on a fan forum. It's pouring here and I'm bored...
Everyone is crucifying Shanahan. Play calling, OT coin toss decision, etc. Then it was the OL. CMC fumble and ST punt muff followed. Next was Wilks' shitty defense's turn.
Only a few brave souls dared to say that Purdy was outmatched.
IMO, if they pay this kid a ton next year, they'll regret it.
He didn't lose the game, but he left big plays on the field I believe.
Quote:
In comment 16396884 SomeFan said:
Quote:
decision to ever take the ball in OT in the Super Bowl. If you take defense, you stop them, then you only need a FG. If they score, you give yourself 4 downs and never consider punting. Just seems dumb what he did.
What if you take the ball, score a TD and stop the other team from scoring.
Is it still terrible decision to receive?
If you can stop them 2nd, you can stop them first. It's an advantage to know what you need to win the game. Why would you kick that advantage away?
Because it's an even bigger advantage (by a wide margin) to possess the ball first in sudden death, and knowing what you need to do is only valuable if your opponent leaves any available points for you to surpass his score. If you take the ball first and hang eight on your opponent, they're left playing for a tie scenario followed by you getting the ball back again for sudden death.
Taking the ball is the right decision. That does not mean that it leads to the winning outcome, because you still have to beat your opponent on the field.
IMO he cannot win in the playoffs on another team right now.
Why tho? Spell it out for me?
Purdy can't win with another team because?
Cause he isn't accurate? wrong
Cause he doesn't have pocket presence? wrong
Cause he has bad mechanics? wrong
Cause he can't throw the deep ball? wrong
Again, just tell me what he can't do please. thats all i'm asking. cause maybe i'm missing something
I mean, no QB is really winning a superbowl without a talented roster, lets be honest
look at the last 10-15 superbowl winners. all rosters were very good
say this louder! cause noone ever mentions this!!!
(it would take guts) but if you receive 1st, score and get 2...your winning % has to be in the 90s at that point
cause now your opponent has to get a TD, a 2 point conversion, and then stop you from getting in fg range!
Their offense didn’t have the same energy level in the second half. They looked gassed.
Defense couldn’t stop Mahomes and Co. like they did in first half.
That’s all I have.
Can Purdy develop into a nice QB? Sure....but I see a lot of Kirk Cousins in his game....
Take away some of those weapons and he is Mac Jones.
Posts like this leave me speechless. There’s a segment of posters who literally don’t know what they’re talking about.
Quote:
The Oline - top 5 in the league
With all that said, at any point in the game last night were you thinking "Purdy's going to burn them deep here?"
No, it's not his game nor ability.
Maybe they can win a championship with Purdy (they have excelled in season and make it through the playoffs) but so far, small sample size, the model seems to come up short against elite teams.
I understand that its where we are in society (to hate instead of appreciate)
And I understand that once someone on TV says something, then the masses seem to think the same thing.
But it was not one time in the superbowl where you thought to yourself "Brock Purdy is mid level" stop the cap man
Brock Purdy is good AF. He has all the goods. He almost outplayed the "2nd greatest QB OF ALL TIME"
He made a big play with his legs. 80% of his throws were dimes. He missed a couple plays but thats because Chris Jones caused some havoc.
And keep in mind, Purdy was going against some all pros!
answer this? from a football standpoint, what can Purdy NOT do?
At not point in my post did I "hate rather than appreciate."
My point, giving SF and Purdy full credit for getting to the SB, is that eventually the mid-level QB is going to be force d to make high level plays that they are not capable of.
When did I come to this conclusion about Purdy?
I watched him since his freshman year at Iowa State. He was a good college QB, playing on solid teams at ISU but consistently demonstrated a mediocre to solid arm throughout his career.
You say that he "almost outplayed Mahomes." He never did that in the game, nor should be asked to (Mahomes is the Generational QB and a clear 1st ballot HOF). He operated the offense efficiently, getting to ball out to wide open receivers on short routes that allowed the receivers to run.
It's a great offense, but on a 3rd down with 2 minutes to go KC turned up the pressure and Purdy couldn't deliver.
As you point out, he's only in his 2nd season so perhaps he'll continue to get better. The question is, will the SF surrounding cast always be as good as what he had on the field yesterday?
Oh also, I wouldn't know what the TV announcers have to say about any of this. I never have my TV volume on as they tend to annoy me....and I rarely if ever watch pre-game shows/ESPN BS.
Quote:
Is to assume that highly drafted or touted players will take time to develop while lower drafted players are finished products.
I see this bias all over the place.
There’s no reason to think Purdy v 2026 won’t be a significantly better player than v 2023. He’s a green 2nd player from a minor football program that came close to bringing home a ring in his 27th pro start.
Sure but his limitations won’t improve in all likelihood - arm and athletic ability. So his ceiling is limited as a result. Can he get better at the rest? Sure, but it’s a big uphill battle with those limitations. He’s never going to be able to consistently pick up crucial 3rd downs with his legs, for example.
UConn - that’s an effective response. You would expect the more athletic players to have more growth potential. So is a bias that has some basis in reality but is taken entirely too far. Let me put it that way.
Purdy is reasonably fast, btw. He ran a 4.8 at the combine.
And this is because Purdy may not have been able to win this game in overtime against arguably the best player and emerging dynasty in NFL history, but he was by no means the reason they lost it. In fact, he outplayed Tua, Josh and Lamar against this defense in this year's postseason. If not for the two deadly turnovers, the blocked extra point and Shanahan's head scratching abandonment of the run in the third quarter yesterday, Purdy would be a champion today.
Quote:
In comment 16396911 riceneggs said:
Quote:
In comment 16396884 SomeFan said:
Quote:
decision to ever take the ball in OT in the Super Bowl. If you take defense, you stop them, then you only need a FG. If they score, you give yourself 4 downs and never consider punting. Just seems dumb what he did.
What if you take the ball, score a TD and stop the other team from scoring.
Is it still terrible decision to receive?
If you can stop them 2nd, you can stop them first. It's an advantage to know what you need to win the game. Why would you kick that advantage away?
Because it's an even bigger advantage (by a wide margin) to possess the ball first in sudden death, and knowing what you need to do is only valuable if your opponent leaves any available points for you to surpass his score. If you take the ball first and hang eight on your opponent, they're left playing for a tie scenario followed by you getting the ball back again for sudden death.
Taking the ball is the right decision. That does not mean that it leads to the winning outcome, because you still have to beat your opponent on the field.
It's not sudden death, though. If you stop KC, you have the ball with needing only a FG to win. If they score, the pressure is on them to decide (and execute a 2 point try) without knowing if SF is even going to score. I think Reid in that scenario would just kick the extra point. Then even if KC scores, you know you can decide to tie it or go for 2 for the win, and you're not considering a FG or punt in that scenario.
It's a clear advantage to kick it away and know what you need to win when you get the ball (and you will get the ball regardless of what KC does). The pressure argument doesn't hold water for me. It's OT in the Super Bowl, there's already tremendous pressure no matter decision is made. They put themselves in a 4th down decision to kick a FG, which allowed KC to win the game with 6. Didn't need to do that.
Unless it's 4th and 7 or longer, I'm probably going for it if I'm deep in KC territory with the ball first. But if they had kicked, and KC scores, you know what you need. I don't see receiving the ball first is an advantage at all.
This was discussed in postgame and on SportsCenter at length, every analyst/commentator said that kicking it first would have been the better play.
Quote:
In comment 16396927 cosmicj said:
Quote:
Is to assume that highly drafted or touted players will take time to develop while lower drafted players are finished products.
I see this bias all over the place.
There’s no reason to think Purdy v 2026 won’t be a significantly better player than v 2023. He’s a green 2nd player from a minor football program that came close to bringing home a ring in his 27th pro start.
Sure but his limitations won’t improve in all likelihood - arm and athletic ability. So his ceiling is limited as a result. Can he get better at the rest? Sure, but it’s a big uphill battle with those limitations. He’s never going to be able to consistently pick up crucial 3rd downs with his legs, for example.
UConn - that’s an effective response. You would expect the more athletic players to have more growth potential. So is a bias that has some basis in reality but is taken entirely too far. Let me put it that way.
Purdy is reasonably fast, btw. He ran a 4.8 at the combine.
Purdy made big plays with his legs both last night and in the NFCCG. He's a good decision maker/processor, and accurate. I agree the supporting cast matters big with him, but he's a good QB.
I see this bias all over the place.
There’s no reason to think Purdy v 2026 won’t be a significantly better player than v 2023. He’s a green 2nd player from a minor football program that came close to bringing home a ring in his 27th pro start.
This is a fair point, and one that I am certain I am guilty of from time to time.
Purdy, at times, shows some of the traits that made Montana so difficult to play agains. JM was the perfect rhythm passer for Walsh's offense, but was also a good scrambler and had great feel for the game.
My issue with Purdy is that I have never seen him throw an out pattern with true pro level velocity (in college or NFL), nor have I seen him throw it deeper than 20 yards with any high level NFL velocity. I have seen him be efficient, intelligent, and able to hit short routes that are wide open with regularity.
He's 2 years into his career, so I think we can all agree he has been superb given the expectations of his low draft status. Let's see how he does when his team is not stacked to the gills at all levels.
Their offense didn’t have the same energy level in the second half. They looked gassed.
Defense couldn’t stop Mahomes and Co. like they did in first half.
That’s all I have.
Purdy's a backup now?
Quote:
In comment 16396923 allstarjim said:
Quote:
In comment 16396911 riceneggs said:
Quote:
In comment 16396884 SomeFan said:
Quote:
decision to ever take the ball in OT in the Super Bowl. If you take defense, you stop them, then you only need a FG. If they score, you give yourself 4 downs and never consider punting. Just seems dumb what he did.
What if you take the ball, score a TD and stop the other team from scoring.
Is it still terrible decision to receive?
If you can stop them 2nd, you can stop them first. It's an advantage to know what you need to win the game. Why would you kick that advantage away?
Because it's an even bigger advantage (by a wide margin) to possess the ball first in sudden death, and knowing what you need to do is only valuable if your opponent leaves any available points for you to surpass his score. If you take the ball first and hang eight on your opponent, they're left playing for a tie scenario followed by you getting the ball back again for sudden death.
Taking the ball is the right decision. That does not mean that it leads to the winning outcome, because you still have to beat your opponent on the field.
It's not sudden death, though. If you stop KC, you have the ball with needing only a FG to win. If they score, the pressure is on them to decide (and execute a 2 point try) without knowing if SF is even going to score. I think Reid in that scenario would just kick the extra point. Then even if KC scores, you know you can decide to tie it or go for 2 for the win, and you're not considering a FG or punt in that scenario.
It's a clear advantage to kick it away and know what you need to win when you get the ball (and you will get the ball regardless of what KC does). The pressure argument doesn't hold water for me. It's OT in the Super Bowl, there's already tremendous pressure no matter decision is made. They put themselves in a 4th down decision to kick a FG, which allowed KC to win the game with 6. Didn't need to do that.
Unless it's 4th and 7 or longer, I'm probably going for it if I'm deep in KC territory with the ball first. But if they had kicked, and KC scores, you know what you need. I don't see receiving the ball first is an advantage at all.
This was discussed in postgame and on SportsCenter at length, every analyst/commentator said that kicking it first would have been the better play.
The third possession is absolutely sudden death. That's the bigger advantage, and you only get to be the first to possess the ball in that scenario by being the first to possess the ball in the original scenario.
I haven't run all the implied probabilities, but I do expect that the output would likely suggest that the options are actually pretty close to even, but that taking the ball first is slightly favorable.
And you don't need to quote ESPN's on-air personalities to make your point. I already think your point of view is more intelligent than theirs to begin with, and nothing they say would change my view (whereas I'm open to having my mind changed by someone like yourself whose intelligence I respect).
It's a great offense, but on a 3rd down with 2 minutes to go KC turned up the pressure and Purdy couldn't deliver.
As you point out, he's only in his 2nd season so perhaps he'll continue to get better.
"getting to ball out to wide open receivers on short routes"
you CLEARLY didnt watch the superbowl bro, clearly
and nobody is gonna deliver when you have Chris Jones comin at you unblocked
scroll thru some of these "dink n dunks"
purdy - ( New Window )
Quote:
In comment 16396940 Gatorade Dunk said:
Quote:
In comment 16396923 allstarjim said:
Quote:
In comment 16396911 riceneggs said:
Quote:
In comment 16396884 SomeFan said:
Quote:
decision to ever take the ball in OT in the Super Bowl. If you take defense, you stop them, then you only need a FG. If they score, you give yourself 4 downs and never consider punting. Just seems dumb what he did.
What if you take the ball, score a TD and stop the other team from scoring.
Is it still terrible decision to receive?
If you can stop them 2nd, you can stop them first. It's an advantage to know what you need to win the game. Why would you kick that advantage away?
Because it's an even bigger advantage (by a wide margin) to possess the ball first in sudden death, and knowing what you need to do is only valuable if your opponent leaves any available points for you to surpass his score. If you take the ball first and hang eight on your opponent, they're left playing for a tie scenario followed by you getting the ball back again for sudden death.
Taking the ball is the right decision. That does not mean that it leads to the winning outcome, because you still have to beat your opponent on the field.
It's not sudden death, though. If you stop KC, you have the ball with needing only a FG to win. If they score, the pressure is on them to decide (and execute a 2 point try) without knowing if SF is even going to score. I think Reid in that scenario would just kick the extra point. Then even if KC scores, you know you can decide to tie it or go for 2 for the win, and you're not considering a FG or punt in that scenario.
It's a clear advantage to kick it away and know what you need to win when you get the ball (and you will get the ball regardless of what KC does). The pressure argument doesn't hold water for me. It's OT in the Super Bowl, there's already tremendous pressure no matter decision is made. They put themselves in a 4th down decision to kick a FG, which allowed KC to win the game with 6. Didn't need to do that.
Unless it's 4th and 7 or longer, I'm probably going for it if I'm deep in KC territory with the ball first. But if they had kicked, and KC scores, you know what you need. I don't see receiving the ball first is an advantage at all.
This was discussed in postgame and on SportsCenter at length, every analyst/commentator said that kicking it first would have been the better play.
The third possession is absolutely sudden death. That's the bigger advantage, and you only get to be the first to possess the ball in that scenario by being the first to possess the ball in the original scenario.
I haven't run all the implied probabilities, but I do expect that the output would likely suggest that the options are actually pretty close to even, but that taking the ball first is slightly favorable.
And you don't need to quote ESPN's on-air personalities to make your point. I already think your point of view is more intelligent than theirs to begin with, and nothing they say would change my view (whereas I'm open to having my mind changed by someone like yourself whose intelligence I respect).
Appreciate it. I think you kick it so you don't worry about a third possession. The only way you have a third possession if I'm in Shanny's shoes is if KC scores a TD and converts a 2-point try, which again, I think Reid would bet on his defense to stop SF from scoring a TD or stopping the 2 point try, meaning he would probably kick the extra point. And if I'm wrong about Reid in that scenario, he still has to convert the 2-point try.
So if I play this out, and even if KC scores a TD and kicks the extra point, I'm using all 4-downs to get into the end zone, and I'm going for 2 to win or lose the game right there. There's not going to be a third possession if I'm Shanahan, in almost any scenario. The one caveat would be if I'm in FG range to tie and it's 4th and long. Or if I have a penalty on the 2 point try and it's backed up so that I need to convert a 12 yard 2-point try. But I'll take the odds that I will avoid those situations with my personnel.
KC used their advantage by having the ball second. They knew they needed 6 to win and played accordingly. If SF misses the FG, they can play it conservatively in FG range and take the 3 to win. But as played, with 4th and 4 from the KC 9, I think if you're Shanny with the ball first, and the proposition is kick a 3 and hope to stop Mahomes from a TD, or go for it, and even if you fail, you have the Chiefs backed up inside their own 10, I think he should play for the TD there, not take 3. Taking the 3 there was all because they took the ball first, and gave all the advantage to KC.
To me, all of that is avoided simply by taking the ball second.
I still struggle with what this actually means!!
As if I don't already know what I need to do to win the game before OT starts
(1) i need to receive the ball
(2) i need to score a TD
(3) if i cant get a TD, i need to make a fg
then i kick it off
(1) i will need to make a stop on 4th down before they get in FG range
(2) if they get in FG range, i need to make a stop on 3rd down to force a fg
(3) i need to block this fg
(4) if i can't block it....
they kick off.....
(1) i need to get to their 38-40 yard line and i'm doing everything to get there!
(2) Moody needs to make a superbowl winning fg
THATS THE SCRIPT!
AND TO END THIS DUMB ASS ARGUMENT - LETS CHANGE THE SCENARIO
KC WINS THE TOSS - WHAT DO YOU THINK ANDY REID IS GONNA DO?????? KICK OFF??? LMAO, YEAR OK
They've been to 7 NFC championship games since 2011 and have no rings to show for it. Brutal.
SF did not attack down the field. You can only throw so many swings and slants. In these games, your #3 or #4 wideout is often a difference maker, and yet, Shanahan didn't send Johnson or McCloud down the field. A DC like Spagnuolo will make you pay for that by squeezing the field so your short routes are harder to complete.
The loss wasn't on him, it was on the 49er mistakes. CMC fumble, miffed punt, and a blocked XP. Right there its 10 pts. I also do think Shanahan got away from the run too early, I wonder if they saw something on the 2nd half tape that KC was running and thought they couldn't run?
I think it is fair to criticize not figuring out how to use Kittle. When you have a great receiving back like CMC and a player like Kittle it can put extreme pressure on the D
Could he have thought his D was so gassed that he didn’t want to put them on the field first. You got beat by the best player in the game playing that like that late
Other amazing thing is that is was a very well officiated game
Quote:
It's a clear advantage to kick it away and know what you need to win when you get the ball
I still struggle with what this actually means!!
As if I don't already know what I need to do to win the game before OT starts
(1) i need to receive the ball
(2) i need to score a TD
(3) if i cant get a TD, i need to make a fg
then i kick it off
(1) i will need to make a stop on 4th down before they get in FG range
(2) if they get in FG range, i need to make a stop on 3rd down to force a fg
(3) i need to block this fg
(4) if i can't block it....
they kick off.....
(1) i need to get to their 38-40 yard line and i'm doing everything to get there!
(2) Moody needs to make a superbowl winning fg
THATS THE SCRIPT!
AND TO END THIS DUMB ASS ARGUMENT - LETS CHANGE THE SCENARIO
KC WINS THE TOSS - WHAT DO YOU THINK ANDY REID IS GONNA DO?????? KICK OFF??? LMAO, YEAR OK
Yes, is the answer to your question. In either scenario, you will need a stop of some kind, because both teams are going to get an opportunity to possess the ball. Only by taking the ball 2nd do you know exactly what you need to win the game. That is a strategic advantage, I'm not sure what you don't understand.
Take the Mahomes throw before the Chiefs fumbled it away the next play. That was not the most advantageous coverage to throw into but Mahomes has the arm and talent to make that throw and it was a huge play that should have led to points. I don't see Purdy making those types of plays.
What game were you watching? Chris Jones was in Purdy’s face all night long. He was having to throw much quicker than he wanted because of the pressure. When Spags went all in on blitzing, this put more pressure on the passing game. As you can see based on the one OT possession they had, they moved it to the 3-4 yard line, but thanks to the OL, Purdy had to throw the 3rd down pass much quicker than he liked. Not his fault. And of course, the play before that, KC stuffed the RB to keep them from getting the first down. Not Purdy’s fault.
Purdy was very good ….Mahomes was maybe slightly better or they were even, but he also had a great TE who gets open. Purdy didn’t have Kittle break loose one time. He was a no show. That didn’t help.
Quote:
He operated the offense efficiently, getting to ball out to wide open receivers on short routes that allowed the receivers to run.
It's a great offense, but on a 3rd down with 2 minutes to go KC turned up the pressure and Purdy couldn't deliver.
As you point out, he's only in his 2nd season so perhaps he'll continue to get better.
"getting to ball out to wide open receivers on short routes"
you CLEARLY didnt watch the superbowl bro, clearly
and nobody is gonna deliver when you have Chris Jones comin at you unblocked
scroll thru some of these "dink n dunks" purdy - ( New Window )
I always find it amusing when trying to chat with other members on hear respectfully, while disagreeing, when the other guy dumps a "bro" type comment to be anything other that respectful. No need to be condescending.
Also, it wasn't Chris Jones that came at him unblocked on that play, it was McDuffie, but please continue to share with me what I did or did not see.
Please enjoy all the championships you expect to see Purdy deliver to SF.
No. It was the Super Bowl. Much like Dan Campbell fans saying "well it was the right call you live with the result."
No. There has to be some semblance of control of the game or feel for the moment. Shanahan play-called his way to death in this game. You run the ball with McCaffrey 12 times in a row in that 3rd quarter and the Chiefs probably end up going away quietly.
No. It was the Super Bowl. Much like Dan Campbell fans saying "well it was the right call you live with the result."
No. There has to be some semblance of control of the game or feel for the moment. Shanahan play-called his way to death in this game. You run the ball with McCaffrey 12 times in a row in that 3rd quarter and the Chiefs probably end up going away quietly.
Eh, not so sure about that. Run twelve times in a row? Nah.
Very hard to do that these days, for any team.
The WR - top 5 in the league
TE - Kittle - top 5 in the league
RB - McCaffrey & Mitchell - top 5 in the league
Shanahan is a superb play caller well.
Throw in that SF has a top 3 defense.
With all that said, at any point in the game last night were you thinking "Purdy's going to burn them deep here?"
No, it's not his game nor ability.
Maybe they can win a championship with Purdy (they have excelled in season and make it through the playoffs) but so far, small sample size, the model seems to come up short against elite teams.
The one thing you got wrong here is OL....not top 5 in the league.
If it was, they'd be hoisting the Lombardi yesterday, guaranteed.
More like the mid to upper teens. Run blocking maybe better than pass blocking, but not by a ton....especially considering it's a zone blocking scheme.
The Eagles, Lions....those teams have a top 5 OL.
Purdy's a top 5 QB before that's a top 5 OL.
Easily.
Quote:
In comment 16396966 allstarjim said:
Quote:
It's a clear advantage to kick it away and know what you need to win when you get the ball
I still struggle with what this actually means!!
As if I don't already know what I need to do to win the game before OT starts
(1) i need to receive the ball
(2) i need to score a TD
(3) if i cant get a TD, i need to make a fg
then i kick it off
(1) i will need to make a stop on 4th down before they get in FG range
(2) if they get in FG range, i need to make a stop on 3rd down to force a fg
(3) i need to block this fg
(4) if i can't block it....
they kick off.....
(1) i need to get to their 38-40 yard line and i'm doing everything to get there!
(2) Moody needs to make a superbowl winning fg
THATS THE SCRIPT!
AND TO END THIS DUMB ASS ARGUMENT - LETS CHANGE THE SCENARIO
KC WINS THE TOSS - WHAT DO YOU THINK ANDY REID IS GONNA DO?????? KICK OFF??? LMAO, YEAR OK
Yes, is the answer to your question. In either scenario, you will need a stop of some kind, because both teams are going to get an opportunity to possess the ball. Only by taking the ball 2nd do you know exactly what you need to win the game. That is a strategic advantage, I'm not sure what you don't understand.
No. It was the Super Bowl. Much like Dan Campbell fans saying "well it was the right call you live with the result."
No. There has to be some semblance of control of the game or feel for the moment. Shanahan play-called his way to death in this game. You run the ball with McCaffrey 12 times in a row in that 3rd quarter and the Chiefs probably end up going away quietly.
Have you watched the Chiefs?
For starters their run defense is very good, running it 12 times in a row wouldn’t work out.
Every team that sacrifices trying to score for keeping the Chiefs off the field more often than not ends up losing.
Quote:
IMO he cannot win in the playoffs on another team right now.
Why tho? Spell it out for me?
Purdy can't win with another team because?
Cause he isn't accurate? wrong
Cause he doesn't have pocket presence? wrong
Cause he has bad mechanics? wrong
Cause he can't throw the deep ball? wrong
Again, just tell me what he can't do please. thats all i'm asking. cause maybe i'm missing something
I mean, no QB is really winning a superbowl without a talented roster, lets be honest
look at the last 10-15 superbowl winners. all rosters were very good
I saw him him throw it deep last night. Too deep actually. Over the open receiver.
I'm not saying he won't be a good QB. I just don';t see him winning it all without an incredibly talented team around him.
Actually, trade QBs and Mahomes wins easily last night IMO. Purdy, nope.
No. It was the Super Bowl. Much like Dan Campbell fans saying "well it was the right call you live with the result."
No. There has to be some semblance of control of the game or feel for the moment. Shanahan play-called his way to death in this game. You run the ball with McCaffrey 12 times in a row in that 3rd quarter and the Chiefs probably end up going away quietly.
You are just using cliches now. You, nor anyone else knows when a coach is going off feel or by analytics. And then you assume the Chiefs can’t win if they run CMC? You have an elite crystal ball.
On their final drive of the 4th, should they have run on 2&5? Probably. But the Chiefs D was living in the backfield.
No. There has to be some semblance of control of the game or feel for the moment. Shanahan play-called his way to death in this game. You run the ball with McCaffrey 12 times in a row in that 3rd quarter and the Chiefs probably end up going away quietly.
I am a big Shanahan fan and would trade a high draft pick for him if he was available and we had an opening for HC.
But I think you are onto something with the bold. After Shanahan gets off script (let's call the first 25 of a game), he does seem to struggle with the feel for a game when it gets tight. By contrast, peers like Reid, McVay, Payton seem to find the right mix of plays in those moments and keep the defenses off balance.
Now, to be fair, maybe that's because he hasn't had that elite QB-type who are more reliable in big moments. Yet, when I heard Mahomes speak after the game, he was effusive how well Reid called those big drives when it was clutch time.
Purdy isn’t the reason they lost, but he didn’t make the plays to win either.
Why take the ball 1st in OT??? You give the opponent automatic 4 downs every time if you score. That may have cost them the win right there
No. It was the Super Bowl. Much like Dan Campbell fans saying "well it was the right call you live with the result."
No. There has to be some semblance of control of the game or feel for the moment. Shanahan play-called his way to death in this game. You run the ball with McCaffrey 12 times in a row in that 3rd quarter and the Chiefs probably end up going away quietly.
This is overly emotional jibber-jabber. You have moved on to he blew the game with the OT decision to he blew the game by not running 12 times in a row until the Chiefs go away quietly? Neither of those things was going to happen.
Sometimes the losing team didn’t lose because of a big bad man who ruined it for them. Sometimes they get beat by a better team. Stop looking for fall guys where none exist.
Purdy isn’t the reason they lost, but he didn’t make the plays to win either.
Why take the ball 1st in OT??? You give the opponent automatic 4 downs every time if you score. That may have cost them the win right there
Pretty solid post.
I was wondering if in the back of Shanahan's mind, he may have been concerned his D was gassed having just been on the field for that stressful last drive of regulation by KC. So, perhaps that went into his calculation...?
The first team gets four downs also. All of the aggressiveness that people seem to think only comes by virtue of circumstance is available to both teams.
Taking the ball first is the correct move. Kicking a field goal on the opening possession, particularly against Mahomes (and Butker), is not. You have to be prepared to trade TDs. That doesn't change by kicking off, because even if you hold KC to a FG (after kicking), you're going to give the ball back to them in sudden death if you settle for a FG yourself. The only way your FG wins is with a stop/turnover (and that also applies regardless of whether you take the ball first or second).
So you need to score a TD on your only guaranteed overtime possession either way, and only one of the two choices gives you the first crack at possessing the ball if/when the format shifts to sudden death. It's high stakes, but that's the nature of overtime - there is not a scenario that isn't high leverage there.
Also, agree that blitz at the end by Spags was the smart move. 49ers had many chances to put them away but came up short. Who cares?
Bummer!
In overtime, both the offense and defense failed. They allowed KC to have their longest drive of the game to score the winning TD.
Chiefs just made more plays when they needed to.
Quote:
In comment 16396879 Tom in NY said:
Quote:
The Oline - top 5 in the league
With all that said, at any point in the game last night were you thinking "Purdy's going to burn them deep here?"
No, it's not his game nor ability.
Maybe they can win a championship with Purdy (they have excelled in season and make it through the playoffs) but so far, small sample size, the model seems to come up short against elite teams.
I understand that its where we are in society (to hate instead of appreciate)
And I understand that once someone on TV says something, then the masses seem to think the same thing.
But it was not one time in the superbowl where you thought to yourself "Brock Purdy is mid level" stop the cap man
Brock Purdy is good AF. He has all the goods. He almost outplayed the "2nd greatest QB OF ALL TIME"
He made a big play with his legs. 80% of his throws were dimes. He missed a couple plays but thats because Chris Jones caused some havoc.
And keep in mind, Purdy was going against some all pros!
answer this? from a football standpoint, what can Purdy NOT do?
IMO he cannot win in the playoffs on another team right now.
He definitely can. How far one goes depends on the team. If you really think Garoppolo and Purdy cannot win playoff games without Shanahan, then one has to acknowledge that the guy is really damn good. Bill Belichick 1-1 record postseason without Brady (Browns), no postseason appearances in New England without Brady. Nobody else can do more with "less" as many people seem to view these guys. McVay made 2 Super Bowls with two #1 overall QBs for comparison.
Mahomes for all his greatness kinda had a 2013 Russell Wilson type SB run this year. Which is fine, but let's call it like it is.
Quote:
In comment 16396930 SirLoinOfBeef said:
Quote:
IMO he cannot win in the playoffs on another team right now.
Why tho? Spell it out for me?
Purdy can't win with another team because?
Cause he isn't accurate? wrong
Cause he doesn't have pocket presence? wrong
Cause he has bad mechanics? wrong
Cause he can't throw the deep ball? wrong
Again, just tell me what he can't do please. thats all i'm asking. cause maybe i'm missing something
I mean, no QB is really winning a superbowl without a talented roster, lets be honest
look at the last 10-15 superbowl winners. all rosters were very good
I saw him him throw it deep last night. Too deep actually. Over the open receiver.
I'm not saying he won't be a good QB. I just don';t see him winning it all without an incredibly talented team around him.
Actually, trade QBs and Mahomes wins easily last night IMO. Purdy, nope.
Mahomes is unique. Very likely the only QB that could've won the game for the Chiefs the other night was him.
Purdy is already a very good QB, but unfortunately the margins for winning against KC in a big game are very tight. Not everyone can be amazing, but good luck finding someone out and out superior, very easily.
Spagnuolo and the KC coaching staff were very complimentary of him after the game, impressed at how he was able to read their zone coverages. One guy saw "some Brees in him".
Comparing QBs aren't very linear. If you came up with 15 traits for a QB and you ranked all 32 starters, you'd have results all over the place.
Purdy likely lacks the velocity to attack elite defenses in certain areas like skinny posts and arrow routes, but has great anticipation and ability to go through progressions when he has time and can improvise pretty well.
And again if you think that's all nonsense, then Kyle is the best HC of all time, taking backup QBs to overtime against the greatest ever.
He has 6 all pros on offense alone. Outside Aiyuk - there were all all-pros before Purdy got there. It makes a masssive difference when a QB has all that talent surrounding him.
I mean look at the drop off from Hurts from last year to this year. When the eagles got banged up on the OL and WR - hurts went from a MVP candidate last year to a very average one at the end of this year.
Talent matters. Whether it’s the QB or surrounding cast.
He has 6 all pros on offense alone. Outside Aiyuk - there were all all-pros before Purdy got there. It makes a masssive difference when a QB has all that talent surrounding him.
I mean look at the drop off from Hurts from last year to this year. When the eagles got banged up on the OL and WR - hurts went from a MVP candidate last year to a very average one at the end of this year.
Talent matters. Whether it’s the QB or surrounding cast.
Eagles just beat up on bad teams last year.
I think their luck ran out and got way too many favorable calls this year. I don't think they were that good and it all caught up to them. Was nice watching them fall back down to earth against the 49ers and then after that the Cardinals and Giants and the Buccaneers just destroying them completely. I wasn't all too impressed by the 2022 Philadelphia Eagles.
He has 6 all pros on offense alone. Outside Aiyuk - there were all all-pros before Purdy got there. It makes a masssive difference when a QB has all that talent surrounding him.
I mean look at the drop off from Hurts from last year to this year. When the eagles got banged up on the OL and WR - hurts went from a MVP candidate last year to a very average one at the end of this year.
Talent matters. Whether it’s the QB or surrounding cast.
If Purdy was on the Giants this year, you're probably in the playoffs.
And you would have money to fund other positions.
We don’t have one guy on offense that could start at their respective position in the 49ers.
What a total insult to the rest of the offense.