Early bets on the new 3rd string QB?

I don't know about options

But I will go on to say that I think almost all of the Alex Smith surgery drama has just been a case of bad reporting.

Smith was reported to have said that he was having surgery. He refuted that by saying that he'd only told the reporter that surgery was still an option. In other words, nothing new and a misquote. Then that was misreported as Smith saying that he wasn't having surgery. Again, all he said to begin with was that he was still deciding. But now because of misquotes and mirepresentations it sounds like he's flip-flopped to the media and coaches 3 times.

Meanwhile Nolan has to stand in front of the media and say "screw it, I don't know what you guys are talking about," because they don't even know what they're talking about, but then that gets misreported as Nolan saying "screw it, for all I know Alex is faking the whole thing because I'm the most clueless coach ever."

If we just listened to what they said, we wouldn't feel jerked around. Here's what they said.

Alex: I'm still thinking about surgery, but I'd still rather not.
Nolan: I'll know more when Alex knows more.
Smith: I guess I need surgery after all.

Stupid reporters, muddying the stupid waters.

I keep reliving the moment when Steve Young almost fell down. Over and over. / My Blog, For Writers

by howtheyscored on Dec 10, 2007 11:17 PM PST reply actions

Enough

Alex Smith is a good quarterback. He has played only 1 real year of football. He rookie season was horrible but most rookie QBs don't even play their whole first year. Last year, Smith had a decent year with almost 3,000 yards and 16 TDs. This year, he has only played 3 real games people. The stats say 7 because of the frist 3, then the one snap on the 4th, and then the 5,6, and 7 games were with a GRADE III SEPARATED SHOULDER. Come on. Give the gu a break. And he was not half bad in the first three games either. He threw for almsot 600 yards with 1 TD and 1 Int. BUT in the Arizona game, Battle fumbled the ball at the one, and jackson and davis dropped TD passes against st. louis(yes, that happened in both games. People just don't rememeber the other game because we won!) So if that did not happen then there are 4 td and 1 int and that was a meaningless desparation int against pittsburgh and in that game, there was that terrible call that prevented us from being at the 10 yard line which could have lead to another TD. Basically what I am trying to say is don't get rd of Smith. He is a good quarterback who has a lot of potential and just needs another year and someone to throw to. Even vernon davis is running the wrong routes. As for this saterday, we should just try to have fun and maybe have 2 or 3 QBs and try out a bunch of new players in different positions. What do we have to loss. Go 49ers! 6-10!!!!!!!!!!! And lose DAL and NE!!!!!!!!

by montasmob69 on Dec 11, 2007 12:00 AM PST reply actions

ps on the good point

good points, especially pointing out the Grade III seperation he delt with in half the games this season he actually played if you minus the injury sustaining game, couldnt have pointed it out better myself. But i just wanna throw in the fact that his only interception, the one you mentioned against Pitsburg, I think it was Taylor Jacobs, the guy who replaced Bryan Gilmore in the number 3 spot and how has since been axed from the lineup to bring back Gilmore, forgot the route! and caused the interception, so you can't even hold smith's sole interception against him. AND lets not forget the very bad offensive play calling by the Hoss in those games.

by NinerInLA on Dec 11, 2007 12:41 AM PST up reply actions

Ah yes, Taylor Jacobs

He was running the wrong routes in pre-season. His bad route-running was responsible for at least two interceptions in exhibition games.

by Bob In Pacifica on Dec 12, 2007 7:25 AM PST up reply actions

I completely agree...

49ers fans have turned on Smith WAY too fast, perhaps because they're being optimists hoping if we just plug in a new QB the problems on this team will be fixed. Sorry, but it's not Smith who's at fault, it's Nolan.

by jaytierney on Dec 11, 2007 9:36 AM PST up reply actions

Don't know if Smith will be good

but it's clear he's the smallest part of the problem that is the Niners.

by Bob In Pacifica on Dec 12, 2007 7:27 AM PST up reply actions

Merc article

The Georgatos article on Alex Smith ripping Nolan is, I think, pointing to why Nolan is not going to succeed. Article here:

http://www.mercurynews.com/49ers/ci_7689770

Yeah, yeah, yeah, we all know about the toughness code, how a player isn't supposed to say that an injury affects his play. And Nolan's a real tough guy. But it was clear to everyone that Smith wasn't right, couldn't throw accurately.

Either Alex Smith is lying about Nolan's conduct in the locker room, in which case he should be gone, or Nolan has been badmouthing his quarterback for not "playing tough," in which case he should be gone, but probably won't be for another year of this misery.

Sorry, but if Nolan can't tell the difference between playing tough and playing ineffectively because of injury, then Nolan's mental processes aren't up to the task. I'll turn it around. If Nolan is ripping Smith, then he's blaming Smith for his lousy coaching staff and his bad head coaching job.

When Nolan took over he got rid of people who were independent thinkers. To a degree you need followers on a football team. The problem is that you also need leaders on football teams. Now it looks like Nolan has ruined Smith as a leader. Does that benefit the team? Does that even benefit Nolan?

I don't think so.

All of these questions are beyond whether or not Smith will succeed as a quarterback. Nolan's badmouthing has made the situation deteriorate to the point where Smith won't be to succeed here at SF.

People should remember that Shaun Hill is playing with a bad finger on his throwing hand. He's just one play away from not being able to hold a ball. Maybe Nolan will tell the locker room that Hill isn't tough enough to throw with his other hand.

+++

It sounds like Dilfer won't be available this week. It probably doesn't matter who they sign or his they promote anyone from the taxi squad because no one is going to learn this offense. Hell, the guys who have been playing on it for a year haven't learned it.

by Bob In Pacifica on Dec 11, 2007 6:45 AM PST reply actions

Smith

I don't understand where being a leader and someone who thinks for the team are mutually exclusive. Just because you follow the book, it does not make you a follower and DEFINITELY doesn't make you incapable of being a leader.

As we all saw during the weeks Alex played with the injury and the games sandwiching that with Trent starting, an injured Alex played just as well as a healthy Trent. Nevermind what Nolan says to the media about Trent having one of the best QB games he's seen, as we all know team officials will say one thing to the media and mean another. Alex Smith, healthy OR injured, was the better option at QB.

Alex even admitted he (which I'm assuming Nolan was, too) under the impression his shoulder would keep healing. I've said it before, and I continue to say it now, Nolan isn't a doctor. If the doctors tell him and Alex the shoulder should continue to get better and that the pain are normal, of course Alex will want to play (and of course Nolan would prefer him over Trent).

As HowTheyScored points out in the VERY first comment of this entry, the media is spinning things faster than a tire spins on ice on a sub-freezing day. From what I understand (from reading the article you link and Matt Maiocco's blog entry), Nolan was trying to explain his side of the story to the team. He wasn't trying to blast Smith or anything like that. Media reports at the time were saying Nolan ignored Smith and that Nolan has forced him to play during all that pain.

There is nothing wrong with a coach that wants to give the team both sides of the story, so they can decide for themselves who is at fault. Judging from the way the team continues to play, I don't feel the team thinks Nolan is greatly at fault at all. Also, Alex was right there, so he could always have stepped up and said something. He's not a baby, even if he is the youngest starting QB in the NFL.

As per usual, your comment generally frees Smith of any wrong-doing of his own. Alex Smith isn't even playing right now. Hell, he's not even going to be throwing a football for probably 4 months (and quite possibly more). Yet, he goes ahead to the media with this news when the team is trying to finish the season out strong. You don't hear about Manny Lawson complaining about being around Santa Clara even though his season was over practically before it started. You hardly even hear about his rehab.

Smith is wrong for going to the media about EVERYTHING he is feeling. As Nolan continually says (and gets blasted for), there is a time and place for everything. If it's still the regular season and you're not even playing, it is not the time to be airing out your dirty laundry. That is exactly what Smith is doing, and it's not like it's going to help the team any, or himself even.

by sfgfan on Dec 11, 2007 9:10 AM PST up reply actions

In the comments of Maiocco's blog...

Matt says that Alex is making it clear that he doesn't want to play for Nolan again. All of these public comments are probably a concoction from his agent, to start the gears on the 49ers cutting him, buying out the remainder of his contract, or trading him.

If it comes down to it and the Yorks had to choose between Nolan or Smith, I can almost guarantee that the Yorks will take Nolan. I would make that choice in a heartbeat. He has produced far more goodwill for this team than Alex has, and is the reason the entire franchise has turned around in less than three years (front office AND the field).

Smith? Not so much.

by sfgfan on Dec 11, 2007 9:13 AM PST up reply actions

Don't Make Guarantees...

The Yorks will NOT choose Nolan over Smith, for two BIG, BIG reasons...

It's called salary cap and a guaranteed contract. Follow the money.
The press is backing Smith in this situation (rightly so) and they clearly are fed-up with Nolan's BS. Don't think for a second this doesn't matter.

by jaytierney on Dec 11, 2007 9:31 AM PST up reply actions

Media

Salary cap or no salary cap, Alex Smith hasn't even shown he's worth the remaining $24M in bonuses, let alone the $9M in base salary that will be due to him if he says. Cutting bait, especially when the guy has turned on the coaching staff and isn't THAT great of a player to begin with, is seriously an option.

Those two reasons are VERY bad reasons to stick with a player. While a different sport, following the media (and fans) is what got the SF Giants to where they are today. Similarly, keeping a player only because his salary warrants it is the kind of logic that would keep guys like Rashaun Woods, Ryan Leaf, and Tim Couch on teams longer than they've earned it.

by sfgfan on Dec 11, 2007 9:55 AM PST up reply actions

Nolan or Smith?

Nolan has displayed a willingness to throw A. Smith under the bus to protect himself. That's a bully mentality. Not being tough but being a bully. That is, he will humiliate Smith in order to protect himself.

If it took Nolan two months to figure out that the shoulder separation was affecting Smith's play then he's utterly incompetent. But he apparently hasn't figured that out yet, IF WE ARE TO BELIEVE HIM. He is going around behind Smith's back telling other players that Smith is making excuses for his poor play. He's blaming Smith for his bad coaching.

This whole thing is Nolan's fault. Smith has to go now.

Will the Yorks go with Nolan? Sure. They don't want to admit that they screwed up with him after they screwed up with the last regime. And what are the chances that the team will be this bad next year? So even mediocrity next year will ensure the fifth year for Nolan. And then he'll get fired.

Nolan may not have much to do with the offense, but he's responsible for it. This is the worst-prepared offense I have witnessed in my forty-odd years watching pro football. Nolan's game day decisions are laughable. He seems clueless. But his mishandling of Smith's injury reveals how badly he is as head coach. The team will flounder as long as he's head coach.

On KNBR Rod Brooks is getting red hot about the Nolan doubters. He keeps saying that someone should make Smith and Nolan get together and act as adults. The problem is that Nolan is the top dog in the organization. The problem was caused by Nolan. If he'd just said, "Smith is injured," when he was injured instead of all the BS he's been injecting into the public discourse then there wouldn't be this mess. Nolan created this mess. Smith (and presumably his agent) just want to get away from it.

by Bob In Pacifica on Dec 11, 2007 2:31 PM PST up reply actions

Blah blah

Blah blah blah. Conspiracy. Bully. Stupid. Mistakes. Buses. It's the same words you use over and over again, and I've responded with the same exact words over and over again. Everyone is blaming Nolan for saying two weeks he couldn't tell Alex was hurting. Yeah, he could have probably told. Yes, it was obviously affecting his play. But really, to say he doesn't have the insight or the "common sense" to say something doctors didn't even say at the time is utterly nonsensical.

Nolan and Smith are neither doctors or nurses. It's not like they both knew his shoulder wasn't healing. Team doctors may have told the both of them that pain was normal and that he should be healing. That's the impression Smith got, so why can't that be the same impression Nolan got? Even the original MRI's didn't suggest to Dr. Andrews that Smith would need surgery, and that some rest would have gotten it done.

Besides, would anyone be saying anything if he didn't even originally get medical clearance to allow Nolan to think he was healthy? Probably not, because Smith would have never hit the field. If doctors clear you, and you're throwing the ball okay (which Smith, reports, and coaches all thought he was), then he's going to start. A healing but medically cleared Smith is still better than a completely healthy Trent Dilfer, and that is what the coaching staff had to go on.

Throwing him under the bus? Not really. You can challenge a player's toughness. Word around the block is that the 49ers are challenging Jonas Jennings' toughness. Similarly with Lelie. So why can't he challenge Smith's, when like the other two he HAD MEDICAL CLEARANCE to play.

As per usual, we'll probably have to agree to disagree and leave it at that. I can't wait until draft time when Nolan is still the head coach and it's going to be driving you nuts. Then we'll have to agree to disagree on what draft picks make the most sense. You'll roll your Nolan hate into the next two years, and nothing he ever does is going to be good to you.

by sfgfan on Dec 11, 2007 2:54 PM PST up reply actions

3-10

Blah blah blah, sfgfan.

Nolan sucks as a head coach. He's an ass but he looks good in a suit. He's clueless about offense but he was an okay DC when he had a head coach over him.

Grow up. Stop getting personal with people who don't agree with you. You're starting to act like Mike Nolan.

by Bob In Pacifica on Dec 12, 2007 7:32 AM PST up reply actions

So point and counterpoint has flown out the window

And we're on to namecalling and unsupported assertions. Cool, I really thought what this site needed was some more namecalling.

I keep reliving the moment when Steve Young almost fell down. Over and over. / My Blog, For Writers

by howtheyscored on Dec 12, 2007 10:23 AM PST up reply actions

Two Words

Jeff George.

We are not who I thought we were.

by marcello on Dec 11, 2007 7:29 AM PST reply actions

I got it!

Eric Crouch

Bring back the classic Uni's!

by wjackalope on Dec 11, 2007 8:35 AM PST reply actions

In keeping with the random washed-up QBs...

Ryan Leaf, anyone?

Kidding aside, considering how shitty this season has become, I think it would actually bring some entertainment to the game if they would start Battle or Robinson. It would at least give us a reason to watch and cheer with anticipation.

And while we're at it, if we use Robinson, why not try a spread offense with the option? Let's go college style on the Halloweened Cats just for the hell of it. Why not?

"If it looks like a rat and smells like a rat, by golly, it's a rat."

by UnleashTheGore on Dec 11, 2007 8:44 AM PST reply actions

love the idea

but in reality, we can't even run to offense that we do have, let alone learn a whole new scheme in one week.

Bring back the classic Uni's!

by wjackalope on Dec 11, 2007 8:56 AM PST up reply actions

Freddie Solomon

I remember back in the 70s the Niners moving wide receiver Freddie Solomon to quarterback when their last backup was injured. This was around the Scott Bull era. It was kind of fun to watch Solomon drop back and run around, but it didn't the game either.

by Bob In Pacifica on Dec 11, 2007 9:04 AM PST up reply actions

Nolan is Finished...

I said earlier in the season that Nolan screwed himself and this team by questioning Alex Smith's toughness. It was extremely stupid and he should be fired.

http://www.mercurynews.com/49ers/ci_7689770?nclick_check=1

Honestly, you've got to feel bad for Alex Smith... instead of working with a coach who would stand by him and worry about his best interests, Nolan only tried to cover his own ass.

As much as it sucks to waste another 3 years, I think we need to push the button and drop the nukes on this team. There IS some good talent to work with, unfortunately the talent in the coaching staff (minus Singletary) doesn't equal it.

by jaytierney on Dec 11, 2007 9:29 AM PST reply actions

Again.

If you're going to blast the coaching staff, blast everyone. I don't understand why all the love for Singletary. "He's a shiny HOF, ooooooh!"

I don't know how else to explain to you, Bob or anyone else who is under the impression the entire thing is Nolan's fault. Both players are at fault. Heck, even the doctors share some fault. Nolan and Smith were both under the assumption that his shoulder will continue to heal. Neither are doctors. Alex wanted to play and believed he could. An injured Smith is better than a healthy Dilfer. Both men are at fault, and quite equally, mind you.

People are so willing to nuke a team, especially when the team (beyond the field) has turned around so much. Nolan gets blasted for a mistake he AND Alex made, and everyone forgets what he's done the first two years here. I understand frustration, and I share a lot of that. It's one thing to be frustrated. It's a whole other thing to jump off the cliff. Calling for a complete restructure is just that.

by sfgfan on Dec 11, 2007 10:00 AM PST up reply actions

Nolan is a good defensive coordinator

And that's his ceiling.

If you publicly ridicule your injured quarterback for not being tough enough when the guy tried to play with a separated shoulder then you aren't fit to be the head of the shoe department at Macy's much less head coach.

If Nolan isn't man enough to admit that he was blaming this team's failures on Smith when the fault lies with him and the coaches on his staff then he doesn't have the nuggets to be a leader. Maybe he can intimidate, but he can't lead.

Nolan is currently THE HEAD COACH. He's the head everything. All responsibility is his. If he has no clue about the offense and has no responsibility for the offense, then he should have Hostler standing next to him at his press conferences. He can say, "I dunno" and point to Hostler.

Why is Larry Allen still in the starting lineup? I bet because he's one of "Nolan's guys." This time next year Allen will be sitting on the couch at home. The only thing he'll be blocking is someone's view of the widescreen. I bet that's why it took 3/4 of the season to play Lelie for more than a handful of plays in a game--because Lelie wasn't a "Nolan guy."

Like I commented above, this is the worst-prepared team I've seen in over forty, let's say forty-five years of watching pro football (I saw the Titans when there was a New York Titans team). The offensive free agents are all performing under what they did elsewhere. What does that say? Poor judgement is selection? Poor coaching? Either way, it's Nolan's fault.

Do I want to keep throwing out head coaches every couple of years? Only if the alternative is worse.

by Bob In Pacifica on Dec 11, 2007 2:53 PM PST up reply actions

Coaches

Of course it is the head coach's responsibility to watch over the entire team. Under normal circumstances, you could hold him accountable for everything from personnel to coaching moves. It isn't fair, however, to blame the offensive collapse solely on Nolan for a variety of reasons.

First and foremost, as you and many others here have admitted, he is a VERY defensive minded coach. There is NOTHING wrong with that. Wade Phillips in Dallas is a VERY defensive minded coach, but his offense is doing just fine. Contrastly, Seattle's Holmgren is a VERY offensive head coach, but his defense seems to do okay. What does this mean? A lopsided head coach really needs a strong coordinator coaching the side of the ball that the head coach is weaker on.

Mike Nolan had that last year in Norv Turner. It certainly didn't show up in the results, but the talent last season was significantly weaker than the talent from this season. With that said, Norv was like the head coach of the offense, which is something Nolan truly needs.

When San Diego asked to hire Norv, they did it at a time that it would be impossible for Nolan to find a replacement. And fans are blaming Nolan for this? That is just plain ridiculous. The man asked for interviews outside of the team (I know for sure Cincinnati turned down his request to interview Zampese, their QB coach, and I know there was at least one other rejection). He had no choices, so what did he do? He TRIED to make lemonade out of kumquats.

Blame him for Smith's thing. I've already said that I will agree to disagree with you on that. But one mistake (if I agreed with you) does not make him a bad coach, and he is far from it. So what if you don't like the crap he spews out. So what if the media hates it. It's better than doing what Smith did three weeks ago and did again last night, and that is air out the team's dirty laundry.

If Nolan decides he's going to keep Hostler at OC, then I will begin to turn around and join the other ship. Until he shows me he doesn't want to go out and find himself another OC that can do what Norv did for him, and that everything the way it is right now is just fine and dandy, I will argue that he isn't a bad coach at all. He's inexperienced, but by no means bad.

by sfgfan on Dec 11, 2007 3:04 PM PST up reply actions

All I want from a head coach...

... is for him to step up, acknowledge his authority, and admit that WHATEVER happens, he's the head coach and the buck stops here. Quit making excuses and trying to cover your own ass, Nolan. A little honesty goes a long way; that's why the local media has been chomping at the bit to attack Nolan and defend Smith: because they're tired of his BS.

by jaytierney on Dec 12, 2007 11:19 AM PST up reply actions

I'm just scared

we're gonna cut bait on Nolan without a good replacement in mind. Remember when we did that last time? We got Dennis Ericson. Remember how SD did that and ended up with Norv? It's not a good idea. Continuity is a GOOD thing. Nolan has said and done some dumb shit this year, but let's remember, just like Alex Smith is a young and inexperienced QB, Nolan is a young and inexperienced head coach. He's a smart guy, he'll learn from his mistakes. If he doesn't, don't re-hire him. But for goodness sakes, let's let his contract run its course at least.

Bring back the classic Uni's!

by wjackalope on Dec 11, 2007 9:42 AM PST reply actions

IAWTC

Two years. If people are so willing to live the next two years with a coach who may not even be able to hold Dennis Erickson's jock strap, I don't understand why people can't give Nolan two more years. ESPECIALLY after getting this franchise where it is.

by sfgfan on Dec 11, 2007 10:02 AM PST up reply actions

Getting the franchise where it is?

Is that a joke?

3-10?

by Bob In Pacifica on Dec 11, 2007 2:57 PM PST up reply actions

Process vs. Results

Sometimes looking at only the results can be misleading. Yes we are 3-10, but that doesn't mean Nolan has done everything wrong. Many things went unexpectedly wrong this year, but that doesn't mean the process was flawed.

Ever since Nolan arrived he has brought in talented players. The team he inherited had who on it? Peterson, BY, ???. I'm probably missing a few, but who else on that team was an impact player? Now who do we have on the team? Gore, Davis (you may not want to include him, but I do for now), Staley, Clements, Willis, Lawson, Harris, Lewis. All of those guys are at least good if not great players and that is a very solid core.

It's real easy to be upset with this season as everyone got out of control making pre-season predictions, myself included. In reality, we weren't quite there yet and we happened to have some unexpected line problems which led to our QB getting hurt. Losing our O-Coordinator as late as we did hurt too. But you are seriously overreacting to a bump in the road. The foundation of this team is still intact and still very promising. But fuck it, let's just blow it up again. We'll bring in a new coach and if he doesn't get it turned around in 2 years time, we'll fire him and bring in another, ad infinitum.

AHHHHHH SKY IS FALLING. Cut this shit out, it's fucking tired.

We are not who I thought we were.

by marcello on Dec 11, 2007 3:27 PM PST up reply actions

THE SKY IS FAAAAAAAAALLING.

[Insert Chicken Little staring up at the sky graphic here.]

by sfgfan on Dec 11, 2007 4:07 PM PST up reply actions

No, it;s not

3-10 is as bad an evaluator of this team this year as there could possibly be. If you can name one thing that has gone right for this team this year, one single realistic thing that could have gone wrong that didn't, then I'll give you 3-10.

I can't think of anything, though.

The reality is that this is a team with a solid core of very young, extremely talented players on both sides of the ball. The offense lacks receivers, experience, depth, and a decent coordinator. 3 of those things can be addressed easily in the offseason. The other thing is experience.

Right now this team is probably a 6-9 win team if things go right. That's what we thought when the season started and it's still true. We never thought it was a great team, and we were still on the bus on day one. But then hundreds of uncontrollable things go wrong and that's somehow a symptom of the team? No way, that's a symptom of luck. The 49ers this year are suffering from what I call "Matt Cain syndrome."

Next year, if receivers, depth, and a coordinator are addressed on offense, I think this is probably an 8-11 win team easily. I think that's taking the team to a pretty good place in 3 short years.

I keep reliving the moment when Steve Young almost fell down. Over and over. / My Blog, For Writers

by howtheyscored on Dec 11, 2007 3:36 PM PST up reply actions

yeah...

3-10 is inaccurate, given the way they played they should be 1-12!

By ANY measure this is a terrible team. Terrible offense. Terrible defense. Great punter! Def ROY at linebacker.

And don't give me that crap about "the defense is just tired". The Ravens have like the 27th best offense, but manage the 2nd best defense. KC has the 31st best offense, but 5th best defense. The Titans have the 24th best offense and 3rd best defense (all by DVOA). The Niners? 32nd and 31st.

Now - if Nolan brought in all this talent - they why has it performed so badly?

About the kindest thing I can say is that for some reason, the OL imploded this year, and took the offense with it. Was that Nolans's fault? The OCs fault? The OL coach fault? Pure bad luck? And doesn't explain the terrible defense.

If I have to keep 1 of Smith and Nolan, I keep Smith. Why? Because at least the defense and OL is definitely not his fault.

Now, should we fire Nolan? I dunno. The team is SO bad, I kind of can't fault the coach. I mean, if Bill Walsh was the Coach, what, would we be 5-8? I kind of doubt it. Still - it's his team, and it's the worst in the league for no apparent reason - I think he's got to take the fall for it.

by zenbitz on Dec 11, 2007 4:09 PM PST up reply actions

OL

This offensive line was regarded by many (not only the 49ers) to be one of the best lines in the league (talent and depth) before the season started. They certainly performed as such throughout all of last season.

Between then and now, the team made ONE change along the line and it's not like that change has been the catalyst to the offensive line's failures. No one really knows why the line has sucked so bad this year. Outside of sitting Kwame for Staley, the only other thing that changed that could possibly affect the offensive line is the offensive coordinator. Which is another reason why it's hard to blame Nolan for their struggles.

He just needs a true offensive coordinator, and he needs it in a VERY bad way. The defense, averages-wise, is a FAIRLY good defense. Not quite top-10, but probably above average. A statistic thrown out during this past weekend's game is that the 49ers lead the league in stops behind the line. They don't get sacks (which is something that'll probably have to be addressed in the offseason, but they do get penetration. Even late in games, tired or not, they seem to step up. This is especially true when the score has been "close."

by sfgfan on Dec 11, 2007 4:23 PM PST up reply actions

Not everyone

Dr. Z of Sports Illustrated said that Larry Allen was washed up last year. This year he's a year past being washed up. He can't move anymore. Zimmerman was right.

We were told by Nolan and his people that they were the strength of the Niners' offense. I guess that means that on top of everything else, Nolan and company aren't good evaluators of talent.

The other thing: Why is it that with the exception of Clements and Lewis, all the free agents have played worse than where they came from. Did Nolan choose guys on the downside of their careers or isn't he coaching them to play as well as they did?

On gameday the Niners' offense is so unprepared. I've never seen an offense so unprepared. Not even the early Tampa Bay Bucs. They're awful.

by Bob In Pacifica on Dec 12, 2007 7:42 AM PST up reply actions

Dr. Z?

I don't know about Dr. Z, and I'm sure he's a lot more knowledgeable than me on the offensive line, but statistics (if I recall right) supported the idea that Larry Allen made a huge difference in that line last year. If I recall, Frank Gore's rushing average to the left was almost a whole yard more than rushing to the right. Considering Jonas Jennings wasn't there a lot of the time and Larry Allen played in every game (if I recall correctly), Larry Allen had to have been a big reason in that "success."

As for the free agents, what other free agents did you expect a lot out of? No one really know what Tully Banta-Cain had in him. He is hardly being paid starter money, so it's not like he should have been expected to be some elite player. He was a support player on his previous team, and he's really performing no weaker now than he had been previously. He had more support in New England, support (if he had any at all) was lost when Manny Lawson's season went down the tube.

Who else is there? Aubrayo Franklin? The guy was a 3rd string NT in Baltimore. Like Banta-Cain, he's not even being paid a starter's salary, and isn't necessarily a true nose. Yet, he's being asked to start at being a true-nose and he's done a fairly decent job, considering BY and Douglas have produced quite a bit.

The last player is Ashley Lelie. This is a player, who like Antonio Bryant, was worth taking a shot on. Was he a guaranteed commodity? Far from it. Throughout the season, he has shown many of us (fans, coaches, and media personnel) why he hasn't become an elite WR, despite all his "tools." He runs the wrong routes (which still plagued him as late as last week, when Trent yelled at him at least on one occasion and I'm pretty sure two). He is big, but doesn't play physical. If I'm not mistaken, he's being paid even less than Antonio Bryant was last year.

Basically, Mike Nolan signed Lelie, Banta-Cain, and Franklin as filler and "see what they can do" kind of guys. If you noticed, none of those guys have a contract that extend past three years. The other two FAs, Lewis and Clements, the two that have played well, were the only two that got "long-term" commitments. They're the only two players that hurt the team if the team wants to let them go before their contracts are up. The other three, not so much. That has to say something about the talent evaluation: commit to the ones you strongly believe in (Clements and Lewis) and give out short-term deals for guys who are just filling in or you are trying to catch "lightning in a bottle" with.

Offensive preparations fall on the shoulders of the entire offensive coaching staff. As I pointed out previously, under normal circumstances, a head coach could also be faulted for this. However, Nolan's situation isn't "normal." He didn't get to choose the best coordinator for the job. He had to work with what he had, so that's what you get.

by sfgfan on Dec 12, 2007 9:11 AM PST up reply actions

Agreed

Basically, Mike Nolan signed Lelie, Banta-Cain, and Franklin as filler and "see what they can do" kind of guys. If you noticed, none of those guys have a contract that extend past three years. The other two FAs, Lewis and Clements, the two that have played well, were the only two that got "long-term" commitments. They're the only two players that hurt the team if the team wants to let them go before their contracts are up. The other three, not so much. That has to say something about the talent evaluation: commit to the ones you strongly believe in (Clements and Lewis) and give out short-term deals for guys who are just filling in or you are trying to catch "lightning in a bottle" with.

Similar thing with Walt Harris the year before, and they did catch lightning with him.

We are not who I thought we were.

by marcello on Dec 12, 2007 9:30 AM PST up reply actions

o.o

you can't start an accusation like that by saying "besides clements and lewis" - those were the 2 primary free agent signings this past offseason, and they were great moves. If you want to go back farther than that, how about surprise pro-bowler walt harris? It's not as if HE was "worse here than where he came from".

And free-agency is only half of the player acquisition process. With guys like Gore, Willis, Lawson, Davis, Staley being picked up in what most NFL experts consider to be a "crap-shoot" draft system, Nolan has been above average, if not very good at talent evaluation.

by shleckothegecko on Dec 12, 2007 8:14 PM PST up reply actions

OL woes

I go back to week three, I think it was, Larry Allen and Jonas Jennings had an altercation on the sideline. I think it went, pretty much, unnoticed at the time. The camera showed a glimpse of the altercation. And from what I could tell, Allen and Jennings were jawing with each other and they might have even got into a shoving match.

It almost seems like the altercation was a turning point in the season(not just for the o-line either). That is to say, after the Pittsburg game the Niners had commited only 11 penalties(but I had to put the kibash on that by mentioning it somewhere in a post). And the next game against the Seahawks the Niners commited 9 penalties. Is there any connection or am I just blowing smoke?

It is pretty clear that teams that want to win must have a cohesive o-line. So if the rest of the team see the guys up front fighting, I have to think that affects everyone's psyche in a negative way, unless the altercation was warranted in the first place.

Hostler the Horrible

by jfainsf49 on Dec 12, 2007 2:05 PM PST up reply actions

If I remember right...

If I recall properly (which I admit I may not be), Jennings got on Robinson for blowing a blitz pickup. I think there was a protection audible at the line, and Robinson was supposed to pick up the outside guy while Jennings checked down. Robinson didn't pick up the outside guy, but instead ended up trying to block the same guy Jennings was going after.

Allen may have been telling Jennings to cool it a little, as mistakes WILL occur. Especially if your running back is a second year player.

As I said, though, this is going off of memory. It could have very well been the other way around, with Jennings trying to cool Allen off after Robinson tried to block the same guy Allen was blocking.

by sfgfan on Dec 12, 2007 2:14 PM PST up reply actions

ahhh...

to be a fly on the sideline...

Hostler the Horrible

by jfainsf49 on Dec 12, 2007 2:22 PM PST up reply actions

We obviously just disagree

The defensive stats you're using are the NFL standard of yards given up? Defensive yards given up is about as good a defensive evaluator in football as ERA is and evaluator for a relief pitcher in baseball. The 49ers defense actually pans out quite well in many of the advanced stats, notably rushing yards given up per rushing play (which they rock at - see Peterson, Adrian - something like top 10 in the league with a sub 4 average).

But the defense is actually very good. I don't even credit fatigue for their "failings." Most of it can be chalked up to pure minutes, regardless of fatigue. Any defense that is on the field for as long as the 49ers will give up a lot of total yards. That's just logically sound. If that old legendary Ravens defense was on the field for 45 minutes a game, it would have given up a lot of total yards. It's amazing how much we evaluate defensive performance on stats that are partially dependent on offensive production.

I keep reliving the moment when Steve Young almost fell down. Over and over. / My Blog, For Writers

by howtheyscored on Dec 11, 2007 4:35 PM PST up reply actions

And RE: the defense

Key injuries have taken their toll as well. Lawson, McDonald, Moore (for you Fooch), Hudson, Spencer, and Roman. The secondary as been hit hard by injuries and losing Lawson removed our best coverage LB.

And statistically speaking (not total yards stuff), the defense is still doing pretty well.

I keep reliving the moment when Steve Young almost fell down. Over and over. / My Blog, For Writers

by howtheyscored on Dec 11, 2007 4:38 PM PST up reply actions

Defense is okay

They suffer because the offense has been so neglected. Who's in charge? Nolan.

by Bob In Pacifica on Dec 12, 2007 7:43 AM PST up reply actions

The offense has been neglected?

Ummm...

Alex Smith, Frank Gore, Vernon Davis, Jonas Jennings, Larry Allen, David Baas, Adam Snyder, Joe Staley, Jason Hill, Michael Robinson, Delanie Walker, Antonio Bryant, Darrel Jackson, Ashlie Lelie....

Yup, really neglected there. The offense suffers because it lacks luck and experience, not because it's been neglected.

I find that I can't disagre with you more about almost everything you say these days.

I keep reliving the moment when Steve Young almost fell down. Over and over. / My Blog, For Writers

by howtheyscored on Dec 12, 2007 10:21 AM PST up reply actions

Neglected? Misunderstood? A mystery?

During the first month of the season I'd listen to Nolan's press conferences for some clue as to why the offense was so bad; and he kept saying that he didn't know what was wrong with the offense. The head coach. The man in charge. So either he was telling the truth or he wasn't, but he wasn't able to solve anything. Like I've said, this year just about all the free agents on offense have played worse than how they played last year. It's a simple question: How come? How come players who lined up correctly last year aren't doing it this year? What was Nolan doing as head coach while the offense was falling apart?

Zimmerman said that Larry Allen's season last year was a "mirage," that was his word. Now mirage or not, Frank Gore got a lot of yards from the left side. But that was last year. This year in training camp you could see that Jennings and Allen weren't moving anyone. Between that and Allen not being able to move laterally to pick up rushers and other linemen constantly missing blocking assignments the line went from a functioning unit to the biggest problem in the beginning of the season. Why weren't changes made when we all saw the problems?

We all know that Larry Allen, for all his great years in the NFL, is done and won't be playing next year. He shouldn't be out there now. I bet he's one of Nolan's men, like Dilfer. I don't doubt Trent's heart, but he's done too. Who's job was it to get backup quarterbacks for the team? Nolan. Was Dilfer the best choice for backup? Only if the starter never gets hurts.

The head coach watches over the whole operation. He watches over the offense, the defense and special teams. Sure, things would have been better if the team didn't have injuries. But the problems I see are a poorly coached offense, a bad gameday coach who invariably makes the wrong choice when he inserts himself into offensive calls.

Nolan stupidly kept up knocking Smith in front of the team and to the press when it was obvious that Smith couldn't throw with that separated shoulder. That shows me a profound lack of ability to handle people. Nolan could spend 24 hours a day insulting Smith and it wouldn't heal his shoulder. So why did he do it? The only logical answer is that he was looking for a scapegoat for his lousy coaching job. All it did was show that he doesn't know how to handle things on gamedays AND during the week. If Nolan really had stones he'd never have humiliated his quarterback publicly. It served no good.

That's how I see. Not only is he not a good head coach but his character flaws are going to undermine his authority. I wish it was different but it's not. While some here think that 3-10 isn't a good yardstick I think it's an excellent one. The team has been unwatchable. The offense is not only bad, it's boring. The team isn't even entertaining. What's on the field is a reflection of the man who put it together. That's the result of his philosophy. Don't expect much improvement next year if Nolan is still in charge.

by Bob In Pacifica on Dec 12, 2007 3:26 PM PST up reply actions

Two questions

What offensive FA's are you referring to? There was one offensive free agent signing, and that was Ashley Lelie. We all know why he hasn't played up to par. So who else are you referring to? The "4th round pick", Jackson? Both of these guys were no guarantee to be world-beaters, but they were players the 49ers felt were worth taking a chance on. I point this out about Lelie somewhere in this thread.

As for the offensive line and Larry Allen. Okay, given the 49ers current situation, who would be starting that would be much (if any) better? The 49ers best backups are already STARTING on the line, now. Who is left? Wragge? Estes? The line, being a weakpoint and all, is really in no position to be chanced. Even before the injuries, Baas hasn't done THAT much better than Smiley, and Snyder hasn't done THAT much better than Jennings. It could probably be argued that neither of those guys improved the line very much at all.

So what do you expect the 49ers coaching staff to do? Again, they came into the season with a line that many thought would be a top 10 offensive line. Even if you take away the aging Allen and replace him with Snyder (who will more than likely be the LG next year), would it really have made a difference? There is NO WAY IN ANY UNIVERSE could ANYONE have predicted the fall of Jennings, Snyder, Heitman AND Smiley all at the same time.

As a matter of fact, up through the first couple of weeks of the season, Smiley was still being considered to be a coveted upcoming free agent. Now? No one really knows, anymore.

Even if the the bus the 49ers are driving/riding on had traction-control (or other similar systems) there is no way for that system to account for all four wheels slipping at the same time. As HTS points out, no team could have probably expected this. NO ONE.

by sfgfan on Dec 12, 2007 3:45 PM PST up reply actions

But really

Do you have any idea the SHEER NUMBER of things that have gone wrong this year that were neither foreseeable nor controllable? Very few teams could have suffered the same amount of bad luck and come out in decent shape. In fact, I can't think of any team that has survived a season that involved this amount of pure, unadultered bad luck.

I keep reliving the moment when Steve Young almost fell down. Over and over. / My Blog, For Writers

by howtheyscored on Dec 12, 2007 10:26 AM PST up reply actions

It wasn't bad luck

to leave Larry Allen out there. It wasn't bad luck to have Trent Dilfer as the backup quarterback. Every team has injuries. Some teams with a run of bad luck on injuries slip from 14-2 to 10-6. Where did the Niners slip from to wind up at 3-10, on the way to 3-13? If everyone were healthy does anyone believe that this offense would be scoring 25 points a game? 20? 17? How many games this year did they underuse Vernon Davis? Was that unlucky? Was it unlucky that Lelie wasn't suited up for most of the season or just that he wasn't one of Nolan's guys? How unlucky was it that Gore had hands around his ankles behind the line of scrimmage every time he ran to the left?

There are fundamental flaws on this team coming from the coaching. That wasn't bad luck either, just another bad decision by the Yorks.

by Bob In Pacifica on Dec 12, 2007 3:37 PM PST up reply actions

Bad luck.

It's kind of short-sighted to say the 49ers season hasn't hit a heap of bad luck. The 49ers didn't just suffer from injuries, they suffered from underperforming players that fell off the proverbial cliff. There is no way you could expect four offensive linemen that spearheaded a top 10 rushing attack to COLLECTIVELY fall off the face of the earth.

In addition to that, it's not fair to say Vernon was underused without factoring in the reasons he may have been underused in the first place. He was kept in to block because the offensive line wasn't doing it's job. Is it his job as a tight end to block? Why, yes it is! If he had gone out into passing routes, would he have caught the passes? Maybe. Maybe not. The QB definitely would have had even less time to find him then.

As for Lelie, things I've read lead me to believe Nolan wasn't the only reason he wasn't suiting up. Jerry Sullivan, one of the most well-respected WR coaches in the league, never gave Nolan his "stamp of approval." Lelie is a terrible "receiver" in that he not only runs horrible routes, but doesn't seem to care that he does! His hands are nothing to hoot about either. So why do people make such a big deal out of him not suiting up? He was a player worth taking a risk on, and the risk isn't returning any dividends. The team doesn't have a whole lot invested in him, and he's not all that important.

by sfgfan on Dec 12, 2007 3:51 PM PST up reply actions

Possible signings

Possible signings this week:
-Anthony Wright
-Jeff Blake
-Tony Banks
and pretty much any other former Raven's qb that wants to play

Hostler the Horrible

by jfainsf49 on Dec 11, 2007 2:25 PM PST reply actions

Grossman

Obviously we couldn't get Grossman at this point in the season. But another blogger over at foxsports.com suggested Grossman as a possible answer. Your thoughts.

Hostler the Horrible

by jfainsf49 on Dec 11, 2007 2:47 PM PST reply actions

My Dark Horse Picks

Tim Couch and Joe Ayoob!

I hope nobody took that seriously.

I keep reliving the moment when Steve Young almost fell down. Over and over. / My Blog, For Writers

by howtheyscored on Dec 11, 2007 3:39 PM PST reply actions

Ayoob

Well, the nickname for Ayoob writes itself, so I'm in.

BOOYA! /Stuart Scott

We are not who I thought we were.

by marcello on Dec 11, 2007 3:49 PM PST up reply actions

Howbout?

Jared Zabransky?

Merton Hanks, 'nuff said.

by jtoj on Dec 11, 2007 4:08 PM PST reply actions

Light at the end of the tunnel.

Matt Maiocco has a follow-up on the continued Nolan-Smith saga on his blog.

The gist of it is that Smith says he made the comments he made out of frustration. Frustration that the reporter told Smith he would be writing an article about his teammates saying negative things about him. Frustration with the questions that were being answered. He believes that his relationship with his coach and his team are strong enough to withstand this storm. He also pointed out he didn't intend to be a distraction for the team in preparations for the upcoming game.

Nolan shared the opinion that Alex could be frustrated and that their relationship over the past three years is stronger than one bad media report. The bright side of it all (if this could blossom in to such) is that both men seem to be willing to work past this. Smith with his rehab, Nolan with preparations for the remainder of the season.

As a footnote, his surgery is set for Thursday with Dr. Andrews. Smith choosing Andrews has nothing to do with not wanting team doctors to work with it. Smith supposedly is close to Drew Brees and Brees had his shoulder repaired by Andrews previously.

by sfgfan on Dec 11, 2007 4:19 PM PST reply actions

andrews

Andrews does EVERYONE'S surgeries, no matter what team they're on. Having him do the surgery is no slight to the niners doctors at all. There was a good article about him not that long ago in, what was it? SI I think. Anybody remember?

Bring back the classic Uni's!

by wjackalope on Dec 11, 2007 8:08 PM PST up reply actions

Bush

I did not see that article. But I remember the commentators from MNF talking about Reggie Bush going to see Dr. Andrews. Andrews is either the best doctor out there or he's running a monopoly.

Hostler the Horrible

by jfainsf49 on Dec 12, 2007 7:53 AM PST up reply actions

Word of mouth

Reggie Bush is a very good friend of Alex Smith's, as we all know. I'm sure that if he didn't get the endorsement from his team doctors that he would have gotten one from Alex.

by sfgfan on Dec 12, 2007 9:12 AM PST up reply actions

Ahhh...

good point. I forgot about their high school ties.

Hostler the Horrible

by jfainsf49 on Dec 12, 2007 10:29 AM PST up reply actions

found it

it was on ESPN.com... a good read:

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/news/story?id=3024046

Bring back the classic Uni's!

by wjackalope on Dec 12, 2007 9:21 AM PST up reply actions

After the blood, apologies

Sorry, the public kissing does not resolve the underlying issues.

Yesterday on the radio Tim Kawakami mentioned that the Niners having some kind of "consciousness-raising sessions" where the team gathers around and talk freely about each other. Apparently, it was one of those sessions that drove Jennings out with his "personal issues." This is typical bully BS draped in new age BS.

When a coach starts using one player against another to no benefit of the team but only for the coach's own ego needs, you might as well toss in the towel.

by Bob In Pacifica on Dec 12, 2007 7:49 AM PST up reply actions

Hmm.

I don't agree with a lot of the things Kawakami spews out of his mouth. The man lacks original thinking and, if you notice, is almost never the first one with any kind of report or thoughts. But I guess that is beside the point.

What is wrong with those kind of team meetings? It gives players and coaches an idea of where the team stands and what people think of each other. How are these meetings turning one player on another for the "ego" of the coach? It's to build awareness, accountability, and trust amongst one another. It's not so that Nolan can say "well I did my part" or anything like that.

There should not be anything wrong with a little honesty between "family" members. Do you believe there is? I don't know if you're married (or have children), but do you lie to your wife (and kids)? I know many people believe honesty only exists in an "ideal" world, but what's wrong with trying to produce that on a football team?

Jonas Jennings has been nothing but a big baby since he got here, and if he's going to cry because some of his teammates shared that sentiment, well "boo hoo" to him. Frank is running around with an ankle that hurts at the very first bit of contact. Alex played with his shoulder. As did Adam Snyder (I believe) last season. Yet Jennings had a bum ankle and couldn't play. Jonas needs to take "personal" time off because he doesn't like something someone else said?

by sfgfan on Dec 12, 2007 9:21 AM PST up reply actions

Jennings

was one of Nolan's first big signings.

All roads lead to Nolan.

by Bob In Pacifica on Dec 12, 2007 3:39 PM PST up reply actions

Petrino out in Hotlanta!

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2007/12/11/sports/s151740S94.DTL

He bailed to go coach the Arkansas Razorbacks. He lasted only 13 games in the NFL.

Lott's Prayer: Almost as many words as the Lord's Prayer, but the Lord wouldn't recognize any of them.

by Nosetackle Supreme on Dec 11, 2007 5:05 PM PST reply actions

I heard that

I was thinking of starting a Diary on the success of college coaches in the pros... in fact, I'll go do that now!

I keep reliving the moment when Steve Young almost fell down. Over and over. / My Blog, For Writers

by howtheyscored on Dec 11, 2007 5:18 PM PST up reply actions

That cock tease

Every week, "We need to get Norwood more touches."

Every week, Norwood did not get more touches. I don't even have him on a fantasy team, this just pissed me off. Norwood is so obviously better than Dunn at this point. Just plain stupid.

Why do pro teams even hire college coaches any more, their success rate has to be garbage. That is purely unfounded speculation by the way, I'll just have to wait for HTS's post on it.

We are not who I thought we were.

by marcello on Dec 11, 2007 5:41 PM PST up reply actions

I said essentially the same thing in my Diary

With essentially the same amount of research put into it. But I used more words. Because that makes me look smrat.

I keep reliving the moment when Steve Young almost fell down. Over and over. / My Blog, For Writers

by howtheyscored on Dec 11, 2007 5:46 PM PST up reply actions

I am so SMART

S-M-R-T.

All together now, in German

We are not who I thought we were.

by marcello on Dec 11, 2007 6:32 PM PST up reply actions

Singletary

I guess that means Mike Nolan will not only need an offensive coordinator, but he may be looking for an assistant head coach as well. Mike Singletary was considered to be a strong candidate for the Falcons HC job last offseason, and I figure he'll be right up there again this offseason.

Would it be an interesting thought to bring in someone like Mariucci to be an assistant head coach and offensive coordinator? Why does it seem like I want Mooch back as an offensive coordinator so badly? Talk about habits on this site.

by sfgfan on Dec 12, 2007 10:02 AM PST up reply actions

Don't Panic! There is hope!

I don't get why everyone is panicing. We can fix our team. I have thought of offseason plans for a while. This should help a lot. First of all, Nolan should be fired from one of his jobs, since he is the head coach and gm. I like him and i think he can still do a fine job As for our team, he need a WR, OG, OT, and a NT and an OLB would also be nice but that is not a prioity. Frank Okam or Kentwon Balmor, two stud NT who should both be around in the late 1st round. We can also get Mario Maningham, Malcom Kelly, Limas Swed, Deshaun Jackson, or Early Doucet in the second round. And bam, tw of our problems are fixed. Then pick up our big free agent fish, Alan Faneca who will serve as a leader and dominate the O-line for atleast another 3 to 5 years. And with one free agent and two draft picks, we pretty much have fixed our issues. But the biggest question is smply execution. Fank Gore is a beast. If Smith can because somewhat of a threat, they won't put so many men in the box and with better blockers, the niners could be in very good shape for 2008 and years to come

by montasmob69 on Dec 11, 2007 8:03 PM PST reply actions

One of his jobs?

The problem is that Scot McCloughan is functioning as the GM regarding personnel moves, so he's already GM in that sense. Maraag does the cap numbers.

Meanwhile, Nolan is terrible with gameday coaching. He has been abominable overseeing the offense. Do you want him to be head coach but only oversee the defense and not be involved in gameday decisions? If you take one job away from Nolan it would be head coach, since that's the job he sucks at the most.

If you've got to keep him in some job, give him an office somewhere in the facility and make sure he's gone in two years.

by Bob In Pacifica on Dec 12, 2007 7:55 AM PST up reply actions

Defense

And also, Baltimore had the 27th offence but they were a ball control offence which kept the d rested

by montasmob69 on Dec 11, 2007 10:17 PM PST reply actions

Lowell Cohn weighs in

Here:

http://www1.pressdemocrat.com/article/20071212/SPORTS/712120347/1055/SPORT10

by Bob In Pacifica on Dec 12, 2007 8:07 AM PST reply actions

Exactly my point...

"But let's say, for the sake of argument, one of them has to go. Which one? Clearly Nolan. The Niners don't have a fortune tied up in him and they can buy him off and keep moving along -- well, limping along. This is one hell of a dysfunctional group.

Smith is harder to dump. The 49ers owe him millions. And more important, no one knows how good he is, or even if he's good. We have not seen enough of him yet. He won the first two games this season and played well in the third game, a loss to the Steelers, and it is way too early even to consider letting him go. He is more valuable to the team than Nolan, although narrow-minded Nolan probably doesn't realize that."

by jaytierney on Dec 12, 2007 11:24 AM PST up reply actions

Tim Kawakami weighs in

Here:

http://www.mercurynews.com/49ersheadlines/ci_7699036

by Bob In Pacifica on Dec 12, 2007 8:18 AM PST reply actions

Ray Ratto weighs in

Here:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/12/12/SPNBTSBL1.DTL

by Bob In Pacifica on Dec 12, 2007 8:24 AM PST reply actions

Oh yay!

Lowell Cohn, Tim Kawakami, and Ray Ratto. I just can't believe the high level of journalistic ethics and general ingenuousness I see out of your various examples.</sarcasm>

I keep reliving the moment when Steve Young almost fell down. Over and over. / My Blog, For Writers

by howtheyscored on Dec 12, 2007 10:17 AM PST up reply actions

Kawakami

I especially hate him. Doesn't know shit. My parents got the Merc and I read the sports section every day when I lived with them. When I was in high school I liked him. Then I grew up and actually learned a few things about the sports I loved (something he should try doing) and I realized what a worthless pile he is.

We are not who I thought we were.

by marcello on Dec 12, 2007 1:28 PM PST up reply actions

You know what the problem is?

It's not quite just the reporters/writers that are doing the writers. It's on the news agencies as well. I know money doesn't grow on trees and the print industry is dying, but news media (especially the Bay Area's media) tries to stretch their writers too thin.

I don't know if the writers consider it to be a good thing or a bad thing (for them) when they take on multiple sports, but I think it is definitely a disservice to the readers of their garbage. Ratto. Kawakami. Gay. Cohn. Peterson. Inman. There are many more. They all try to cover multiple sports, and they just can't plan pull it off.

I know it's very unrealistic to have a writer for each sport, and that it's difficult for smaller papers to do that. However, most of those writers listed work for MediaNews Corporation. Those writers articles are being regurgitated (copy and pasted) in all of the MediaNews newspapers. Why can't they hire a 49ers beat writer to do that across all of their papers. Or a Giants beat writer. Instead, they choose to hire two writers who think they can do it all.

The media has the audacity to believe blogs (and the internets) are the cause of dying print. The problem for them, starts from within, and they won't admit that.

by sfgfan on Dec 12, 2007 2:10 PM PST up reply actions

True believers.

Yeah, all the people covering the Niners are wrong but you guys can tell that Nolan is great and if it wasn't for that wuss Smith not playing with a widdle separated shoulder we'd have won the division.

The media believes the blogs? The media certainly doesn't believe certain of the posters on this blog. Ha!

The team sucks because Nolan is a lousy head coach no matter your bootcamp fantasies of Sargeant Mike. He's got you hopping on one foot. Heh heh.

by Bob In Pacifica on Dec 12, 2007 3:51 PM PST up reply actions

Uh huh.

So a very valid point is made and you go and use sarcastic "humor" to refute it? Or even if you weren't refuting it, an uneducated-sounding remark doesn't make your opinion any more validated in this forum.

Take a frickin' step down from your frickin' billion year old pedestal and take a look at what you wrote. Take a look at ANYTHING anyone else has written on here. Take a look at what I wrote even.

I've never said that the writers are wrong and that is why I don't like them. That'd be both stupid, and naive. If you've EVER read any post of mine regarding Bay Area writers, you would understand is not that they're right or wrong. It is that they just aren't very good writers. They come up with some half-baked idea a couple of hours before their deadline and then they slap a article together and collect their paychecks. It may not actually be what is happening, but a lot of their writing is such.

Not only that, the writers I mentioned are passing judgment over something they don't fully cover. The writers are just too thinly spread. They go out on the limb and make assertions before there is anything they could substantially say to back it up. Not only that, when they get refuted, they do the EXACT same thing you just did: mock.

Maybe it's just the way that generation handles things. Whatever the reasoning, I do know there are many better writers in sports blogs (SBNation or otherwise) that write a heck of a lot better than the people actually being paid to cover sports.

Now your arguments have gone from disagreeing, to disagreeing and responding with the same drivel without countering any counter arguments, to mockery. Yep, I'd say you're just oozing with positive contribution to this blog.

by sfgfan on Dec 12, 2007 4:06 PM PST up reply actions

Matt Maiocco "weighs in"

Matt Maiocco offers his point of view on the whole situation here.

by sfgfan on Dec 12, 2007 10:22 AM PST reply actions

Now Matt Maiocco

He's as good as there is right now, as far as I can tell.

I keep reliving the moment when Steve Young almost fell down. Over and over. / My Blog, For Writers

by howtheyscored on Dec 12, 2007 10:28 AM PST up reply actions

I agree.

Matt Barrows is a VERY distant second. Everyone else? Far far away.

by sfgfan on Dec 12, 2007 10:35 AM PST up reply actions

He nails it here...

"Nolan still says he had no idea Smith was injured. But people close to Smith say that Nolan asked Smith not to talk about his shoulder and forearm problems. (The forearm problems were a result of overzealous work in the weight room, say those close to Smith.) But when Nolan kept saying Smith was fine - and it was obviously to anyone who watched him play that he was not fine - Smith finally snapped."

This is why Nolan is finished. The "code" says that you should never blame your poor play on injuries, which is true, but it's also your coaches' job to do that for you! It was obvious Smith was playing injured and Nolan not acknowledging what everyone else already knew was a major betrayal. I would have acted in exactly the same way as Smith and gone public. What? He's supposed to ruin his career to save Nolan's ass? Forget that.

by jaytierney on Dec 12, 2007 11:30 AM PST up reply actions

Exactly!

Like I said, there is no reason to ridicule your QB when he's injured. Nolan's going to get what's coming to him. He was a lousy head coach this year and then he tried to blame his injured quarterback for it. Don't worry, Nolan worshippers. He'll get a job in college, or as a linebacker coach, where he's qualified for the job.

by Bob In Pacifica on Dec 12, 2007 3:55 PM PST up reply actions

See

I have no problem with you having your own opinion, and I have no problem with you voicing it. What I don't understand is why you try to goad the rest of us into fights. You're obviously being instigatory right now when you don't have to be.

I mean, we both know that I think Nolan is a good coach and you think Nolan is a bad coach, and we both obviously disagree with each others reasons for thinking either way, and we'll butt heads about that and there's really nothing we can do to change it because obviously neither one is being swayed one way or another, but it doesn't have to be this nasty passive aggressive thing it keeps becoming.

I keep reliving the moment when Steve Young almost fell down. Over and over. / My Blog, For Writers

by howtheyscored on Dec 12, 2007 10:21 PM PST up reply actions

Gee whiz

I thought that sfgfan was goading me into fights. I have lately been saying Nolan is a lousy coach, and sfgfan especially has been attacking me for it. When I get pushed I push back. You don't have to respond to any of my posts. If you disagree and want to post, go right ahead. Maybe I'll go back over the thread and find "instigatory" things the sfgfan and others said to me.

Meanwhile, Mark Purdy weighs in:

http://www.mercurynews.com/sportsheadlines/ci_7708991?nclick_check=1

by Bob In Pacifica on Dec 13, 2007 8:04 AM PST up reply actions

Well

I'm sorry if you've ever felt attacked or pushed by me. I try not to get myself into those kinds of interactions and never meant to push you.

I keep reliving the moment when Steve Young almost fell down. Over and over. / My Blog, For Writers

by howtheyscored on Dec 13, 2007 10:02 AM PST up reply actions

Jay, Steve Young agrees

Young said as much on KNBR last night, that Smith has to defend himself when the coach tries to screw him in public. After all, it is HIS career and his career has to be more important to him than Nolan's psychological needs.

by Bob In Pacifica on Dec 13, 2007 8:39 AM PST up reply actions

SURPRISE!

Alex Smith to IR. I can't believe who they're bringing in to back up Hill, though. Apparently McCloughan and company believe that Weinke is a better option than Drew Olson. It'll definitely be interesting to see him take the field again.

by sfgfan on Dec 12, 2007 10:34 AM PST reply actions

Weinke?!!?

oh man.

Bring back the classic Uni's!

by wjackalope on Dec 12, 2007 10:51 AM PST up reply actions

Well...

He, ummm... I guess he had a good year in 2005...?

I keep reliving the moment when Steve Young almost fell down. Over and over. / My Blog, For Writers

by howtheyscored on Dec 12, 2007 10:51 AM PST up reply actions

Everyone but Maiocco is wrong

Right? But then again, Maiocco is beholden to Nolan to be at their practices every day.

Maiocco and the other beat writers covered up the mystery of the "accountability meetings," which turn out to be the reason why Jennings got so angry. How come? Because "accountability meetings" haven't been an important issue with this team?

We still haven't gotten the full story about it, Kawakami mentioned it, but we do know that these meetings have driven the team to a 3-10 record and humiliated a player to leave the team. The mark of a "good coach." Nolan humiliated his injured quarterback for what reason? Does anyone here think that Smith is dogging it? That if he was only tough enough that he would have led this team to the playoffs?

We know that early in his tenure Nolan got rid of a lot of players who weren't his kind of player. Barlow said:

"Nolan just doesn't know what he's doing. He's a first-time head coach with too much power," Barlow told the newspaper. "He has too much power as a first-time head coach. He walks around with a chip on his shoulder, like he's a dictator, like he's Hitler. People are scared of him. If it ain't Nolan's way, it's the highway."

Nolan was right about Barlow. Gore is a better running back.

But maybe Barlow was right about Nolan. Maybe he chose Smith not because he was a leader but because Smith was afraid of Nolan. Maybe there aren't leaders out on the field. When you're so afraid of making mistakes you don't have the courage to take a risk.

by Bob In Pacifica on Dec 13, 2007 8:24 AM PST reply actions

Uh huh.

Again, you're implying we (or I) think Maiocco is always right, which is completely false. There have been quite a few times where I disagreed with his stance, but I like him any way. He is a plain good journalist, someone who doesn't make brash conclusions for the sake of submitting a conclusion.

Who's to say the writers covered up the "accountability meetings"? Up until recently, I'm pretty darn sure no writer even knew what went on during those meetings, because I'm pretty sure they aren't open to the public OR the media. It wasn't until a leaky valve wasn't fixed in time that anyone knew anything about those meetings.

What's funny is that you make it sound like these meetings are what "drove" the team to where they are now. As if it's the only factor. I understand your blaming of the coaching. I totally get that. But it's completely faulty to constantly ignore (or so you make it seem) the performance of the players themselves are also independent of coaching.

Before you argue that, YES, you do leave out the performance of the team when you're doling out judgment on why the team is where it is. You're on your "hate Mike Nolan" bus that ignores all of the underachieving players that have played for this team this year waiting at the bus stop. Yes, you have mentioned how bad they play. But almost 75% of the time, when you mention "why the team is 3-10," you're pointing your finger at Nolan and that just isn't fair. It's a team. It's a team of 48 active players every week and a dozen or so coaching personnel out on that field. They all have played a role in the team's losing.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again. I don't have a problem with you blaming Nolan. I do blame Nolan for some of the team's struggles, too. I just disagree with you practically saying the entire season is almost all (practically 99.999999%) his fault.

by sfgfan on Dec 13, 2007 9:44 AM PST up reply actions

To be fair to Maiocco

It's not so much that I think he's always right as I think Ratto and Kawakami are ethicless hacks. It's gotten to the point with those two where I don't read anything they write and I don't take it seriously when I'm told what they wrote.

Maiocco as the benefit in my book of generally just reporting things. The other guys alwys roll a spin (and usually a nasty spin) on a story, and Matt almost always just reports the story. I appreciate that.

I keep reliving the moment when Steve Young almost fell down. Over and over. / My Blog, For Writers

by howtheyscored on Dec 13, 2007 10:05 AM PST up reply actions

Maiocco

That is exactly what I appreciate as well. Up until this whole Smith-Nolan debacle, Barrows had been pretty good at "just reporting" as well. Those two seem like best friends, and it's quite fitting, really. They're, by my book, the best beat writers in the Bay Area. I don't read much out-of-market beat writing, but I'd almost be willing to say Maiocco is probably one of the best in the country.

With that said, why does he work for the Press Democrat? Any insight into the innerworkings of the newsprint world Howie?

by sfgfan on Dec 13, 2007 10:12 AM PST up reply actions