Posted By: wsmith (28/08/2007 11:38:00 AM)
Comment: Matt - After the excellent year Hicks had returning kicks last year, why is he not doing it this year? With Willis playing every down and special teams, isn't the staff worried he will get gassed late in games, and hit a wall during the season? How have the coaches and players responded to the new DL coach?

Posted By: Nevyn (28/08/2007 10:48:39 AM)
Comment: Matt, how badly do you think the Larry Allen signing has hurt David Baas' development as a player? He went from presumptive starter for last year to buried on the depth chart, and now it looks like despite an impressive camp, he will again be seeing hardly any duty in his third season. As a related question, how awkward will this make extension talks with Baas, who has not proven enough to earn good money, but won't want to commit a long time for small money on the eve of being a starter.

Posted By: Paul in Livermore (28/08/2007 10:16:39 AM)
Comment: Oneniner, I really do not know which Niner team you are watching. Kwame is a better run blocker than he is a pass blocker but he is far from a Pro Bowl run blocker. If you watched the replay of the Bears - Niner preseason game it was on the Bears local broadcast. There they showed Kwame getting beat one-on-one on run blocks which are supposed to be the strong part of his game. On one play Darwin Walker pushed Kwame back, rode him to the right (which was the direction of the play) and then as the runner passed by, quickly disengaged from Kwame and made the tackle for no gain. That is not something you should see from a "pro bowl run blocker". We don't even need to mention Kwame's pass blocking. He is the only O-Lineman I have ever seen get beat every way possible in a single game (swim move, club move, bull rush, speed rush). It's not like he only has one hole in his game like getting beat by speed rushers. The guy get's beat by speed rushers just as easily as power rushers push him back into the QB. He is a liability and leaving him in there is risk to Smith's health.

Posted By: Jim in Waknut Creek (28/08/2007 9:51:53 AM)
Comment: Matt, after listening to Nolan on his KNBR morning radio gig today, I think that Drew, Sonoco and Mike may be on to something - a possible Kwame trade. While Nolan stated that he wanted "both men on the team", he also alluded to "a lot of complications and multiple factors" (paraphrased), in explaining why he hasn't announced the ROT starter. Smells like trade talks are going on.

Posted By: Berger (28/08/2007 9:26:18 AM)
Comment: In 1988, Walsh alternated the left tackle every quarter. Bubba Parris went the 1st and third, Steve Wallace went the 2nd and 4th. Left guard also rotated every other posession. I think it was Bruce Collie and Guy McIntyre? That team won the Super Bowl. I believe Staley and Harris could do that. Lst year when Snyder was trying to beat out Harris, Harris rose to the occasion and was winning the battle until Snyder got hurt. I'm thinking Harris was playing better because he was getting a rest during the game. If they rotated this year, Harris would get a breather during the game and Staley would get valuable experience. In fact, the 49ers offensive line has so much depth, I would like to see some substrituing at every position but center. This would keep them fresher for the 4th quarter.

Posted By: Mike in SF (28/08/2007 9:14:41 AM)
Comment: Robert and Matty - I do NOT have my dream job working for the 49ers. I'm just a loyal 49ers faithful like the rest of us. Anyways - Rock on Matt - love your blog. Its now right up there with my morning coffee on the daily routine of "must haves" to get my day started right. Keep the great information coming!!!

Posted By: mike (28/08/2007 8:08:39 AM)
Comment: Good points oneniner..I forgot about that. It was said before that Staley probably needed to bulk up more (which he has added some already) & he's said he needed to continue working on improving his run "drive" blocking. Either way I think if he were named the starter he would do just fine & if he didn't perform on the run blocks the way you'd like there's Kwame backing him up. You have to be careful on building any rookies confidence the right way so leave it up to Nolan & the coaches to make the right choice here. I can see it going either way esp because Frank's running game is so key in our offense & we want that continuity.

Posted By: StonerLab (28/08/2007 7:45:54 AM)
Comment: Matt, there might be a team out there with a Tackle need afterall. Strange as it is the Cardinals lost their RT Oliver Ross over the weekend with a torn tricep. They're putting the rookie Levi Brown in there but that still leaves them thin at that position plue Levi is a rookie. If the price was right & the Cardinals were interested in doing a deal could this possibly happen?

Posted By: oneniner (28/08/2007 7:28:40 AM)
Comment: after spending the off-season reading most my fellow niner fans comments on various blogs, i do have to say majority do not have a clue about what is going on ( i think its because the niners have lots of fans far away)....there is this idea if we place staley in the starting line up everything would be great...No...our running game would suffer, yes K harris is a not probowl tackle but he sure his a probowl running game tackle.....why the rush to put staley in the line-up, i dont get it......its not like he his going anywhere and i question his experience when it comes to run blocking and guys... staley hasnt faced a real tough defensive end for a WHOLE game.....so relax and enjoy we have very good depth, i think nolan knows K harris would be the starter and he just does not want to say it till the end of preseason....no way staley starts.

Posted By: mike (28/08/2007 6:57:39 AM)
Comment: That's my same question..why the delay in announcing the RT starter? Is there any concern in pushing Staley's development too fast? I think the consensus is that most all Niner fans want Kwame replaced, myself included. Matt, have you seen or heard anything to indicate that mentally (maturity/pressure/learning the playbook) Staley would be better off spending a little more time steadily developing behind a VET player & coaching? From what I've seen & read about him he seems like he carries himself well, plays aggressive w/an edge, has shown up solid in preseason, has good character, & mentally is a strong young guy. He has showed that he wants it & is prepared to handle being the starter if he's given that spot. I think you had already said you thought he s/b the starter..at this point do you think Harris actually has a chance of holding his job?

Posted By: SonocoNinerFan (27/08/2007 11:06:13 PM)
Comment: Matt- It seems to me the prospect of benching a well-liked (at least within the team) and established starter at the beginning of a "contract year" is uncomfortable to Nolan and bad juju in terms of team politics. For that reason I think Nolan would rather trade Harris than bench him. The non-annoucement annoucement feels like an attempt to prop-up Kwame's trade value a little longer to search for a trade . . . and also delay a decsision that will cost a loyal warrior (warts and all) a lot of money in the 2008 free agent market should he stay with the 49ers. I think it's pretty clear that Staley should start and I can't think of any other logical reason to delay the inevitable.

Posted By: Drew (27/08/2007 8:37:50 PM)
Comment: I realize that this is a bad week to make a trade because every team has to cut players to make the roster limit, but I wonder if Nolan's hesitatiion to name a starter at right tackle is because he is trying to entice a trade for Harris. Nolan has said before he wouldn't trade Smiley or Harris unless the 49ers got what they wanted for the player. Announcing a switch now would only decrease Harris's value. If he remains the "starter" through this final game and continues to play well, his trade value may increase whereas demoting him now likely means no chance for an increase in trade value. And since the first team will only play a few series and even fewer for Harris and Staley if they alternate, what real benefit is there to announcing a change now. Keep both on the edge and see what happens. Just seems to make sense to me.

Response: As of Saturday, no team had called the 49ers since the beginning of training camp to inquire about Harris or Smiley. At this point, I'd be surprised if either is traded. (I'm not saying it won't happen, only that I'd be surprised because of the timing and I'm not sure there's a team out there that all of a sudden feels it needs to fill a hole). --Matt M.

Posted By: Robert (27/08/2007 7:36:33 PM)
Comment: Matt, I'm not sure if this is the way I can contact you directly or if there is another way. I just wanted to thank you for answering my question. Also, is "Mike is SF" anyone important with the 49ers or just another fan like myself. I promise I won't tell if he is. :)

Response: To my knowledge, our friend Mike is a loyal and knowledgeable reader and not a 49ers "insider." Mike, is that correct? --Matt M.

Posted By: Mike is SF (27/08/2007 6:01:21 PM)
Comment: Robert - the most obvious sign of an improved football team with depth and talent is late round draft picks not making the team. That is a good problem to have. Looking at our current roster what other position would you then have drafted? Both the D-Line and RB spot remain the most in need of depth and talent, therefore I don't question these picks. If we took a WR, LB, OL, DB, or QB they would have most definitely NOT made the team as those spots are full of talent and good competition. In fact, we will finally be cutting a few players at those positions that WILL make it onto another team's roster (i.e. at LB and WR). Again, a great sign of an improved roster/team. Both Cohen and Clayton have a decent shot at the two thinnest positions on the depth chart. Good picks in my opinion.

Posted By: Boman (27/08/2007 5:19:18 PM)
Comment: Thanks Matt for all your hard work, it is greatly appreciated overseas here in Germany! One question on the Melvin Oliver technicality: Is there any reason for not placing him on IR right away? I vaguely remember Nolan saying something about Oliver getting an accrued season or something but I am not sure. Can you enligthen us on that matter?

Response: Yes, the reason is because they placed him on PUP and they don't have to put him on IR. I think if they wanted to place him on IR now, he would've had to clear waivers (and the club probably would've lost him). --Matt M.

Posted By: Robert (27/08/2007 5:13:01 PM)
Comment: I've heard a lot of talk about the 49ers possibly cutting Cohen or Clayton, or keeping them along with the players that were retained from last year at their respective positions. If either is the case, wouldn't you say that these were bad draft picks? It's obvious that Sopoaga could've been an ample backup to Franklin. Plus I've heard one of our DEs can play DT in a pinch. As far as Clayton goes, Hicks has done a bangup job cleaning up for Gore. Plus he has been solid in KR duties (see opening 2nd half kcikoff return at home vs. Rams last season where he changed the momentum instantly). Don't these two picks seem odd to you, they certainly did to me when they were made. Please tell me we're not cutting our picks less than a year after drafting them!

Response: I don't think there's any way the team will cut Cohen. Clayton's on the bubble. Drafted players get cut every year, so it's not that big of a deal. If Clayton does not make the 53-man, there is a very good chance the 49ers will retain him on the practice squad. I don't think the 49ers had "immediate impact player" on their minds when they selected Cohen and Clayton. They were hoping they'd develop into contributors. --Matt M.

Posted By: Marion (27/08/2007 4:56:35 PM)
Comment: With Vernon being our top receiving threat, I don't see him leaving the field a whole lot. With Delanie emerging I see a lot of double te sets. How often do you see us going 4 wide? I'm asking this question because is there a real need for us to carry 6 receivers? Will any of the receivers on the roster on game day play any special teams other than Brandon Williams? Thanks as always Matt. I really look forward to reading your stuff.

Response: The team needs to keep probably seven receivers total, including practice squad. Last year, it was five on the active roster and two on the practice squad. The reason they'd keep six receivers is because the sixth guy would be better than, say, the 10th defensive back or eighth defensive lineman. Also, if one of their top five receivers gets injured, they wouldn't lose much. Unless it's Gilmore, the 49ers would not get a lot of ST play from any of their receivers. --Matt M.