ImageImageImageImageImage

The Trey Lance thread

Moderators: MHSL82, CalamityX12

Pattersonca65
Starter
Posts: 2,447
And1: 117
Joined: Aug 29, 2014
     

Re: The Trey Lance thread 

Post#61 » by Pattersonca65 » Mon May 3, 2021 10:24 pm

CrimsonCrew wrote:
Bingo_AlphaMan wrote:
wco81 wrote:Well if Lance doesn't work out it would be some Shanahan legacy.

Mike traded the farm for RG3 and that didn't work out.

In fact, maybe Kyle learned lessons from that and isn't going to expose Trey as much to injury risk.


They didn’t want RG3 from what has been reported. The owner forced them to do so, in return they then told the owner something like, “okay. We’ll draft Griffin as you requested but only if you allow us to pick our guy as well (Kirk Cousins)”. The owner agreed! Thus, they never liked RG3 at all for their system.

Same thing happened this year. He wanted Mac Jones. Lynch and the scouting department pleaded with Mike & Kyle saying that they would rather go with Lance. Lynch, vey likeable GM, said that he wouldn’t overrule Kyle if he wants Mac Jones, being that he’s the coach and calls the plays. On Wednesday, Kyle told John that he’s going to go with Lance. John Lynch was shocked and extremely excited to hear of the news. They kept it between themselves and not share it with no one else except for Jed York.

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/05/20/mike-shanahan-i-didnt-think-trading-up-for-rg3-was-very-smart/


I don't buy that for a second. The way I'm reading their story - though I could be wrong - is that they both liked Lance when they traded up, but also knew that they would be content with Jones. They then didn't tip their hands to one another while doing the due diligence/vetting process until the week before the draft. Although I had significant concerns that the team was going to draft Jones, and Kyle's performance in the press conference was Oscar-worthy, it doesn't look like they were ever all that gung-ho on Jones. It certainly doesn't seem like trading up for Jones at three would have made any sense whatsoever.

At this point, the pundits and reporters have all been proven wrong repeatedly. And although I'm always skeptical of anything an NFL front office says to explain their decisions, at this point that source is more reliable than the reporters.


At the end of the day, Shanahan was going to get the QB he wanted and was not going to defer to anyone in the FO. I can't see Shanahan being swayed by Lynch. Maybe with other positions, but not QB
Pattersonca65
Starter
Posts: 2,447
And1: 117
Joined: Aug 29, 2014
     

Re: The Trey Lance thread 

Post#62 » by Pattersonca65 » Mon May 3, 2021 10:29 pm

Jikkle wrote:
Read on Twitter


I've never been on board with the narrative that Lance can't start week 1 and especially the one where he's some 2 to 3 year project.

Unless he's still in the process of retooling and refining his mechanics there really isn't a reason he couldn't start.

You could still go with Jimmy because with him a lot more of the playbook is going to be open and he has experience working with all of the receivers so I could buy an argument in the near term he's a better option to win in 2021 especially if COVID restrictions limit off season work.

But the stuff Lance did in college is close to what he's going to do with Shanahan so it's not like he's one of these guys that has to learn how to take a snap from center or how to form a huddle and make long play calls.

The biggest knock with Lance was some accuracy which is why if he's still retooling his mechanics I'd rather him sit so he doesn't pick up bad habits and experience which is only cured if he takes reps and plays.

I also don't mind if he starts because the team is setup almost perfectly for a rookie QB. Strong running game which was further strengthen in the draft, really good defense, and great weapons to throw the ball too.

You'd just give him enough of the playbook that he can handle, expand it as the season goes on, give him around 15 to 20 attempts a game, maybe around 5 designed runs, and run the ball with the 10 running backs we have on roster now.

There is definitely benefit and a case to be made for him to sit a season but the sooner he's able to get in there the sooner he can gain experience and grow and get his growing pains out of the way.


I just don't see starting him day one. Not on a team that is competing for a Super Bowl. Not a time for learning on the job. For every QB that was successful as a rookie you can list several that struggled. The college game just isn't the same and Lance was considered the biggest project of the group.
CrimsonCrew
Head Coach
Posts: 7,497
And1: 515
Joined: Aug 21, 2014
 

Re: The Trey Lance thread 

Post#63 » by CrimsonCrew » Mon May 3, 2021 10:51 pm

Bingo_AlphaMan wrote:
CrimsonCrew wrote:
Bingo_AlphaMan wrote:
They didn’t want RG3 from what has been reported. The owner forced them to do so, in return they then told the owner something like, “okay. We’ll draft Griffin as you requested but only if you allow us to pick our guy as well (Kirk Cousins)”. The owner agreed! Thus, they never liked RG3 at all for their system.

Same thing happened this year. He wanted Mac Jones. Lynch and the scouting department pleaded with Mike & Kyle saying that they would rather go with Lance. Lynch, vey likeable GM, said that he wouldn’t overrule Kyle if he wants Mac Jones, being that he’s the coach and calls the plays. On Wednesday, Kyle told John that he’s going to go with Lance. John Lynch was shocked and extremely excited to hear of the news. They kept it between themselves and not share it with no one else except for Jed York.

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/05/20/mike-shanahan-i-didnt-think-trading-up-for-rg3-was-very-smart/


I don't buy that for a second. The way I'm reading their story - though I could be wrong - is that they both liked Lance when they traded up, but also knew that they would be content with Jones. They then didn't tip their hands to one another while doing the due diligence/vetting process until the week before the draft. Although I had significant concerns that the team was going to draft Jones, and Kyle's performance in the press conference was Oscar-worthy, it doesn't look like they were ever all that gung-ho on Jones. It certainly doesn't seem like trading up for Jones at three would have made any sense whatsoever.

At this point, the pundits and reporters have all been proven wrong repeatedly. And although I'm always skeptical of anything an NFL front office says to explain their decisions, at this point that source is more reliable than the reporters.


Crims, you and I have commented on this in the past and I’m surprised to hear that coming from you (claiming otherwise). We both in the past has had issues with the media accurately predicting/anticipating our picks weeks before the draft. Here are some notable predictions that came true:

Armstead
Buckner
McGlinchey
Deebo
Solomon
Bosa
Kinlaw

So when someone like Adam Schefter comes out and say that the 9ers moved up for Mac Jones, he wasn’t making **** up just for clout. He’s not that type of analysis.

We agree to disagree on this one, but I stand by what I said earlier being that Kyle wanted Jones. at the eleventh hou he got swayed by John Lynch; Adam Peters; and the rest of the senior level folks in their scouting department


There have been some accurate projections in the past, but I don't think most of that should be chalked up to leaks. Buckner and Armstead were earlier regimes, so that doesn't mean much. Bosa was effectively a given. Thomas was one of a few possibilities, fit an area of need (theoretically at DE, though that tanked), and had the Lynch connection, so that seemed reasonable. It's obviously a lot easier to project higher in the draft than further down. Deebo they gushed about at the Senior Bowl, and he's the sort of player they like, so it's not like anyone had a scoop, it was just self-evident. I called that one, and I don't have any sources.

I don't think many people did call McGlinchey. He was one of several names that had come up, but it's not like everyone was making that call, and they worked to keep it quiet. Kinlaw was a popular choice because they lost Buckner and people knew by then how much this FO loves to build on the DL.

More significantly here, all of these media personalities have a reason to explain away why they were wrong. It's a very convenient story for them to say that Jones was the pick, and then Shanahan changed his mind at the last minute. I don't buy that. Shanahan isn't that sort of guy. He'll take the heat on a pick that others don't like. There were a lot of signs pointing to Lance that the pundits overlooked or downplayed - and that I did, too, frankly. They directed him to work with John Beck. They orchestrated his workout. They didn't do that with Mac Jones. Lance played a lot under center, he used a lot of play action and routinely turned his back to the defense. That's something Shanahan mentioned repeatedly as being important when discussing taking Beathard. And Lance has the physical tools to perhaps be worth the trade. I just can't believe that Kyle Shanahan, coach's son, grew up in the football community, darling of the coaching ranks, offensive genius, endlessly defiant when the simpletons call him out, suddenly got humble with the biggest decision of his career to date and decided to defer to Lynch and the fan base. It's implausible IMO.
CrimsonCrew
Head Coach
Posts: 7,497
And1: 515
Joined: Aug 21, 2014
 

Re: The Trey Lance thread 

Post#64 » by CrimsonCrew » Mon May 3, 2021 10:57 pm

And I'll add that I agree that Schefter and some others who came out with this are reliable guys usually, and must have gotten word somewhere. But all signs are that the FO really tried to keep a lid on this, and it's easy to get caught up in something like Chris Simms saying he knows the sort of player Kyle likes and thinks it's Mac. If Jones was their safety net trading up, maybe that was basically the word that leaked and people ran with it. I don't know, but I absolutely do not believe that Kyle Shanahan conceded on this one.
wco81
RealGM
Posts: 13,134
And1: 5,027
Joined: Jul 04, 2013
     

Re: The Trey Lance thread 

Post#65 » by wco81 » Mon May 3, 2021 11:16 pm

Now Lombardi claims Jones was the first choice but Kyle switched when there was so much flak about trading up for Jones or using such a high pick on a guy who is physically unimpressive.

He also recommended that Jones hit the weight room right away.
User avatar
Cactus Jack
Forum Mod - Supersonics
Forum Mod - Supersonics
Posts: 20,808
And1: 10,748
Joined: Feb 25, 2015
Location: Release the Kraken!
     

Re: The Trey Lance thread 

Post#66 » by Cactus Jack » Mon May 3, 2021 11:20 pm

Dominater wrote:Damn Cactus jack takin over
CrimsonCrew
Head Coach
Posts: 7,497
And1: 515
Joined: Aug 21, 2014
 

Re: The Trey Lance thread 

Post#67 » by CrimsonCrew » Mon May 3, 2021 11:29 pm

wco81 wrote:Now Lombardi claims Jones was the first choice but Kyle switched when there was so much flak about trading up for Jones or using such a high pick on a guy who is physically unimpressive.

He also recommended that Jones hit the weight room right away.


Yeah, that's the story I just don't buy. "This just in: I wasn't completely wrong in my reporting over the last month. It's the guy who made the choice who changed his mind. I was right all along."

This is a unique situation, because it wasn't just guys reporting what they were hearing. This was a lot more definitive than what we usually get. And they were wrong. It's embarrassing. But what's more likely? That Kyle Shanahan - with like four years remaining on his deal - decided to be overruled by his GM and the fans, or that the media jumped to an early conclusions and got it wrong?
Jikkle
Starter
Posts: 2,243
And1: 155
Joined: Aug 24, 2014
         

Re: The Trey Lance thread 

Post#68 » by Jikkle » Tue May 4, 2021 2:07 am

wco81 wrote:Now Lombardi claims Jones was the first choice but Kyle switched when there was so much flak about trading up for Jones or using such a high pick on a guy who is physically unimpressive.

He also recommended that Jones hit the weight room right away.


Hard for me to buy because it looked like Kyle was authentic when he was talking about the Lance during his press after the 1st round.

I don't think he would be as effusive with his praise of Lance if Jones was the guy he wanted but couldn't take because of the heat he'd take for picking him.
Jikkle
Starter
Posts: 2,243
And1: 155
Joined: Aug 24, 2014
         

Re: The Trey Lance thread 

Post#69 » by Jikkle » Tue May 4, 2021 2:13 am

Pattersonca65 wrote:
Jikkle wrote:
Read on Twitter


I've never been on board with the narrative that Lance can't start week 1 and especially the one where he's some 2 to 3 year project.

Unless he's still in the process of retooling and refining his mechanics there really isn't a reason he couldn't start.

You could still go with Jimmy because with him a lot more of the playbook is going to be open and he has experience working with all of the receivers so I could buy an argument in the near term he's a better option to win in 2021 especially if COVID restrictions limit off season work.

But the stuff Lance did in college is close to what he's going to do with Shanahan so it's not like he's one of these guys that has to learn how to take a snap from center or how to form a huddle and make long play calls.

The biggest knock with Lance was some accuracy which is why if he's still retooling his mechanics I'd rather him sit so he doesn't pick up bad habits and experience which is only cured if he takes reps and plays.

I also don't mind if he starts because the team is setup almost perfectly for a rookie QB. Strong running game which was further strengthen in the draft, really good defense, and great weapons to throw the ball too.

You'd just give him enough of the playbook that he can handle, expand it as the season goes on, give him around 15 to 20 attempts a game, maybe around 5 designed runs, and run the ball with the 10 running backs we have on roster now.

There is definitely benefit and a case to be made for him to sit a season but the sooner he's able to get in there the sooner he can gain experience and grow and get his growing pains out of the way.


I just don't see starting him day one. Not on a team that is competing for a Super Bowl. Not a time for learning on the job. For every QB that was successful as a rookie you can list several that struggled. The college game just isn't the same and Lance was considered the biggest project of the group.


I wouldn't start him for the sake of starting him but if he's better than Jimmy I wouldn't hesitate to have him start week 1 and we'll just have to see how training camp roles around.

He's mainly considered a project for the limited experience he has but what he ran in college is closer to what he'll run in the pros and compared to the other guys so from a mental aspect I'd consider him advanced for a rookie. A guy like Mahomes who came from an air raid style offense was more of a project because he basically had to learn how to do basic functions of being an NFL QB whereas Lance has the basics down pat.

I'm not saying sitting him a season wouldn't do him some good but he's not as big of a project as some would have you to believe.
Bingo_AlphaMan
General Manager
Posts: 8,907
And1: 151
Joined: Aug 24, 2014
     

Re: The Trey Lance thread 

Post#70 » by Bingo_AlphaMan » Tue May 4, 2021 3:39 am

wco81 wrote:Now Lombardi claims Jones was the first choice but Kyle switched when there was so much flak about trading up for Jones or using such a high pick on a guy who is physically unimpressive.

He also recommended that Jones hit the weight room right away.


I’m telling you. I really believe this. Kyle was the person who traded up for C.J. freaking Beathard in the 3rd round. CJ was projected to go in the 6th or 7th round that year. All b/c CJ was his type similar to Kirk Cousins, Matt Ryan, etc. Mac Jones met that criteria. I’m telling y’all - Mac Jones was his choice.
Bingo_AlphaMan
General Manager
Posts: 8,907
And1: 151
Joined: Aug 24, 2014
     

Re: The Trey Lance thread 

Post#71 » by Bingo_AlphaMan » Tue May 4, 2021 4:14 am

CrimsonCrew wrote:
wco81 wrote:Now Lombardi claims Jones was the first choice but Kyle switched when there was so much flak about trading up for Jones or using such a high pick on a guy who is physically unimpressive.

He also recommended that Jones hit the weight room right away.


Yeah, that's the story I just don't buy. "This just in: I wasn't completely wrong in my reporting over the last month. It's the guy who made the choice who changed his mind. I was right all along."

This is a unique situation, because it wasn't just guys reporting what they were hearing. This was a lot more definitive than what we usually get. And they were wrong. It's embarrassing. But what's more likely? That Kyle Shanahan - with like four years remaining on his deal - decided to be overruled by his GM and the fans, or that the media jumped to an early conclusions and got it wrong?


Jason Aponte and Grant Cohn raise the same exact point! I’m not totally disagreeing with you Crims.
CrimsonCrew
Head Coach
Posts: 7,497
And1: 515
Joined: Aug 21, 2014
 

Re: The Trey Lance thread 

Post#72 » by CrimsonCrew » Tue May 4, 2021 4:19 am

Bingo_AlphaMan wrote:
wco81 wrote:Now Lombardi claims Jones was the first choice but Kyle switched when there was so much flak about trading up for Jones or using such a high pick on a guy who is physically unimpressive.

He also recommended that Jones hit the weight room right away.


I’m telling you. I really believe this. Kyle was the person who traded up for C.J. freaking Beathard in the 3rd round. CJ was projected to go in the 6th or 7th round that year. All b/c CJ was his type similar to Kirk Cousins, Matt Ryan, etc. Mac Jones met that criteria. I’m telling y’all - Mac Jones was his choice.


I would believe that Mac Jones was his choice, in principle. I did, for some time. I just don't believe that, if Mac Jones was his choice, he would have taken someone else. Lynch said it was ultimately Kyle's call, and Kyle took the guy Kyle wanted. I'm quite confident of that. And Beathard aside, Kyle has repeatedly said that he would like an athletic QB.
Bingo_AlphaMan
General Manager
Posts: 8,907
And1: 151
Joined: Aug 24, 2014
     

Re: The Trey Lance thread 

Post#73 » by Bingo_AlphaMan » Tue May 4, 2021 11:20 am

This might’ve already been posted, so I apologize if this is a duplicate:

CrimsonCrew
Head Coach
Posts: 7,497
And1: 515
Joined: Aug 21, 2014
 

Re: The Trey Lance thread 

Post#74 » by CrimsonCrew » Tue May 4, 2021 4:32 pm

Bingo_AlphaMan wrote:This might’ve already been posted, so I apologize if this is a duplicate:



I hadn't seen it. Hard to argue that the ability to make tight window throws will likely make or break Lance's career. I think he can be solid, even perhaps quite good, if he can't make those throws. But I don't think he can be elite throwing the ball the way he did at NDSU.
Pattersonca65
Starter
Posts: 2,447
And1: 117
Joined: Aug 29, 2014
     

Re: The Trey Lance thread 

Post#75 » by Pattersonca65 » Tue May 4, 2021 4:45 pm

CrimsonCrew wrote:
wco81 wrote:Now Lombardi claims Jones was the first choice but Kyle switched when there was so much flak about trading up for Jones or using such a high pick on a guy who is physically unimpressive.

He also recommended that Jones hit the weight room right away.


Yeah, that's the story I just don't buy. "This just in: I wasn't completely wrong in my reporting over the last month. It's the guy who made the choice who changed his mind. I was right all along."

This is a unique situation, because it wasn't just guys reporting what they were hearing. This was a lot more definitive than what we usually get. And they were wrong. It's embarrassing. But what's more likely? That Kyle Shanahan - with like four years remaining on his deal - decided to be overruled by his GM and the fans, or that the media jumped to an early conclusions and got it wrong?


I would go farther. Lombardi's story is idiotic. That KS or any other coach/GM would change their first round selection because of outside pressure. The media got it 100% wrong and now they are making excuses for their screw up.
Swift21
General Manager
Posts: 8,260
And1: 279
Joined: Jan 05, 2004

Re: The Trey Lance thread 

Post#76 » by Swift21 » Tue May 4, 2021 8:29 pm

Read on Twitter


I know this throw gave Kyle a woody.
CrimsonCrew
Head Coach
Posts: 7,497
And1: 515
Joined: Aug 21, 2014
 

Re: The Trey Lance thread 

Post#77 » by CrimsonCrew » Tue May 4, 2021 8:53 pm

Swift21 wrote:
Read on Twitter


I know this throw gave Kyle a woody.


I've been re-watching Lance's film and was going to make a post about it afterward, but this is as good a time as any to chime in a little bit. Two things have struck me that didn't resonate as much on my first go-through, one bad and one good.

First, the bad, as it relates to this post. Lance (at least through 8 games of the 2019 season) doesn't throw a very good deep ball. It's not usually the downright absurd inaccuracy that he sometimes shows, though there are examples of that where the ball is just way out of bounds. It's just a lack of feel for it, especially as compared to a Justin Fields who is really good at it. Lance will occasionally hit them just right, like the pass shown here. But much more often when he's throwing into coverage downfield, the ball is just off. I realize this is one of the hardest things for a QB to do, but Lance was frequently a few yards long or a few yards deep. He rarely completed a deep ball into coverage, and it wasn't typically because of great defensive plays or receivers dropping balls, like this one. He just wasn't hitting the throws the way he needs to.

Having said that, one thing that he does a very nice job of is moving in the pocket and keeping his eyes downfield. When he feels pressure, he does a great job of stepping up in the pocket and continuing his progressions. The same thing goes when he flees the pocket. He had a lot of wide open completions in 2019, particularly in the end zone, but a fair bit of that is him keeping plays alive and finding the open man. This is an area where Fields struggled, though his movement in the pocket seemed to improve later in the 2020 season.

For Lance, it's all going to be about accuracy. It may not be the only thing that can hold him back, but it's definitely going to be at the top of the list. He simply has to make the throws when they're there. Unlike Fields (or Mahomes, for that matter), I don't have huge faith in Lance to engineer a late double-digit comeback with big plays downfield. He's capable of it, but as of 2019, he didn't have nearly the consistency to rely on it.
CrimsonCrew
Head Coach
Posts: 7,497
And1: 515
Joined: Aug 21, 2014
 

Re: The Trey Lance thread 

Post#78 » by CrimsonCrew » Wed May 5, 2021 6:52 pm

CrimsonCrew wrote:
Bingo_AlphaMan wrote:
CrimsonCrew wrote:
I don't buy that for a second. The way I'm reading their story - though I could be wrong - is that they both liked Lance when they traded up, but also knew that they would be content with Jones. They then didn't tip their hands to one another while doing the due diligence/vetting process until the week before the draft. Although I had significant concerns that the team was going to draft Jones, and Kyle's performance in the press conference was Oscar-worthy, it doesn't look like they were ever all that gung-ho on Jones. It certainly doesn't seem like trading up for Jones at three would have made any sense whatsoever.

At this point, the pundits and reporters have all been proven wrong repeatedly. And although I'm always skeptical of anything an NFL front office says to explain their decisions, at this point that source is more reliable than the reporters.


Crims, you and I have commented on this in the past and I’m surprised to hear that coming from you (claiming otherwise). We both in the past has had issues with the media accurately predicting/anticipating our picks weeks before the draft. Here are some notable predictions that came true:

Armstead
Buckner
McGlinchey
Deebo
Solomon
Bosa
Kinlaw

So when someone like Adam Schefter comes out and say that the 9ers moved up for Mac Jones, he wasn’t making **** up just for clout. He’s not that type of analysis.

We agree to disagree on this one, but I stand by what I said earlier being that Kyle wanted Jones. at the eleventh hou he got swayed by John Lynch; Adam Peters; and the rest of the senior level folks in their scouting department


There have been some accurate projections in the past, but I don't think most of that should be chalked up to leaks. Buckner and Armstead were earlier regimes, so that doesn't mean much. Bosa was effectively a given. Thomas was one of a few possibilities, fit an area of need (theoretically at DE, though that tanked), and had the Lynch connection, so that seemed reasonable. It's obviously a lot easier to project higher in the draft than further down. Deebo they gushed about at the Senior Bowl, and he's the sort of player they like, so it's not like anyone had a scoop, it was just self-evident. I called that one, and I don't have any sources.

I don't think many people did call McGlinchey. He was one of several names that had come up, but it's not like everyone was making that call, and they worked to keep it quiet. Kinlaw was a popular choice because they lost Buckner and people knew by then how much this FO loves to build on the DL.

More significantly here, all of these media personalities have a reason to explain away why they were wrong. It's a very convenient story for them to say that Jones was the pick, and then Shanahan changed his mind at the last minute. I don't buy that. Shanahan isn't that sort of guy. He'll take the heat on a pick that others don't like. There were a lot of signs pointing to Lance that the pundits overlooked or downplayed - and that I did, too, frankly. They directed him to work with John Beck. They orchestrated his workout. They didn't do that with Mac Jones. Lance played a lot under center, he used a lot of play action and routinely turned his back to the defense. That's something Shanahan mentioned repeatedly as being important when discussing taking Beathard. And Lance has the physical tools to perhaps be worth the trade. I just can't believe that Kyle Shanahan, coach's son, grew up in the football community, darling of the coaching ranks, offensive genius, endlessly defiant when the simpletons call him out, suddenly got humble with the biggest decision of his career to date and decided to defer to Lynch and the fan base. It's implausible IMO.


Haberman and Middlekauff on this:

thesack12
General Manager
Posts: 9,694
And1: 1,210
Joined: Jun 06, 2008
Location: N DA NAP
     

Re: The Trey Lance thread 

Post#79 » by thesack12 » Wed May 5, 2021 8:48 pm

For me, Kyle's demeanor during the post 1st round press conference told me that Lance was always his guy.

Kyle seemed almost giddy in that presser. He was smiling most of the time, and was full of praise for Trey. A lot of his interaction in the media in the past he has been kind of combative and a bit stand offish. However, in this one he was pretty engaging.

The footage in the draft room of Kyle talking to Trey showed him being pretty happy as well, he also gave Lynch a hug after getting off the phone.

I just don't think Kyle would of had that type of demeanor, if he was over-ruled and Lance wasn't his guy.
Jikkle
Starter
Posts: 2,243
And1: 155
Joined: Aug 24, 2014
         

Re: The Trey Lance thread 

Post#80 » by Jikkle » Thu May 6, 2021 7:32 am

I'd buy a scenario where Jones was initially who they had in mind when they traded to 3rd but the more they got to know Lance he leap frogged Jones and became the pick.

I just don't see a chance that a guy like Shanahan who is the most powerful person outside of Jed York in the organization with ample job security would cave into outside pressure when making a career defining move like this. If Jones was the guy he felt gave him the best chance to win that's who he would've taken because we all know that boos turn into cheers really quick if a guy performs.

I still tend to believe Lance was the guy all along because to me it became clear after hearing him gush about Josh Allen after MNF he was interested in having a talent like that not Jimmy G 2.0

Return to San Francisco 49ers