49ers coaching search continues...

[Popeyejones]

^^^^^ Read the post I'm quoting again.

(Also, not that it much matters, but the Giants became "set " on McAdoo right after it was announced that Jackson wasn't even going to take their interview and was signing with Clev).

 

[HawkGA]

How sad is that for the 9ers that somebody would take the Browns job over theirs? The Browns?

If this post was about more than concern trolling 9ers fans wouldn't it logically be much sadder for the Giants than the 9ers?

I missed some of the news about him saying the 9ers could had had him. Overall though on this particular move, I have no idea what Jackson is thinking going to Cleveland.

 

[Popeyejones]

How sad is that for the 9ers that somebody would take the Browns job over theirs? The Browns?

If this post was about more than concern trolling 9ers fans wouldn't it logically be much sadder for the Giants than the 9ers?

I missed some of the news about him saying the 9ers could had had him. Overall though on this particular move, I have no idea what Jackson is thinking going to Cleveland.

The only logical answer IMO is it's about the control the Browns were willing to give him.

We know 1) the Giants are in all other ways a MUCH, MUCH better job than the Browns and 2) the Giants definitely weren't going to give him that, so I don't know any other way to make sense of it, TBH.

This also explains the 9ers, as I know we can't really have a level-headed convo here about if the 9ers job is better than than the Clev job*, but we also know Jackson wasn't going to get full control from them.

I think it's horribly short-sighted and likely a huge mistake on Jackson's part, but I'd guess the story he's likely telling himself is that he wants full-control over his own destiny. His angling for power has been one of the commonly noted downsides of hiring him since his name emerged as a coaching candidate for anyone, and with the Browns, he doesn't even have to angle for it, because they're giving it to him.

Slightly off-topic but on this topic: That Pete Carroll essentially gifted control of some things to Schneider even though he wasn't contractually obligated to do so is a huuuuuuge compliment to the man. If things had gone bad rather than really well he'd of course have pulled it back (everyone is a fink when their job is on the line), but that he did so in the first place is really a testament to him.





*To this, I will say, however, c'mon. :lol: 1) If the 9ers suck for going 5-11 last year, well, the Browns have gone 5-11 or worse for seven out of the last eight years. :lol: 2) If the 9ers suck for having bad ownership that has cycled through their last two coaches, the Browns have had 7 head coaches in the last 12 years. :lol:

 

[Sports Hernia]

How sad is that for the 9ers that somebody would take the Browns job over theirs? The Browns?

If this post was about more than concern trolling 9ers fans wouldn't it logically be much sadder for the Giants than the 9ers?

I missed some of the news about him saying the 9ers could had had him. Overall though on this particular move, I have no idea what Jackson is thinking going to Cleveland.

The only logical answer IMO is it's about the control the Browns were willing to give him.

We know 1) the Giants are in all other ways a MUCH, MUCH better job than the Browns and 2) the Giants definitely weren't going to give him that, so I don't know any other way to make sense of it, TBH.

This also explains the 9ers, as I know we can't really have a level-headed convo here about if the 9ers job is better than than the Clev job*, but we also know Jackson wasn't going to get full control from them.

I think it's horribly short-sighted and likely a huge mistake on Jackson's part, but I'd guess the story he's likely telling himself is that he wants full-control over his own destiny. His angling for power has been one of the commonly noted downsides of hiring him since his name emerged as a coaching candidate for anyone, and with the Browns, he doesn't even have to angle for it, because they're giving it to him.

Slightly off-topic but on this topic: That Pete Carroll essentially gifted control of some things to Schneider even though he wasn't contractually obligated to do so is a huuuuuuge compliment to the man. If things had gone bad rather than really well he'd of course have pulled it back (everyone is a fink when their job is on the line), but that he did so in the first place is really a testament to him.





*To this, I will say, however, c'mon. :lol: 1) If the 9ers suck for going 5-11 last year, well, the Browns have gone 5-11 or worse for seven out of the last eight years. :lol: 2) If the 9ers suck for having bad ownership that has cycled through their last two coaches, the Browns have had 7 head coaches in the last 12 years. :lol:

That's some serious turd polishing right there. ^^^
8)

 

[Popeyejones]

^^^ Which part? That the Browns are even more helpless than the 9ers or that Jackson was looking for something that 9ers and Giants weren't offering?

If the former I guess you'd have to make your case for why, and if the latter, the sticking point in 9ers doomsday stories about Hue Jackson is the Giants (to make any sense any story you have to tell has to answer the "why not the Giants too?" question, and this is literally the only one that makes sense IMO).

 

[Laloosh]

Hue Jackson said himself popeye, that it was about the people. Said he felt like he was going to have the support to be successful with CLE. I posted a tweet a ways up (or on a diff page).

 

[Popeyejones]

Hue Jackson said himself popeye, that it was about the people. Said he felt like he was going to have the support to be successful with CLE. I posted a tweet a ways up (or on a diff page).

For sure, but I think you're focusing on the wrong word in that statement.

If you focus on the word "people" then the question becomes, once again, why not the Giants? Those people have as good of a reputation as anyone in the NFL, and Jackson signed with Cleveland a few hours before he was even scheduled to sit down to talk with them. If the focal word is "people" why didn't he talk to all the people, let alone the universally thought of as BEST people who wanted to talk to him?

I think the word to focus on instead is "support" which can mean one of two things.

Support #1: Ownership not having an itchy trigger finger and still supporting their coach even if they have a rough year or two. It can't be this version of support because the Giants are as good as anyone at this, and the Browns treat coaches like single ply toilet paper; ripping through them at a feverish pace to try to scrape the sh!t off their franchise.

Support #2 Entrusting the coach with the keys to car, and to fully enact his will and vision. This meaning of "support" 1) explains the "why not the Giants?" question, 2) explains Mike Silver's tweets about Jackson and the 9ers, and 3) confirms what everyone has been saying about Jackson since before this round of searches even started.

To be clear I'm not arguing that this makes the 9ers look good or better (as I said earlier if the sticking point was over control of the 53 that's a HUGE PROBLEM for the 9ers) but it does keep all our arrows pointing in the same direction, and in a way that makes a slew of disparate information all fit in a quiver together.

 

[rlkats]

Well it really doesnt matter much. Looks like Shanny might be the choice as of this morning. It is said the taljs have really heated up. For the record if it does happen. YUC.

 

[DavidSeven]

Hue Jackson was never reported to be the "FRONT RUNNER" for the Giants.

In fact, the Giants were probably never going to hire anyone but McAdoo. They were just doing their due diligence, and Hue probably knew this, so he didn't bother with the interview.

The 49ers, on the other hand, wanted Jackson badly and got spurned.

 

[Popeyejones]

Hue Jackson was never reported to be the "FRONT RUNNER" for the Giants.

In fact, the Giants were probably never going to hire anyone but McAdoo. They were just doing their due diligence, and Hue probably knew this, so he didn't bother with the interview.

The 49ers, on the other hand, wanted Jackson badly and got spurned.

Two things on this:

1) There's a lot of hindsight bias in saying that the Giants were never going to hire anyone but McAdoo. Back when they had already interviewed McAdoo and put in a request to interview Hue the story was that they clearly must be doing so because they didn't like what they heard in their meeting with McAdoo. Rather than Hue not bothering to spend the couple hours to talk to the Giants, I think more likely is that he got what he wanted from the Browns, and it was something he already knew he wasn't going to get from the Giants (who aren't nearly desperate enough to give up total control, as everyone already knew).

2) The only report of Hue being the front-runner for the 9ers job came from before they even interviewed him. To be clear I'm not arguing that they are RIGHT to not have badly wanted him after that lone interview, but that they didn't badly want him is clearly supported by three important data points from both sides of the exchange:

A) Mike Silver, reporter and inside man on all things Hue Jackson for the last week, saying the 49ers could have had him if they wanted him. This really does all the work we need by itself, but just to pile on there's two more data points.

B) The report that the 9ers were slow rolling him, suggesting that they wanted him but not unconditionally

C) The simple fact that they didn't do what the Browns did and set up a second interview with him.

Again, all of this only makes sense if they wanted him, but didn't want him unconditionally. All signs still point to him getting from the Browns what he wanted, which is total control.

Again though, and I feel the need to repeat myself, if the sole sticking point for the 9ers was 53 man control I think that is DISASTROUS for 9ers fans, not because of Hue Jackson, but because it's mostly a symbolic thing and for the 9ers to be unwavering about it to the point of shunning a coach they otherwise really want is seriously a problem. If it was more than that (and the Browns have given him more than that and the book on Hue is that he might be out for more than that) I'm more than okay with it.

 

[theENGLISHseahawk]

@AdamSchefter 6s6 seconds ago
49ers expected to choose between Chip Kelly and Mike Shanahan for their next HC, per league sources. Decision likely within next 24 hours.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[Marvin49]

Hue Jackson was never reported to be the "FRONT RUNNER" for the Giants.

In fact, the Giants were probably never going to hire anyone but McAdoo. They were just doing their due diligence, and Hue probably knew this, so he didn't bother with the interview.

The 49ers, on the other hand, wanted Jackson badly and got spurned.

Two things on this:

1) There's a lot of hindsight bias in saying that the Giants were never going to hire anyone but McAdoo. Back when they had already interviewed McAdoo and put in a request to interview Hue the story was that they clearly must be doing so because they didn't like what they heard in their meeting with McAdoo. Rather than Hue not bothering to spend the couple hours to talk to the Giants, I think more likely is that he got what he wanted from the Browns, and it was something he already knew he wasn't going to get from the Giants (who aren't nearly desperate enough to give up total control, as everyone already knew).

2) The only report of Hue being the front-runner for the 9ers job came from before they even interviewed him. To be clear I'm not arguing that they are RIGHT to not have badly wanted him after that lone interview, but that they didn't badly want him is clearly supported by three important data points from both sides of the exchange:

A) Mike Silver, reporter and inside man on all things Hue Jackson for the last week, saying the 49ers could have had him if they wanted him. This really does all the work we need by itself, but just to pile on there's two more data points.

B) The report that the 9ers were slow rolling him, suggesting that they wanted him but not unconditionally

C) The simple fact that they didn't do what the Browns did and set up a second interview with him.

Again, all of this only makes sense if they wanted him, but didn't want him unconditionally. All signs still point to him getting from the Browns what he wanted, which is total control.

Again though, and I feel the need to repeat myself, if the sole sticking point for the 9ers was 53 man control I think that is DISASTROUS for 9ers fans, not because of Hue Jackson, but because it's mostly a symbolic thing and for the 9ers to be unwavering about it to the point of shunning a coach they otherwise really want is seriously a problem. If it was more than that (and the Browns have given him more than that and the book on Hue is that he might be out for more than that) I'm more than okay with it.

There are reports now that Cleveland is having trouble securing interviews with GM candidates because that candidate will NOT have control of the 53. Pretty clear there that Jackson will.

I think thats it right there in a nutshell.

IMO, the 49ers could have had Jackson if they were willing to give him control of the 53 (ie, as Silver said if they really wanted him). They weren't. To be honest, I'm pretty OK with that.

Payton and Jackson were my first 2 choices for a HC, but I don't want either of them as the last say on personnel. I know Baalke has a bad rep here and among some Niner fans, but I still like the guy. He has a weak spot for drafting offense and WR in particular, but thats one of the reasons I thought Payton would be so good. To help in that regard.

I am and always have been a fan of the classic GM/HC power structure.

Now....Shanahan? I'm not a big fan of that move, but the dude does no offense...in particular the running game. He's had like 8 different 1000 yard backs and 6 seasons with a guy over 1500 yards. If Hyde could stay healthy...wow.

He'd just need somebody to run that D and Baalke to keep drafting on that side of the ball (and on that note...why do I have a sneaking suspicion that Miles Jack will be a 49er? Anyway...)

 

[drrew]

@AdamSchefter 6s6 seconds ago
49ers expected to choose between Chip Kelly and Mike Shanahan for their next HC, per league sources. Decision likely within next 24 hours.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Wow...incredible if that's what they really do.

 

[Trrrroy]

Shannahan and Chip? I don't think its a coincednlence that both those guys like mobile qb's. Interview's only question: "how do you like kaepernick?"

 

[Popeyejones]

Now....Shanahan? I'm not a big fan of that move, but the dude does no offense...in particular the running game. He's had like 8 different 1000 yard backs and 6 seasons with a guy over 1500 yards. If Hyde could stay healthy...wow.

He'd just need somebody to run that D and Baalke to keep drafting on that side of the ball (and on that note...why do I have a sneaking suspicion that Miles Jack will be a 49er? Anyway...)

Always nice when our opinions differ. :lol: (meaning, 100% agreed on everything else in your post about preferred power structure, etc.).

Shanahan has always been #2 for me behind Payton.

Things I like about him:

1) A long history of success in the ZBS which they started to install this year and plays to Hyde's strengths.
2) Works on the offensive side of the ball.
3) A ton of experience, which I think is really important for what is a really young team.
4) Has shown some flexibility in his approach to the passing game, and in ways that cater both to the limitations of Kap and the limitatins of Gabbert regardless of which one is starting next year (I'm not expecting much over the next few years, but for them to be more below-average to mediocre than painful would be preferable).
5) Can't demand the control to be making short-term, job security related roster moves that could set the team back an additional three or four years should everything fail.
6) Has experience working under an overly-emotional and reactive owner, which he may be more able to navigate than some other guys.

With Shanny I think there's also a pretty good chance that Mangini is kept on as defensive coordinator, and I can't believe I'm saying this, but I'm really very okay with that. In Mangini's corner for me -- and it's a huge thing -- is that he radically adjusted what he was doing when things weren't working over he course of the year. It's something we never saw from the Harbaugh staff, or the Singletary staff, or the Nolan staff, and so on. I'm not in love with Mangini, but the defense improved over the year simply because he was reactive to what was happening, and it's been a really long time since a 9ers coordinator did that.

 

[Popeyejones]

@AdamSchefter 6s6 seconds ago
49ers expected to choose between Chip Kelly and Mike Shanahan for their next HC, per league sources. Decision likely within next 24 hours.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Beyond the pipe dream of Payton, kinda crazy how this has played out, as the 9ers are now seemingly down to my far-and-away first choice and my absolute last choice. If they announce Kelly I'm taking a break from the internet.

 

[HawkFan72]

Kelly or Shannahan? This is a WIN-WIN ... for Seahawk fans!

 

[rideaducati]

Shannahan and Chip? I don't think its a coincednlence that both those guys like mobile qb's. Interview's only question: "how do you like kaepernick?"

The only problem I can see is that those coaches need ACCURATE, mobile QBs while Kaepernick is an inaccurate RUNNING QB. There is a difference.

 

[hawk45]

The issue with granting full control - if that was the issue - probably has more to do with York not being ready to jettison Baalke than it does about taking a principled stand against an arrangement that they believe is a guaranteed disaster. The Niners went with Tomsula last year and he was a guaranteed disaster, didn't bother them then.

But whatever, either Shanahan or Kelly will be a step up from Tomsula. There is still some shine left on Kelly so I'm hoping they feel the pressure from fans to do something splashy and go with Chip, because of how big a soap opera it will be with Chip and Baalke and company all bunking together, only without the stacked roster Harbaugh inherited.

Edit: I think RGIII ruined Shanahan not the other way around, and actually think he's a good fit with a chance to be decent. So yeah, really rooting for Chip.

 

[Marvin49]

Now....Shanahan? I'm not a big fan of that move, but the dude does no offense...in particular the running game. He's had like 8 different 1000 yard backs and 6 seasons with a guy over 1500 yards. If Hyde could stay healthy...wow.

He'd just need somebody to run that D and Baalke to keep drafting on that side of the ball (and on that note...why do I have a sneaking suspicion that Miles Jack will be a 49er? Anyway...)

Always nice when our opinions differ. :lol: (meaning, 100% agreed on everything else in your post about preferred power structure, etc.).

Shanahan has always been #2 for me behind Payton.

Things I like about him:

1) A long history of success in the ZBS which they started to install this year and plays to Hyde's strengths.
2) Works on the offensive side of the ball.
3) A ton of experience, which I think is really important for what is a really young team.
4) Has shown some flexibility in his approach to the passing game, and in ways that cater both to the limitations of Kap and the limitatins of Gabbert regardless of which one is starting next year (I'm not expecting much over the next few years, but for them to be more below-average to mediocre than painful would be preferable).
5) Can't demand the control to be making short-term, job security related roster moves that could set the team back an additional three or four years should everything fail.
6) Has experience working under an overly-emotional and reactive owner, which he may be more able to navigate than some other guys.

With Shanny I think there's also a pretty good chance that Mangini is kept on as defensive coordinator, and I can't believe I'm saying this, but I'm really very okay with that. In Mangini's corner for me -- and it's a huge thing -- is that he radically adjusted what he was doing when things weren't working over he course of the year. It's something we never saw from the Harbaugh staff, or the Singletary staff, or the Nolan staff, and so on. I'm not in love with Mangini, but the defense improved over the year simply because he was reactive to what was happening, and it's been a really long time since a 9ers coordinator did that.

I think my problem with Shanahan is that I've just never been a fan of retread HCs. I think I probably unfairly downgrade them just because no coach has ever won a Lombardi with 2 different teams.

This might be different though. Sometimes those guys kinda don't have the drive they once did with their second teams and take that second job for huge $$$$ and power within the organization. That wouldn't happen here. Shanahan would just be the coach and is hungry enough that he has been lobbying for this job for 2 years.

It would be interesting if nothing else.

Kelly? I like the idea of trying his offense, but his reputation scares me. They are 50 mil under the cap and I fear he's scare players away.

Tom Gamble though is in SF and is reportedly pushing for him to get the job.