Horns of Gold said:
I know we're not allowed to compare the two hires since Harbaugh didn't have to put in a new system, didn't suffer the negative impact of a lockout and took over a much better team...
He DID inherit a much better team in 2011 than Spags did in 2009. There is really nothing to be gained from denying that. There's even less of a reason to deny that something like that made a huge difference.
In fact, he not only inherited a good and stable OL, he inherited one of the top front 7s in the NFL.
I really don't think you gain headway by trying to dismiss that. It's a foundational kind of distinction.
And he also DID simplify the offense. Which is one reason they're 31st in passing attempts. One example: while the Rams were busily adding sight adjustments to the menu of a sophomore qb who already honestly admitted he had trouble making pre-snap reads and reading defenses generally, the entire SF offense subtracted sight adjustments altogether. This simplifies things, obviously, for the OL, WRs, and qb combined. But especially, of course, for the qb.
Your real argument, it seems to me, is that Harbaugh responded to the lockout and the subtraction of camp 2 a days by simplifying the offense, while the Rams added a more complicated offense on the shoulders of a young qb (and apparently didn't make much of an effort to simplify it).
That's a valid criticism if you're going to compare the two.
On the other hand, leaving out or erasing the fact that Harbaugh inherited a lot of first-rate veteran talent is the opposite--it makes the criticism less valid.