Will Harbaugh Be True To His Word?

[MHSL82]

High reward= High risk. This game was lost because you ran an option pitch late in the game and CK fucked it up. Period. Thats a play you dont run with Smith. This is the first game you lost because of the switch, wont be the last. Thats what I was trying to say in the other thread.

I'm a Smith fan as well as a Niner fan and wanted him to win it this year before Kaep took over, but you turned this post from a "told you so" post to a prediction post.

I assume when you say "won't be the last" that means that it won't be the last that he causes us to lose. If you just mean it won't be our last loss with him, then yeah, I agree. Regardless, I can't assert one way or another that he'll cost us a(nother) win (though I agree it won't be the last mistake). I am not saying he cost us this win because I rejected any theory that we would have lost the Bears or Saints game with Smith. It would simply be hypocritical of me to say that a different game plan with Smith may have, too, won the games and then not acknowledge that a different game plan with Smith could have lost to the Rams, too.

I don't know what's going to happen from now on, but as a Niner fan, I hope and assume that Harbaugh didn't make this switch for regular season record shining. Sure, a bye would be HUGE, but there is a bigger picture here. I have not turned on Smith, as I believe we could win with him, even against the Giants a fourth time (an unpopular belief), but having no say in the matter, I choose to trust Harbaugh and root for the team, knowing that Kaep does add some actual and potential benefits.

 

[MHSL82]

What a croc! You have no answer to using the spread offense to combat the Rams nine in the box so you come up with this? If you need an example of how it works, check out a Patriots game sometime.

Not arguing with you because I'd be the last person to argue schemes, but how long do you honestly think it would take to transform into that type of offense? A game, an off-season, a few drafts? I understand that Kaepernick is likely well-familiar with it and a lot of our personnel have had some experience in it, but wouldn't this be an off-season thing because these guys have either come from a non-spread offense or have spent time adjusting away from that style of offense?

If you're just talking about being more pass-oriented (as opposed to formations), then I'd agree that'd be the hope against 9 in the box defenses, but that's difficult to do and it's not like they stay in the box once the QB drops back to pass (so you're not sending four against two). Once we go wide to do a spread attack, they don't keep 9 in the box. Maybe they then adjust to something that attacks the spread? Personnel and substitutions can be a disadvantage to a switch for either side with that time clock. This seems like a recipe for constant switches and out-smarting yourself. We need to execute what we have and address it in the off-season so we can execute a different offense then.

 

[MHSL82]

agree. it was a team lost - including Coaching - not a Kaep lost.

Kaep wasn't outstanding, but not bad enough to sit. you still go with him against Miami.

I wouldn't be judging who should start by their previous play but rather their abilities and potential in the future (short-term) games - the reason is because Smith technically wasn't bad enough to sit. He made the switch based upon his belief in ability - not the "hot hand" bullshit, so we're beyond that. Even if Kaep had played bad enough to sit, I don't think it'd be right to sit him against the Dolphins - a very winnable game. Yes, Smith lacks some things that Kaep has, so therefore going with Kaep is the right decision, but being bad enough to sit is different from another QB being better and needing the experience. I am aware that Smith could be "not good enough" to win the SB, but that to me, with this defense and running team, is at best an opinion, no matter how loud people shout it.

 

[Robotech]

I trust Harbaugh to keep his word and stick with Kap. It's the right move.

I feel that the Niners got too conservative after Kap completed the pass to Moss for a first down in OT. Should've tried to go for another first down considering how shaky Akers has been lately.

 

[TobyTyler]

Not arguing with you because I'd be the last person to argue schemes, but how long do you honestly think it would take to transform into that type of offense? A game, an off-season, a few drafts? I understand that Kaepernick is likely well-familiar with it and a lot of our personnel have had some experience in it, but wouldn't this be an off-season thing because these guys have either come from a non-spread offense or have spent time adjusting away from that style of offense?

If you're just talking about being more pass-oriented (as opposed to formations), then I'd agree that'd be the hope against 9 in the box defenses, but that's difficult to do and it's not like they stay in the box once the QB drops back to pass (so you're not sending four against two). Once we go wide to do a spread attack, they don't keep 9 in the box. Maybe they then adjust to something that attacks the spread? Personnel and substitutions can be a disadvantage to a switch for either side with that time clock. This seems like a recipe for constant switches and out-smarting yourself. We need to execute what we have and address it in the off-season so we can execute a different offense then.

Don't you think the 49ers practice the two minute offense every day? That's all it would be; an extended version of that. The QB sees nine or eight in the box and stands up and throws it out to the wide receiver like the Patriots do and he has a better chance of beating the DB one on one than Gore does in a 5 on 9 blocking scheme. Any QB can stand up and throw a two yard pass. You don't need Tom Brady.

As for the second part, the object is to get them out of the nine men in the box. They can't wait for the snap to back out of it because then it is too late. The ball is already out to the wide receiver. If they back out of it early, then you run the ball. Running from the spread gives a huge advantage to a guy like Gore. That's how I see it. The bottom line is you have to dictate to the defense what package they will use, not let them dictate to you what you can do.

 

[MHSL82]

And why pitch it to the guy with the second worst hands on the team?

You want me to give you a good answer to this? Sorry, but I ain't got one. I don't have a good reason for Ginn to be on the field for offense, great 2-yard catch notwithstanding. I'm also running out of reasons to keep him for returns, but I'll pass on that tirade until I see Jenkins or someone else doing it well. I don't believe in calamoring for the backup just to do so - though I understand the pinch of the 53 man roster, 46 actives in a game.

 

[rmilia1]

I'm a Smith fan as well as a Niner fan and wanted him to win it this year before Kaep took over, but you turned this post from a "told you so" post to a prediction post.

I assume when you say "won't be the last" that means that it won't be the last that he causes us to lose. If you just mean it won't be our last loss with him, then yeah, I agree. Regardless, I can't assert one way or another that he'll cost us a(nother) win (though I agree it won't be the last mistake). I am not saying he cost us this win because I rejected any theory that we would have lost the Bears or Saints game with Smith. It would simply be hypocritical of me to say that a different game plan with Smith may have, too, won the games and then not acknowledge that a different game plan with Smith could have lost to the Rams, too.

I don't know what's going to happen from now on, but as a Niner fan, I hope and assume that Harbaugh didn't make this switch for regular season record shining. Sure, a bye would be HUGE, but there is a bigger picture here. I have not turned on Smith, as I believe we could win with him, even against the Giants a fourth time (an unpopular belief), but having no say in the matter, I choose to trust Harbaugh and root for the team, knowing that Kaep does add some actual and potential benefits.

Not really what I meant but I agree that it wont be the last game you guys lose because of the switch. As Ive stated the reason you go to Kaep is his ability to do more things, that isnt bad obviously but it opens up more potential for fuck ups ( like the bad pitch). You will win some games you wouldnt have won by making the move and you will lose some you would have won. Thats the perils of the move and the perils of playing a guy with no experience on a team that can win the Super Bowl.

 

[TobyTyler]

You want me to give you a good answer to this? Sorry, but I ain't got one. I don't have a good reason for Ginn to be on the field for offense, great 2-yard catch notwithstanding. I'm also running out of reasons to keep him for returns, but I'll pass on that tirade until I see Jenkins or someone else doing it well. I don't believe in calamoring for the backup just to do so - though I understand the pinch of the 53 man roster, 46 actives in a game.

My understanding is that one of the backup DBs, his name escapes me now, used to do a good job of punt returning in Denver.

 

[MHSL82]

Don't you think the 49ers practice the two minute offense every day? That's all it would be; an extended version of that. The QB sees nine or eight in the box and stands up and throws it out to the wide receiver like the Patriots do and he has a better chance of beating the DB one on one than Gore does in a 5 on 9 blocking scheme. Any QB can stand up and throw a two yard pass. You don't need Tom Brady.

As for the second part, the object is to get them out of the nine men in the box. They can't wait for the snap to back out of it because then it is too late. The ball is already out to the wide receiver. If they back out of it early, then you run the ball. Running from the spread gives a huge advantage to a guy like Gore. That's how I see it. The bottom line is you have to dictate to the defense what package they will use, not let them dictate to you what you can do.

First paragraph - teams don't stack nine in the box for two minute drills, do they? If we were to run the two minute drill the entire game, that could help if executed with the right personnel, I just don't know how long that'd take. The two minute drill works because of the conditions around it. Defenses are more in prevent and they are at a disadvantage because of the no huddle. Right? As always, correct me if I'm wrong.

Second paragraph - Agreed, if we come out with the spread, they won't be in the box as much and that will help that end. It's just that if it were that easy, we'd have done it; so it feels like we'd have to get them in the box to exploit their formation. Otherwise, if we come out in the spread and run the ball because they have few in the box, then that won't be like the Patriots in offensive attack. Obviously, we'd need to confuse them and switch a lot between exploiting the few in the box and attacking the well-covered pass defense. It seems that we don't do well against covered defenses, we do well exploiting them when they stack the box - something they wouldn't do if we were in the spread. Balance is key and dictating to the defense is the way to go, I just don't see us doing that quickly. We need time to practice that.

 

[TobyTyler]

First paragraph - teams don't stack nine in the box for two minute drills, do they? If we were to run the two minute drill the entire game, that could help if executed with the right personnel, I just don't know how long that'd take. The two minute drill works because of the conditions around it. Defenses are more in prevent and they are at a disadvantage because of the no huddle. Right? As always, correct me if I'm wrong.

Second paragraph - Agreed, if we come out with the spread, they won't be in the box as much and that will help that end. It's just that if it were that easy, we'd have done it; so it feels like we'd have to get them in the box to exploit their formation. Otherwise, if we come out in the spread and run the ball because they have few in the box, then that won't be like the Patriots in offensive attack. Obviously, we'd need to confuse them and switch a lot between exploiting the few in the box and attacking the well-covered pass defense. It seems that we don't do well against covered defenses, we do well exploiting them when they stack the box - something they wouldn't do if we were in the spread. Balance is key and dictating to the defense is the way to go, I just don't see us doing that quickly. We need time to practice that.

Two minute drill was probably the wrong choice of words because that requires throwing it down field. In this case it would be standing up and throwing to the wide receiver at the line or just off of it. As for the second part, it would be exactly like the Patriots. They run a lot out of the spread when the defense has backed up. That's how guys like Danny Woodhead are so effective.

I do agree with your statement that "It can't be as easy as it looks" however.

 

[MHSL82]

Not really what I meant but I agree that it wont be the last game you guys lose because of the switch. As Ive stated the reason you go to Kaep is his ability to do more things, that isnt bad obviously but it opens up more potential for fuck ups ( like the bad pitch). You will win some games you wouldnt have won by making the move and you will lose some you would have won. Thats the perils of the move and the perils of playing a guy with no experience on a team that can win the Super Bowl.

I see your point, I just need to clarify that I wasn't agreeing with the bold (pointing it out because my novels cause people to skim or ignore my posts sometimes). I'm just saying it's hard to say either way because we have a different game plan with both QBs. If Smith started making the same decisions as Kaep, I'd feel we'd have more INTs due to his arm not having the same velocity. If Kaep made all the same decisions as Smith, we wouldn't have made the switch, and we wouldn't see the strengths of Kaep. With different decisions within your means as a player, will produce different W/L outcomes. So I can't say we lost a game we would have won with Kaep. That's why I don't like comparisons much. I'd just say we lost because of X, Y, and Z without reference to the other QB.

 

[SJVP408]

In my eyes, Kaep atoned for his mistakes (safety, botched option pitch) by giving the team two chances to win it afterwards. He can't catch his own passes and he can't kick FGs. I have faith that Kaep will know never to drop back 17 yards into his own endzone just to avoid a sack and that the coaches will never call an option play with mf'ing Ginn as the RB, while deep in their own territory, with the Niner defense playing lights out.

What we should be more worried about is how Jacobs is not an adequate replacement for KHunter and how Gore is showing signs of wear and tear.

 

[deep9er]

In my eyes, Kaep atoned for his mistakes (safety, botched option pitch) by giving the team two chances to win it afterwards. He can't catch his own passes and he can't kick FGs. I have faith that Kaep will know never to drop back 17 yards into his own endzone just to avoid a sack and that the coaches will never call an option play with mf'ing Ginn as the RB, while deep in their own territory, with the Niner defense playing lights out.

What we should be more worried about is how Jacobs is not an adequate replacement for KHunter and how Gore is showing signs of wear and tear.

the botched pitch was a questionable call in that situation, but for me, not so much to rant over.

Kaep didn't get a good handle on it before pitching, and thus tossed it high. it wasn't Ginn's fault the pitch was errant? Ginn did compound it by not falling on it, or maybe kicking it OB?

 

[yossarian]

the botched pitch was a questionable call in that situation, but for me, not so much to rant over.

Kaep didn't get a good handle on it before pitching, and thus tossed it high. it wasn't Ginn's fault the pitch was errant? Ginn did compound it by not falling on it, or maybe kicking it OB?

Just a huge compound of mistakes in that one play, any of which, if corrected, would have forced the Rams to score a TD on our defense. Ugly, ugly, ugly.

 

[TobyTyler]

I trust Harbaugh to keep his word and stick with Kap. It's the right move.

I feel that the Niners got too conservative after Kap completed the pass to Moss for a first down in OT. Should've tried to go for another first down considering how shaky Akers has been lately.

Those two in combination are not possible. Kaepernick has gotten worse with each game so he no longer is the "hot hand".

 

[ChrisPozz]

Those two in combination are not possible. Kaepernick has gotten worse with each game so he no longer is the "hot hand".

Because Harbaugh said the only reason to start Kaepernick was because he had "the hot hand"?

 

[TobyTyler]

Because Harbaugh said the only reason to start Kaepernick was because he had "the hot hand"?

Yep. Thats the only thing I heard him say. Or was I wrong when I heard "we have two excellent starting quarterbacks we have confidence in so I'll go with the hot hand". We knew it was a lie, but that is what he said. If you have something where Harbaugh said that Kaepernick brings more to the table than Smith does, I'd like to see it...........I'll wait.

 

[TobyTyler]

Still waitng for Chris P to do his research and show us what Harbaugh said.. Tick, tick, tick......

 

[CitySushi]

the botched pitch was a questionable call in that situation, but for me, not so much to rant over.

Kaep didn't get a good handle on it before pitching, and thus tossed it high. it wasn't Ginn's fault the pitch was errant? Ginn did compound it by not falling on it, or maybe kicking it OB?

I think it was a horrendous play call given the situation and the timing. The Niners defense had been in completely control of the game at that point. With a little over 3 minutes left, the Niners should have been content to try to run as much time off the clock as possible. It's the same exact reason you don't call any long/intermediate pass routes in the same situation. It's not worth the risk. Rely on your defense to do what it did all game and handle the Rams offense. Not excusing Kaep here either, as he has to know he has to make sure not to put the ball on the ground. But in Harbaugh's regime he's been all about putting the QB in a situation to not make mistakes. This one goes against everything he has done in his time here.

 

[TobyTyler]

I think it was a horrendous play call given the situation and the timing. The Niners defense had been in completely control of the game at that point. With a little over 3 minutes left, the Niners should have been content to try to run as much time off the clock as possible. It's the same exact reason you don't call any long/intermediate pass routes in the same situation. It's not worth the risk. Rely on your defense to do what it did all game and handle the Rams offense. Not excusing Kaep here either, as he has to know he has to make sure not to put the ball on the ground. But in Harbaugh's regime he's been all about putting the QB in a situation to not make mistakes. This one goes against everything he has done in his time here.

Yep. Inexcusable.