Bill Dungsroman wrote:

laudablepuss wrote:

What is this horseshit? Dude, BDR, what's your reaction to this?

It's official: I'm never going to fully understand San Fran's front office. I don't even remember Erickson's name coming up - by that article, apparently it never did, publicly. Why?

OTOH, Erickson appears (in that that's what Donahue and the players are saying) to be what they wanted - a dude who wants to wing the ball. Then why all this dicking around with Blache and Cottrell and other DC's? How about that Erickson was an unqualified loser at Seattle for 4 years? Or that he's friends with Donahue? "We think he'll get along fine (with us)," says Donahue. Yeah, so does every coach who's a toady to the front office. But who knows? The fundamental problem was that SF does not want to commit the money to the sort of guy who has a reputation. It's going to be a surprise if they do well no matter who they pick, given the pool they're working with.

An interesting thing to me is how vocal Jeff Garcia was about this earlier. He's been pretty diplomatic in the past, but he made it clear that he did no tlike the decision to fire Mariucci, and that he didn't think the team would improve next year no matter who came in. But he's either reverted to his old diplomatic ways or he's being honest in the support he's given Erickson. But if Erickson is committed to opening up the offense, then I wish him the best, and I'll support him. The Niners may lose some guys in the offseason, but the core offense ought to remain intact, a core that has been in the top five two of the last three years.

BDR