Michael Crabtree

[MW49ers5]

See, now you're back to lying again. I've taken part in more than 4-6 game-day threads that you were also involved in, and made ample comments in all of them that make it clear I'm watching the game in real-time.

Integrity goes a long way on this board, and in general. I'm sorry to see once again that you have so little of it.

LOL!!!...I would be surprised if I was in more than five and shocked if I was in more than six GDT's. I am rarely in the GDT's as I spend most game-day's with family...

 

[Crimsoncrew]

LOL!!!...I would be surprised if I was in more than five and shocked if I was in more than six GDT's. I am rarely in the GDT's as I spend most game-day's with family...

That may be true, don't have time to look into it now. Either way, you're still lying.

 

[MW49ers5]

That may be true, don't have time to look into it now. Either way, you're still lying.

Look into it, I'm curious myself...

As for my lying about how many games you watch - I'm basing my guess on your general knowldege of what actually happened in the games which is why I said "MAYBE" 4-6 games...Keep in mind the more games you claim to have watched the dumber you get...

 

[Crimsoncrew]

Look into it, I'm curious myself...

As for my lying about how many games you watch - I'm basing my guess on your general knowldege of what actually happened in the games which is why I said "MAYBE" 4-6 games...Keep in mind the more games you claim to have watched the dumber you get...

And yet, at the end of the day, I'll still be smarter than you.

Still waiting on that laundry list of contested catches Morgan made this year, btw. And for that matter, a rational explanation of why we didn't target Morgan more.

 

[MW49ers5]

And yet, at the end of the day, I'll still be smarter than you.

Still waiting on that laundry list of contested catches Morgan made this year, btw. And for that matter, a rational explanation of why we didn't target Morgan more.

Yeah, and I'm still waiting for you to pull your head out of your ass - so it looks like we are both in for long waits - time to run along now...

 

[Crimsoncrew]

Yeah, and I'm still waiting for you to pull your head out of your ass - so it looks like we are both in for long waits - time to run along now...

Someone asks a pointed question based off one of your claims and you decide it's time run along. Surprise, surprise. At least you're predictable.

 

[MW49ers5]

Someone asks a pointed question based off one of your claims and you decide it's time run along. Surprise, surprise. At least you're predictable.

Smith hasn't shown much willingness to throw to Morgan in tight spaces, either. That's part of why Morgan's targets are relatively low IMO.

How about you show me how to support a claim - since you know, you're smarter and everything...And please define what you saw in Smith that convinces you he was unwilling to throw to Morgan.

Now, Morgan had less then 25 targets in 2011 so it should not be too hard for someone who has watched, recorded and studied every game, should it?

 

[Crimsoncrew]

How about you show me how to support a claim - since you know, you're smarter and everything...And please define what you saw in Smith that convinces you he was unwilling to throw to Morgan.

Now, Morgan had less then 25 targets in 2011 so it should not be too hard for someone who has watched, recorded and studied every game, should it?

I have modeled the behavior of addressing pointed questions and supporting my arguments throughout this thread and in dozens if not hundreds of others. If you haven't picked it up by now, you're beyond my powers to help you.

As for Smith being hesitant - obviously not unwilling, as he did throw to Morgan periodically - I would point, as I have repeatedly, to the fact that he did not throw to Morgan all that often considering Morgan was, at least in theory, the closest thing we had to a #1 receiver through the first five games.

As for your last sentence, I never said I recorded and studied every game. That's your deal. I just said I watched them. But yet again, since you do claim to record and study every game, how many of Morgan's receptions this year were contested? And why didn't we throw to him more?

 

[Flyingiguana]

will have to disagree, considering he didn't have quality WR play, he mixed it up pretty well. put yourself in his shoes, i'd think its pretty hard to call plays knowing your WR's can't get open, your QB needs OPEN receivers, and your line can't hold.

granted the line got better at the end, but you got the gist. towards the end of the season, wasn't he moving away from the run?

the play calling against the giants was horrible. he got away from what was working and it put us in 3rd and long. too predictable. the knapp formula was, pass on 1st, run on 2nd, then 3rd and 8 watch qb get blitzed.

every qb needs open recievers. or at least a step so the defensive back doesn't knock the ball away. if smith made a throw to someone that was covered and it ended up being intercepted it would be, smith is back to being a turnover machine.

the nitpicking is horrible and it's a result of the wasted years

 

[MW49ers5]

I have modeled the behavior of addressing pointed questions and supporting my arguments throughout this thread.

As for Smith being hesitant - obviously not unwilling, as he did throw to Morgan periodically

As for your last sentence, why didn't we throw to him more?

Thank You for bringing a conclusion to our friendly discussion.

You:
"Smith hasn't shown much willingness to throw to Morgan in tight spaces, either."

Me:
"You are wrong about Smith to Morgan"

You:
MW you're right again as, clearly, Smith is willing to throw to Morgan in tight spaces.

So, Crimson, once again, it is precisely as I said - you don't know what you are talking about.

Also, before I let you perpetuate this BS under the guise of your new chosen word 'hesitant' I will once again direct you back to the following:

"...admittedly I don't recall many specific plays from the fifth game and earlier..."

Look, the only thing you have modeled in this as in all threads is your incompetence.

As for your last question - that has been answered in full detail in this thread. If the answer is really important to you then go find it.

 

[MHSL82]

it was pretty obvious we didn't have the talent at wr to have a productive passing offense. i'm wondering how much of that was a factor in how roman called plays.

Now, I'm not going to go Smith-crazy, but that's a fair question because a lot of people asked how Smith's limitations were affecting playcalls. I would believe that any offense tailored to their players' strengths is also restricted by their limitations, qb, oline, and receivers. Manning may be less restricted but there are limits to what the Colts could call, whether that simply based on the reality of how good some defenses are.

 

[MHSL82]

Smith easily makes both of those throws and more difficult ones at that...Look, Crimson, you may see, what, maybe 4-6 games a year - so please, just stop with the BS.

FWIW, and IMO, Smith would look better with a better receiver than Crabtree would with a better QB. Plus, I think most of Crabtree's weaknesses (slow, inconsistent routes, undependable hands, inability to shield defenders, inability to get separation, etc) are not QB related.

Crabtree doesn't need a better QB he needs a perfect QB - and those do not exist. All elite QB's have top notch, elite WR's because those WR's make plays on imperfect passes - all the time.[/QUOTE]

For the sake of consistency, I have to stop you there. I'm all for criticizing those who don't produce, but I HATED, HATED when people said that Alex needed everything to be perfect to succeed - as in be a winning QB, not as in win the SB. So, I couldn't go for someone saying that Crabtree needed perfection. I said that Alex needed a competent coach (not perfect), some better protection (not perfect), and more creative playcalls designed by an offensive minded coordinator (not someone who just takes orders). A similar case could be made for Crabtree. Maybe he needs someone to get him to be more disciplined in his routes, understand the nuances of the plays, and work on his hands and he'd succeed. 800+ yards isn't far off. If he can get 2-3 more plays a game for 15+ yards, he'll be fine. Maybe even 10+. We just need some protection and some destraction to the defense.

 

[MHSL82]

Well, the first time we played the Giants 8 different receivers caught passes with 50% of Smith's targets going to a WR. This time just four receivers caught passes with 34.6% of those targets going to a WR on five more total plays.

I think both Roman & Harbaugh know we need a more potent offense and I think they try to incorporate those things next year. - at least, I hope...

I know this is the company line (or am I getting the phrase wrong), but I felt this year's goals were to get the team familiar with the playbook and personnel, limit mistakes, and lean on the defense. (Of course, the actual goal was to win) This next year's goals have to be to build upon the offense's growth up to the Saints' game (as I feel we regressed against the Giants despite getting the big sideline throw). We now have a relative grasp on the foundation of our offense and time to get more familiar. I trust the coaching staff will adjust as well.

 

[MW49ers5]

Smith easily makes both of those throws and more difficult ones at that...Look, Crimson, you may see, what, maybe 4-6 games a year - so please, just stop with the BS.

FWIW, and IMO, Smith would look better with a better receiver than Crabtree would with a better QB. Plus, I think most of Crabtree's weaknesses (slow, inconsistent routes, undependable hands, inability to shield defenders, inability to get separation, etc) are not QB related.

Crabtree doesn't need a better QB he needs a perfect QB - and those do not exist. All elite QB's have top notch, elite WR's because those WR's make plays on imperfect passes - all the time.[/QUOTE]

For the sake of consistency, I have to stop you there. I'm all for criticizing those who don't produce, but I HATED, HATED when people said that Alex needed everything to be perfect to succeed - as in be a winning QB, not as in win the SB. So, I couldn't go for someone saying that Crabtree needed perfection. I said that Alex needed a competent coach (not perfect), some better protection (not perfect), and more creative playcalls designed by an offensive minded coordinator (not someone who just takes orders). A similar case could be made for Crabtree. Maybe he needs someone to get him to be more disciplined in his routes, understand the nuances of the plays, and work on his hands and he'd succeed. 800+ yards isn't far off. If he can get 2-3 more plays a game for 15+ yards, he'll be fine. Maybe even 10+. We just need some protection and some destraction to the defense.

You're right, my mistake - Crabtree needs better than perfection...

 

[MW49ers5]

I know this is the company line (or am I getting the phrase wrong), but I felt this year's goals were to get the team familiar with the playbook and personnel, limit mistakes, and lean on the defense. (Of course, the actual goal was to win) This next year's goals have to be to build upon the offense's growth up to the Saints' game (as I feel we regressed against the Giants despite getting the big sideline throw). We now have a relative grasp on the foundation of our offense and time to get more familiar. I trust the coaching staff will adjust as well.

So you do or don't think Jim & Greg are going to try to get more production out of our passing game next year?

 

[DoobieKeebler]

Wasn't there a carbon copy of this thread like.... last week?! Literally - it was called "Michael Crabtree," and it had to be locked. Someone put this thread out of it's misery; there is no need for 16 pages of this crap.

 

[MW49ers5]

Wasn't there a carbon copy of this thread like.... last week?! Literally - it was called "Michael Crabtree," and it had to be locked. Someone put this thread out of it's misery; there is no need for 16 pages of this crap.

Then ignore it...

 

[DoobieKeebler]

Then ignore it...

Cause in 16 pages you've REALLY gotten to the CORE of who Michael Crabtree is, his desire, and NFL ability?

Whatever, go back to being 12 years old.

 

[MHSL82]

So you do or don't think Jim & Greg are going to try to get more production out of our passing game next year?

Absolutely, no question. (Doing my best Alex impression) But I don't think they'll go overboard and try to make it NO Parte Deux. I just think they'll look how they approached this year (what they learned going from college to the pros), where they started/finished this year, additions/subtractions from personnel, know what they can install that they held back this year due to the shortened off-season, etc. Plus, knowing that everyone is more knowledgeable has to have some effect. They also know how close they were and be hungry. My guess is that even an above average coaching staff would bite off more than they can chew the first 2-3 games. Let's see if our staff is above "above average". I don't know if they are going to do it with length of routes, number of passing plays, or just efficiency of learning when to attack. I'd have to guess they won't change their colors but not be as conservative (relatively speaking).

 

[MHSL82]

Wasn't there a carbon copy of this thread like.... last week?! Literally - it was called "Michael Crabtree," and it had to be locked. Someone put this thread out of it's misery; there is no need for 16 pages of this crap.

I tried mediating it in a way that wasn't a) peace out or b) shut up. I guess you have a different solution.