My post Super Bowl hot take

Fire Brian Schottenheimer and hire Mike Lafleur away from the Niners to be our new OC.

Pete wants to run the football; no problem. Lafleur would bring the Kyle/Mike Shanahan run game concepts and innovation with him, along with a more modernized passing scheme with more more play action and intermediate routes.

Oh, and we’d steal a coach away from our chief division rival as well.

I know it’s not going to happen, but it’s still fun to put it out there.

The Niners just extended LaFleur.

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/49er ... er-report/

Sgt. Largent":2q9gi4i8 said:

The Niners just extended LaFleur.

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/49er ... er-report/

Click to expand...

I understand that, but it would be a promotion for him, since he’s not an OC in SF. We’d still have to get permission to interview him since he’s under contract. Like I said, it’s not going to happen, but it sure would be nice if it did.

Here’s hoping Russ can lobby for some change in offensive philosophy and put us in better position to succeed in 2020 and beyond.

THE TABS":gkwyejse said:

Sgt. Largent":gkwyejse said:

The Niners just extended LaFleur.

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/49er ... er-report/

Click to expand...

I understand that, but it would be a promotion for him, since he’s not an OC in SF. We’d still have to get permission to interview him since he’s under contract. Like I said, it’s not going to happen, but it sure would be nice if it did.

Here’s hoping Russ can lobby for some change in offensive philosophy and put us in better position to succeed in 2020 and beyond.

Click to expand...

That's WHY you extend a young coach like LaFleur, to keep him from being hired away by other teams...........especially your biggest division rival.

My guess is Shanahan's grooming him to take over for Modkins in a year or two.

Besides, Pete would never hire an offensive coordinator that has big ideas and would want to make wholesale scheme changes. It's why he's hired re-treads like Bevell and Schotty, they're perfectly happy running Pete's scheme.

THE TABS":2iid8kko said:

Fire Brian Schottenheimer and hire Mike Lafleur away from the Niners to be our new OC.

Pete wants to run the football; no problem. Lafleur would bring the Kyle/Mike Shanahan run game concepts and innovation with him, along with a more modernized passing scheme with more more play action and intermediate routes.

Oh, and we’d steal a coach away from our chief division rival as well.

I know it’s not going to happen, but it’s still fun to put it out there.

Click to expand...

Pete doesn’t like to run intermediate routes. He doesn’t run the west coast offense.

Schotty isn't the problem.

TheLegendOfBoom":11kuuj66 said:

THE TABS":11kuuj66 said:

Fire Brian Schottenheimer and hire Mike Lafleur away from the Niners to be our new OC.

Pete wants to run the football; no problem. Lafleur would bring the Kyle/Mike Shanahan run game concepts and innovation with him, along with a more modernized passing scheme with more more play action and intermediate routes.

Oh, and we’d steal a coach away from our chief division rival as well.

I know it’s not going to happen, but it’s still fun to put it out there.

Click to expand...

Pete doesn’t like to run intermediate routes. He doesn’t run the west coast offense.

Click to expand...

Not convinced that's accurate, but assuming it is you spose that's why our defense can't defend against them? Our opponents are eating us alive throwing to the spaces in middle of our zone.

bigskydoc":27pq45jc said:

Schotty isn't the problem.

Click to expand...

okay then what or who is?

Wait a minute! Didn't the 9ers LOSE the game, in the 4th quarter by (IMO) panicking and getting away from what they do (did) best. You wanna hire that guy? If you're gonna hire a new OC, why not hire Bieniemy, the OC of the winner?

John63":19qpbimd said:

bigskydoc":19qpbimd said:

Schotty isn't the problem.

Click to expand...

okay then what or who is?

Click to expand...

1. The defense
2. The defense
3. The defense
4. The defense
5. The defense

I know you're immune to stats when arguing about how awful Pete and his offensive schemes are, but not sure how you can prioritize any offensive issues when we have a top 5 QB, top 5 run game and top 5 overall offense when the defense is downright terrible.......bottom 10 in just about every statistical category.

You get back to a top 5-10 defense? This team becomes a serious SB contender, and not just fighting for WC berths every season.

It's not the defense fault that the offense rarely plays well in the first half. That's coaching.

I've said this before... I don't want an offensive scheme that relies heavily on confusing the defense to be effective. Those offenses are great when you have a good O-Line and have to protect an average QB from himself.

Seattle is similar to KC; they don't need to engineer plays to get one or two guys open so the QB knows where to go with the ball. They can build an offense around guys who can win 1 on 1 match ups and design plays where the QB reads the defense rather than essentially being told where to go with the ball before the snap.

I think the take-away from last nights game is to put more weapons around Wilson, and give him a bit more help on the O-Line. That's the biggest difference between the KC offense and ours.

I don't want to hear about philosophy either, KC started slow in every single playoff game. The only difference between KC and Seattle this season? They had the talent to make their 4th quarter comebacks, and we came up just short.

knownone":kh14jpgg said:

I've said this before... I don't want an offensive scheme that relies heavily on confusing the defense to be effective. Those offenses are great when you have a good O-Line and have to protect an average QB from himself.

Seattle is similar to KC; they don't need to engineer plays to get one or two guys open so the QB knows where to go with the ball. They can build an offense around guys who can win 1 on 1 match ups and design plays where the QB reads the defense rather than essentially being told where to go with the ball before the snap.

I think the take-away from last nights game is to put more weapons around Wilson, and give him a bit more help on the O-Line. That's the biggest difference between the KC offense and ours.

I don't want to hear about philosophy either, KC started slow in every single playoff game. The only difference between KC and Seattle this season? They had the talent to make their 4th quarter comebacks, and we came up just short.

Click to expand...

That and the KC defense was 8th overall in scoring D and we were like 28th.

The Sgt. and Cyrus are both correct. It is a combination of the defense and coaching.

The defense is just talent, especially on the line. We also need the younger DB's to step up this next year. That would be more doable if our D-Line can do a much better job of pressure on opposing QB's.

The coaching is more a measure of philosophy and urgency, more than the individual coaches in my book. I am of course referring to our offensive method of feeling out teams the first half in every game. This at best gets us a half time score of 3 points up or down at that point in the game. At worse we are down by at least two scores and have to play catch up all second half. The problem is I don't see this changing with PC at the helm.

So the solution is get our defense to at least top 10 in yards and scoring against to give our offense more opportunities with the ball. That will require much better talent. In this respect I agree with the Sgt.

PC isn't going to change. So something else must change this next year. That is where I do hope that RW finally saying some things publicly along with some other offensive leaders may push PC to be more uptempo and creative the first half of games. Personally I think RW should have spoke up several years ago.

TreeRon":sxnvmf3m said:

Wait a minute! Didn't the 9ers LOSE the game, in the 4th quarter by (IMO) panicking and getting away from what they do (did) best. You wanna hire that guy? If you're gonna hire a new OC, why not hire Bieniemy, the OC of the winner?

Click to expand...

1. Can’t hire an OC unilaterally for the same job.

2. Lafleur is the passing game coordinator, not the OC nor the play caller.

THE TABS":dkqqwjux said:

TreeRon":dkqqwjux said:

Wait a minute! Didn't the 9ers LOSE the game, in the 4th quarter by (IMO) panicking and getting away from what they do (did) best. You wanna hire that guy? If you're gonna hire a new OC, why not hire Bieniemy, the OC of the winner?

Click to expand...

1. Can’t hire an OC unilaterally for the same job.

2. Lafleur is the passing game coordinator, not the OC nor the play caller.

Click to expand...

The point is, this years hot flavor might be next years flop. Remember LY when everyone wanted us to hire DeFilippo or whatever his name is. He got fired TY.
(We could make Bieniemy asst hd coach or whatever, but I wasn't serious)

Sgt. Largent":1lqydbq1 said:

John63":1lqydbq1 said:

bigskydoc":1lqydbq1 said:

Schotty isn't the problem.

Click to expand...

okay then what or who is?

Click to expand...

1. The defense
2. The defense
3. The defense
4. The defense
5. The defense

Click to expand...

^^^This Guy

There almost always isn't enough offense on any team to overcome nearly 25 PPG allowed and expect to have a good shot at winning a Super Bowl. The Giants were the last team to give up that kind of point average and win it and that was some lightning in a bottle.

The Chiefs finally got it done because they actually fielded a good defense this year. All that insane slinging the last few years with poopy defense got them knocked out. And those Chiefs did a bunch of Seahawk-y things in the playoffs screwing up the first half and then coming back. The difference is their defense can actually get stops when it matters.

The Patriots have seemingly only managed SB wins in the years that they could get a good to great defense paired with the offense.

If this defense doesn't get fixed much, and they "let Russ cook", they'll score a lot of points. And give up a lot of points. Maybe some people think that is fun but it likely doesn't translate to more wins, especially in the playoffs.

bmorepunk":3lnw2lkb said:

.......If this defense doesn't get fixed much, and they "let Russ cook", they'll score a lot of points. And give up a lot of points. Maybe some people think that is fun but it likely doesn't translate to more wins, especially in the playoffs.

Click to expand...

But think of all those pretty, shiny stats Russ will pile up. Dreamy!

Cyrus12":gq13872i said:

It's not the defense fault that the offense rarely plays well in the first half. That's coaching.

Click to expand...

The Hawks had four more TD's in the 2nd half in 2019 then the 1st half, and compiled 3,094 yards in the first half vs 3,002 yards in the 2nd half.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/ ... splits.htm

Our offense performed much better in the first half this year compared to previous seasons. So we need to retire this old narrative.

So no, it's not the offense making the defense bad. It's a bad defense, and should be the first, second, third and fourth thing addressed this off season.

Again, if you guys think Pete's going to change his offensive philosophy at the ripe old age of 68, then you're delusional. Get the defense back to a top 5-10 defense, and this team becomes a legitimate SB contender.

Coach says he is looking forward to working in new adjustments to defense for next year.
I am in favor of adjustments that change from a somewhat passive reactionary zone scheme to something that is an attacking defense. Seems to me if you play reactionary defense you are providing additional built in advantage to the offense. I want to see a defense that dictates play instead of reacting after the fact.