Should Shanahan Have Turned to Mac Jones?

The San Francisco 49ers’ loss to the Seattle Seahawks will be dissected from every angle, but one question continues to stand out: Should Kyle Shanahan have turned to Mac Jones in the second half?

This isn’t about panic or making a sweeping judgment on the starting quarterback. It’s about recognizing when a game has shifted and understanding when a different approach might spark life into an offense that has stalled.

After halftime, Seattle clearly adjusted. The Seahawks compressed throwing lanes, disguised coverage looks, and forced San Francisco into long-yardage situations.

The result was an offense that struggled to sustain drives and failed to put consistent pressure on the scoreboard.

That’s where Jones could have offered value. One overlooked but telling statistic is that the 49ers never scored fewer than 15 points in a game with Mac Jones at quarterback.

While that number doesn’t guarantee a win, it does point to a baseline level of offensive functionality and stability.

In a game where the offense struggled to reach even that threshold, it’s a data point worth considering.

Against a Seahawks defense that was sitting on deeper routes and daring the 49ers to take what was underneath, Jones’ willingness to consistently hit short and intermediate throws could have helped reestablish rhythm.

Even modest gains would have forced Seattle to defend every blade of grass instead of teeing off on predictable down-and-distance situations.

Experience also matters. Jones has started playoff games and operated in high-pressure environments where defensive disguises and late rotations are the norm. 

Seattle’s second-half plan relied heavily on confusing the quarterback post-snap, baiting throws, and limiting explosive plays.

In those moments, a quarterback who is content to take the checkdown and move the chains can be just as valuable as one searching for a big play.

Shanahan is one of the league’s premier play designers, but even the best schemes can stall when a defense finds answers.

A series or two with Jones could have disrupted Seattle’s defensive rhythm, altered pass-rush lanes, and forced in-game adjustments. Sometimes the change itself creates opportunity.

The counterargument is obvious: a mid-game quarterback switch risks sending the wrong message to the locker room.

That concern is fair, but context matters. This wouldn’t have been a permanent benching, but a situational decision aimed at winning a critical divisional game.

Ultimately, the 49ers didn’t lose solely because one quarterback played the entire game. Football rarely works that way.

Still, when an offense is stuck, adjustments are required.

Given the production baseline the team has historically maintained with Mac Jones under center, the decision not to explore that option in the second half remains a legitimate and lingering question.