A short note on what worked for the 49ers, but isn't really a "model"

I think what’s kind of interesting about the 49er “model” is that they spent a high second round draft pick on a very risky, but extremely dynamic, quarterback. Just like Pete has done with a lot of Seahawks, Harbaugh is making the best of what he’s been given. He was given a ton on defense, but offensively he went extremely conservative and revitalized Smith’s career by severely limiting what was asked of him. If Kaepernick is any indication, that’s not what Harbaugh wants from his quarterback. Kaepernick is a pure playmaker who can help the running game a lot but can also threaten with both his legs and his arm if he ends up developing like they hope.

I don’t know that that’s necessarily any different than what Seattle is looking for in their quarterback. You could probably say that TJack fits that same mold of extremely risky but very dynamic. I just find it kind of odd that so much is made of being able to win with Alex Smith when one of Harbaugh’s first moves was to find his replacement.

And defended, above. I bet you will agree with this: the impact and relevance of running & defense, and this Steelers/49ers model — calling it model for the sake of identifying a thing we can talk about — is not trivial, nor is it unsound. As a replacement for a dynamic passing offense, it’s unfit, though.

There are teams we think of as running & defense, that don’t ignore or neglect the passing game, but the caricature of the teams’ natures makes it easy to forget they can throw pretty well. Like the recent Steelers. Like Carroll’s Trojans. And plenty of others.

The question about whether Carroll & Schneider believe in old school mouthpunching, in the game of attrition, to the extent that their concept of point guard game manager QB is basically get a Tarvalex Smithson and coach him to be cautious and coach the defense to go after the ball, and nothing more is needed, is actually a very tricky thing to answer. Vexingly hard to answer. They give the right lip service publicly, enough to keep from painting themselves into a corner when it comes to the pursuit of a QB, but also enough to seem they don’t neglect the importance of the passing game, but their actions are quite another thing.

We can continue to see their actions through the prism of building the team first, of playing the competition/proactive non-stop game of expanding the talent pool as widely as possible before committing to a QB, of them having higher standards than to just bite the bullet and drafting Dalton. And all of that makes sense. Holding out for Barkley, being Ron Wolf enough to trade up for RGIII, having caught their eye on Kirk Cousins while turning a blind eye to Clausen, Mallett, Flynn, could be indicators of good judgment and great handling of pressure.

But it could also be the very thing you worry about most. That the concept of point guard game manager really is to try to duplicate the 2002 Buccaneers. The public statements and the actions could all fit into that approach, and we know, certainly, they wouldn’t be the first coach or GM to hold fast to this philosophy. They just seem so damn smart that it’s hard to reconcile that with the notion of a total blind spot in the passing game. But it’s definitely possible. I sure hope this damn question is answered soon.