a crack against the type of D the Hawks were playing. For sure KS now understands the folly of giving the ball back to Wilson with any time left on the clock.

 

[olyfan63]

Penny is wildly disappointing especially knowing Chubb was available. He may be a #1 for a different team but he just cannot run the style Pete wants. I understand why they took a RB with Carson's injury, hindsight is just a b!@ch.

For sure, Chubb is a better back, like a faster Carson, in hindsight, and Ronald Jones II did a decent job against us for Tampa, got way more touches than Penny and looked solid.

I'm doing my best to hang in there with Penny, but it's just hard to tell if he has the heart, the makeup, to run inside the way Pete wants him to, and hang onto the ball in the process.

Pretty sure Chubb was down on a lot of draft boards for medical reasons. Everyone knew he was very talented but he needed a complete knee reconstruction and that’s really hard to predict recovery from. I’ve no problem with the FO taking a pass.

But I’ve lost total faith in Penny. By now he should be splitting reps with Carson. Carson is great but he’s not so great you don’t spell him on occasion to save him for the playoffs. It’s year 2 for Penny and he needs to compete and take reps from Carson. It doesn’t look like a talent issue. Looks mental.

Schneider has been an awesome GM but his swings for the fences in round 1 have been terribly problematic. Need to really evaluate the first round grades they put on players.

Also in the mix was Sony Michel, IIRC, Hawks could have taken him. He had a nice year last year, but this year is #3 in the RB rotation for the Patriots, behind better pass-receiving backs. IIRC he had injury issues to work through when drafted, knee also I believe.

Ronald Jones II is a little lighter in the pockets than Penny.

I do wonder why Pete and Schotty have used CJ Prosise so little. He can run inside. And great in the passing game.
Last I knew, he wasn't injured, but I could be behind the times. Hell, maybe convert Prosise to a pass-catching TE.

Things being what they are, at least Penny will be fresh if we ever need him. Will he be ready? He does show brief flashes, like last week when I had to look twice to see it was Penny, not Carson, after a nice between the tackles run. So I guess there's not much else to do except hang in there, and hope the light bulb goes on. I would like to see Penny take over kickoff return duty; he was amazing at that in college. Don't need to see No-E returning kicks; he's too valuable at WR.

 

[hawksfansinceday1]

I was thinking SF might do a couple run plays in the mix, just to avoid leaving too much time for Russell if they have to punt. Bet they would have gotten 10 yards a crack against the type of D the Hawks were playing. For sure KS now understands the folly of giving the ball back to Wilson with any time left on the clock.

Why would Sahnanhan do that when he wouldn't even do so in the Super Bowl with a 28-3 lead and likely the GOAT playing QB for the other team?

 

[Sox-n-Hawks]

I was thinking SF might do a couple run plays in the mix, just to avoid leaving too much time for Russell if they have to punt. Bet they would have gotten 10 yards a crack against the type of D the Hawks were playing. For sure KS now understands the folly of giving the ball back to Wilson with any time left on the clock.

Why would Sahnanhan do that when he wouldn't even do so in the Super Bowl with a 28-3 lead and likely the GOAT playing QB for the other team?

^^^ This ^^^^

 

[HawkStrong]

I was thinking SF might do a couple run plays in the mix, just to avoid leaving too much time for Russell if they have to punt. Bet they would have gotten 10 yards a crack against the type of D the Hawks were playing. For sure KS now understands the folly of giving the ball back to Wilson with any time left on the clock.

Why would Sahnanhan do that when he wouldn't even do so in the Super Bowl with a 28-3 lead and likely the GOAT playing QB for the other team?

I believe you have your facts mixed up, Russ Wilson did not play in that SB.

 

[Popeyejones]

I was thinking SF might do a couple run plays in the mix, just to avoid leaving too much time for Russell if they have to punt.

God no.

This is the problem with using hindsight to argue that outcome trumps process.

If you're the head coach of an 8-0 team in OT playing the second place team in the division and you've played a hard fought game and your players have seen a bunch of their teammates go down to injury how do you stare them in the face after the game after going for the tie instead of the win?

If he had played for the tie instead of the win in that situation it would have been a media bloodbath. The fans would be furious, the media would be down his throat, and you guys would have had a field day mocking him.

The correct strategy in that position is to split the difference between being hyper-aggressive and hyper-passive to drain clock.

You do what EVERY TEAM does in that situation, and you take the short routes that the defense is giving you to slowly work your way up the field while draining clock before you start taking your shots. That's exactly what he did.

The PROCESS on first down was an underneath route (correct), and the outcome (a batted ball at the line) was bad.

The PROCESS on second down was another underneath route (correct), and the outcome (a dropped pass) was bad.

Now you're at third down and you have to either go for the first or concede the chance to win and pray that Russell Wilson with a minute and fifteen seconds can't get into field goal range whereas Russell Wilson with two minutes can.

Do you wanna make that bet about Russell Wilson? I definitely don't.

Basically, a batted ball and a dropped pass are just crapping out on your dice rolls, even if you're playing the game the right way.

The outcome massively sucked for the 49ers and 49ers fans, but that doesn't mean the strategy was wrong at all.

 

[DomeHawk]

We aren't a bunch of emasculated sissy-boys raised by overly-invested soccer moms.

THIS IS FOOTBALL!!!

WE DON"T PLAY FOR TIES!!!

 

[Popeyejones]

We aren't a bunch of emasculated sissy-boys raised by overly-invested soccer moms.

THIS IS FOOTBALL!!!

WE DON"T PLAY FOR TIES!!!

Yeah, that, or, you know, optimal strategy, which is what my post was about.

 

[Hawkpower]

I was thinking SF might do a couple run plays in the mix, just to avoid leaving too much time for Russell if they have to punt.

God no.

This is the problem with using hindsight to argue that outcome trumps process.

If you're the head coach of an 8-0 team in OT playing the second place team in the division and you've played a hard fought game and your players have seen a bunch of their teammates go down to injury how do you stare them in the face after the game after going for the tie instead of the win?

If he had played for the tie instead of the win in that situation it would have been a media bloodbath. The fans would be furious, the media would be down his throat, and you guys would have had a field day mocking him.

The correct strategy in that position is to split the difference between being hyper-aggressive and hyper-passive to drain clock.

You do what EVERY TEAM does in that situation, and you take the short routes that the defense is giving you to slowly work your way up the field while draining clock before you start taking your shots. That's exactly what he did.

The PROCESS on first down was an underneath route (correct), and the outcome (a batted ball at the line) was bad.

The PROCESS on second down was another underneath route (correct), and the outcome (a dropped pass) was bad.

Now you're at third down and you have to either go for the first or concede the chance to win and pray that Russell Wilson with a minute and fifteen seconds can't get into field goal range whereas Russell Wilson with two minutes can.

Do you wanna make that bet about Russell Wilson? I definitely don't.

Basically, a batted ball and a dropped pass are just crapping out on your dice rolls, even if you're playing the game the right way.

The outcome massively sucked for the 49ers and 49ers fans, but that doesn't mean the strategy was wrong at all.

I think his point was that if you run the ball on 1st or 2nd down, with the hawks playing fairly soft, you are likely going to still pick up those 10-15 yards that an underneath route picks up, without the risk of a drop or a tip that stops the clock.

Doing that even one time still allows an offense the opportunity to move down the field while simultaneously draining the clock and the hopes of the opponent getting the ball back to score.

 

[olyfan63]

I was thinking SF might do a couple run plays in the mix, just to avoid leaving too much time for Russell if they have to punt.

God no.

This is the problem with using hindsight to argue that outcome trumps process.

If you're the head coach of an 8-0 team in OT playing the second place team in the division and you've played a hard fought game and your players have seen a bunch of their teammates go down to injury how do you stare them in the face after the game after going for the tie instead of the win?

If he had played for the tie instead of the win in that situation it would have been a media bloodbath. The fans would be furious, the media would be down his throat, and you guys would have had a field day mocking him.

The correct strategy in that position is to split the difference between being hyper-aggressive and hyper-passive to drain clock.

You do what EVERY TEAM does in that situation, and you take the short routes that the defense is giving you to slowly work your way up the field while draining clock before you start taking your shots. That's exactly what he did.

The PROCESS on first down was an underneath route (correct), and the outcome (a batted ball at the line) was bad.

The PROCESS on second down was another underneath route (correct), and the outcome (a dropped pass) was bad.

Now you're at third down and you have to either go for the first or concede the chance to win and pray that Russell Wilson with a minute and fifteen seconds can't get into field goal range whereas Russell Wilson with two minutes can.

Do you wanna make that bet about Russell Wilson? I definitely don't.

Basically, a batted ball and a dropped pass are just crapping out on your dice rolls, even if you're playing the game the right way.

The outcome massively sucked for the 49ers and 49ers fans, but that doesn't mean the strategy was wrong at all.

Excellent post as usual, Popeye, and I can't really dispute your point that the Niners got unlucky on the dice roll. A completion on either underneath route, probably gets tackled in bounds, and uses some clock time to avoid giving Wilson too much time if/when he gets the ball back. I totally agree with your emphasis on correct PROCESS over BS 20/20 OUTCOME, as if *outcomes* could be accurately predicted controlled. Ha! Every NFL snap is a freakin' roll of the dice.

BTW, I was absolutely NOT advocating to play for a tie. However, a coach would also want to make things AS DIFFICULT AS POSSIBLE FOR THE OPPONENT to win the game. My thoughts AT THE TIME, was that it would be wise (bet-hedging) (PROCESS) for SF to RUN the ball on 1st down, maybe 2nd down, against the quasi-prevent defense the Hawks were in. A run should get between 5 and 20 yards against the D Seattle was playing. 3rd and 5, vs. 3rd and long, and maybe JG completes or even runs for a 1st down, and still leaves the winning FG on the table, and reduces the time and increases the distance Russell Wilson and the 'Hawks must travel, IF (when) they get the ball back. As it was, 3 passes, no completions, NO YARDS, only 15 seconds taken off the clock was an absolute DISASTER of a possession, WORST POSSIBLE outcome for SF in the situation, short of a turnover. SF gets even ONE first down there, Seattle doesn't likely win. Someone probably play-by-play (win %) has analytics for all this. I don't.

Really, only the 2nd down drop was the Hawks getting lucky/bad dice roll by Niners. The batted ball on 1st down was more a sign of a good, hustling defensive play, and Griffin's pass breakup on the long 3rd down throw was simply an excellent defensive play.

Clearly, as a Hawk fan, I was happy with the outcome. SF gave the Hawks a gift with that possession. I really don't know how Pete Carroll does this, pulling wins out of very tenuous circumstances, I only know he does it consistently, so therefore it's not just luck. Or maybe it's simply Russell Wilson.

 

[DomeHawk]

We aren't a bunch of emasculated sissy-boys raised by overly-invested soccer moms.

THIS IS FOOTBALL!!!

WE DON"T PLAY FOR TIES!!!

Yeah, that, or, you know, optimal strategy, which is what my post was about.

No prob, I'm being facetious.

I am a caricature of myself.

 

[Popeyejones]

We aren't a bunch of emasculated sissy-boys raised by overly-invested soccer moms.

THIS IS FOOTBALL!!!

WE DON"T PLAY FOR TIES!!!

Yeah, that, or, you know, optimal strategy, which is what my post was about.

No prob, I'm being facetious.

I am a caricature of myself.

:lol:

I read the sarcasm but misread which way it was going. My bad. :2thumbs:

 

[Fade]

#24 was cut!