The myth of 49er greatness

by smileyman on Nov 9, 2009 9:16 PM PST Comment 56 comments

When we start talking about 49er teams in the past (especially the Super Bowl teams of the '80s), we see lots of myths develop around them. One particularly prevalent myth is that we were a dominant team throughout the decade of the 80s. Another is that Joe Montana was always surrounded by big talent. Neither of these is true and I'd like to examine them for a bit if I may.

(This originally started out as a reply in another topic but once I got several paragraphs into it I figured it deserved it's own fanpost.

In 1970, 71, and 72 the Niners were dominant in the NFC, winning the NFC West each of those seasons, though eventually losing in the NFC champsionship game.

In 1973 we started a long fall from greatness. John Brodie was on his last legs, splitting time with two other QBs. Our running game was not dominant. That year we had a losing record of 5-9. In '74 we tried to address the RB need through draft, but our QB situation was still precarious and we had a rotating QB situation. We ended up 6-8 that year. In 1975 we tried bringing in players through FA but posted our third consecutive losing season at 5-9. At the end of the year head coach Dick Nolan was fired.

We started 1976 with a new head coach, Monte Clark. That year we started off with a 6-1 record but then went into a tailspin and finished off the season 8-6. Clark was fired at the end of that year. 1977 saw us with yet another head coach in Ken Meyer and yet another losing season with a 5-9 record. Meyer would be fired in the off season and Pete McCulley would be hired only to have another dreadful season with a 2-14 record.

Bill Walsh would then be hired, though his start was not auspicious. His first full season he had a record of 2-14. We had another losing season in 1980 with a 6-10 record, before winning the first Super Bowl in 1981 with a 13-3 regular season record.

Some points with this first half of our trip down memory lane.

Before our first Super Bowl victory we hadn't been to the playoffs in nine years. Before Walsh we had four coaches in as many years. Seeing a trend here? Our last playoff appearance was in 2002. We've had 5 coaches in the last 7 years.

Don't get misunderstand me. I'm not saying that Singletary is the next Bill Walsh. Just that they come to the Niners with some pretty startling similarities in team history.

Now on to part two of Niner mythmaking, which is the image of a team that completely dominated the NFL during the 1980s. This one is also not true. Other than a few exceptional season the Niners of the 80s were barely above average.

Here's the breakdown year by year:

1980--6 and 10.

1981--13 and 3. Best record in the NFL going into the playoffs. First Super Bowl victory. Five of our victories this year were by 1 score or less. We could very easily have been 8 and 8 this year.

1982--3 and 6. Strike shortened season.

1983--10 and 6. Lost to the Redskins in the NFC championship. Two victories by one score or less. We won pretty convincingly this season.

1984--15 and 1. Best record in the NFL going to playoffs and the second Super Bowl win. Five victories this season were by one score or less (also the one loss was by 3 points)

1985--10 and 6. Lost wild card play off game to the Giants. Our wins were again convincing. Our losses were all by one score or less.

1986--10, 5, and 1. Clinched NFC west but lost in the first round of playoffs to the Giants. Our wins this season were in dominating fashion. Our losses came by one score or less.

1987--13 and 2. Clinched NFC west but lost to the Vikings. Three of our wins were by one score or less. One of our losses by one score or less

1988--10 and 6. Win the third Super Bowl. Four of our wins are by one score or less. Five of our losses are also by one score or less.

1989--14 and 2. Win fourth Super Bowl. Four of our wins are by one score or less. Both our losses were by one score or less.

There are only a couple of those seasons where I could say that we dominated, and even in those seasons most of those games were really close and could've gone the other way. Quite similar to how we've played so far this season actually. We are one score per game away from a 7-1 season. I still see a great deal of hope for the future of this team. We're not even done with the first full year of team development yet, and we've already played tough with the best teams in the league. Last year some of these games we played would've been epic losses, like what we had with Atlanta.

Keep the faith.

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of Niners Nation's writers or editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of Niners Nation's writers or editors.

0 recs | Comment 56 comments | Add comment

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

5 coaches in 7 years?

Mooch, Erickson, Nolan, Singletary…

I was "Deific16"
The cake is a lie.

by Sultan of Seitan on Nov 9, 2009 9:27 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Mooch, Erickson, Nolan, Zombie-Nolan, Singletary…

by bignerd on Nov 9, 2009 9:39 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs

Zombie-Nolan

lol

What we've got here is a failure to communicate.

by chikmagnet_565 on Nov 9, 2009 10:08 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

That's my mad math skillz at work again.

by smileyman on Nov 9, 2009 10:04 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Excuse me?

Now on to part two of Niner mythmaking, which is the image of a team that completely dominated the NFL during the 1980s. This one is also not true.

SO 4 superbowls in 10 seasons isn’t dominant? WTF sport do you think you are watching?

1989—14 and 2. Win fourth Super Bowl. Four of our wins are by one score or less. Both our losses were by one score or less.

"Optimist Prime"
"Child Please" -Ochocinco

by rlott#42 on Nov 9, 2009 9:41 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

When I think of dominant I think of season wins

Records like 14-2, 15-1, 13-3, etc.

10-6 record isn’t dominant in my book. That would be like calling the Arizona Cardinals a dominant team because they took a 9-7 regular season record to the Super Bowl last year.

by smileyman on Nov 9, 2009 10:04 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

To expand on that

During the decade of the 80s we had 2 losing seasons and 4 seasons with only 10 wins. Our regular season record simply doesn’t show domination.

by smileyman on Nov 9, 2009 10:07 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

We were still ballin though

49ers Al Grito De Guerra!!! hahaha

by 49erSalvatrucha on Nov 9, 2009 10:19 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

One of the 10 win teams won a championship, though.

They had a crummy first half of the season and Walsh managed to get it fixed. By the end of the regular season, that team was pretty dominant.

by asleepinSF on Nov 9, 2009 11:16 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

That's kinda my point with this

We tend to look back on the 80s as the decade in which we wiped the floor with the league and that’s simply not true. We had some incredible seasons, two bad ones, and some above average ones.

I also wanted to highlight how close some of those games were and how they could’ve easily broken the other way. That’s where we’re at now. It’s frustrating to be at 3-5, but like I pointed out we’re 1 score in each of those games away from being 7-1.

by smileyman on Nov 9, 2009 11:28 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

4 superbowls in 10 seasons

Who else has done that?

We wiped the floor with teams when it was time to play.

"Optimist Prime"
"Child Please" -Ochocinco

by rlott#42 on Nov 9, 2009 11:51 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Right.

But the regular season records aren’t all that hot except for a couple of seasons. Which is the point I’m trying to make here which seems to be escaping everybody.

by smileyman on Nov 10, 2009 12:19 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Not all that hot? Regular season only.

1983 – 10-6
1984 – 15-1
1985 – 10-6
1986 – 10-5-1
1987 – 13-2
1988 – 10-6
1989 – 14-2
1990 – 14-2
1991 – 10-6
1992 – 14-2
1993 – 10-6
1994 – 13-3
1995 – 11-5
1996 – 12-4
1997 – 13-3
1998 – 12-4

With all due respect, that is DOMINATION like the NFL has never seen before or since. The margin of victory means squat.

Kezarvet

by kezarvet on Nov 10, 2009 10:36 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

The margin of victory means squat.

Seriously. This is the NFL. This is not some pansy Big 12 or SEC where you get to play FIU and cream ‘em 50-0 every year. In the NFL, the Browns are still a decent team that’ll keep it close if you’re not careful.

You have been DFiBrillated.

by Dubs fan in Boston on Nov 10, 2009 9:22 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I remember that year

They started 6-5 and had an important Monday night game against a Washington team that was also 6-5. The 49ers won and ended up going 10-6 on the season. That was also the year the played the NFC championship game in Chicago and everyone thought they were too soft to win. They destroyed the Bears 28-3.

Don't trust this guy. He lies.

by urnext on Nov 10, 2009 8:43 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Expand this:

During the ’80s we had seven (7) seasons with 10 wins or more. You left out the two before you were born and one other.

Kezarvet

by kezarvet on Nov 10, 2009 12:19 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Your book

needs to be updated. Nobody ever accused the 9-7 Cards of being dominant. There were at least 10 Niner teams that were dominant, five of whom won Super Bowls. In three of those games we scored 38, 49 and 55 points. So much for your book.

Kezarvet

by kezarvet on Nov 11, 2009 5:43 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

No offense or anything, it’s nice that you’re trying to look at things in a different way, but if you don’t think that the 49ers of the 80’s and early 90’s are one of the greatest dynasties of all time then you are destined to be forever disappointed in your sports life. I’m a young guy, but if I live to be 100, I doubt I see any of my Bay Area favorites approach that level of dominance for that long of a span of time. It was a heck of an era, and only by arbitrary declarations like deciding that 10-6 isn’t an impressive record (which is preposterous) are you able to explain it away as not so great.

Idolizing Robb Nen since 2002...

by Smoke on the Water on Nov 9, 2009 11:55 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Gah

10-6 is just above average. 8-8 is average. 10-6 is generally just good enough to get you a wildcard spot in the playoffs.

And I’m not saying that the Niners weren’t a dynasty. Obviously they were. I became a fan of the Niners during the ‘84 season (I was 7 years old). I’m just saying that time tends to lend an aura of invincibility to those years that weren’t all that spectacular if you look at the actual win-loss numbers of the regular season.

by smileyman on Nov 10, 2009 12:24 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I looked at the won-loss numbers.

In fact, I saw every game during that time. The aura of invincibility WAS that spectacular. You were just too young to appreciate it.

Kezarvet

by kezarvet on Nov 10, 2009 9:45 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

smileyman makes a valid point

The two seasons (regular & post) have little to do with each other.

Otherwise, last season, the 9-7 Cards wouldn’t have gone very far in the playoffs and the 12-4 Giants & 13-3 Titans wouldn’t have been knocked out in their first playoff game.

His basic premise is that teams like the ’84 Niners, the ’85 Bears and the ’86 Giants are rare: teams that dominate in the regular season AND in the playoffs.

In 2007 the team that dominated in the regular season (New England – 16-0) lost the big one to the 10-6 NY Giants, who started out 0-2 and gave up 80 points on defense those first two games.

Eli Manning’s stats in 2007 (completion %, TD’s, INT’s and passer rating) were almost identical to Rex Grossman’s in 2006 (save for eight completions).

Of course, there are many examples of teams that post excellent regular season records and win it all. Like last years Steelers who were 12-4. However, they only won the SB by four points and came within 2:37 of losing that game.

The Vikings are now 7-1. Brett Favre himself admitted that they were ‘lucky’ to beat the 49ers and the Ravens. As good as Minnesota is, they easily could be 5-3 right now.

For most teams in most seasons, there is a fine line between winning and losing, especially in the regular season.

by GeoMak on Nov 10, 2009 2:26 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Thank you

That’s exactly what I’m saying.

by smileyman on Nov 10, 2009 11:18 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

And the rest of us are saying that the Niners, from the 80s to the early 90s

Had arguably the most dominant stretch of any team ever. If that’s not “dominant” in your book, I don’t know what is. You probably think the Pats were just “OK” in the 2000s.

You have been DFiBrillated.

by Dubs fan in Boston on Nov 10, 2009 9:25 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

The author has no clue.

From 1983 through 1998 the Niners won ten (10) games or more. That is 16 straight seasons. No team in NFL history has ever done that except the 49ers. Margin of victory has never counted. The only important stat is wins and losses.

You talk about the ‘80s but start out with the 70’s. Frankly, I’ll bet you never saw those teams play. How old are you? This is an article based on hot air and not much else.

The Niner “myth” of greatness started long before the 80s. I saw the great QB Frankie Albert. I watched the Million Dollar Backfield with McElhenny, Johnson, Perry and Tittle (all of whom are in the HOF). I was in Kezar in 1948 when the 49ers who were 10-1 met the Cleveland Browns who were 11-0 in one of the greatest games of all-time.

Myth? The only myth is that you are a sports writer.

Kezarvet

by kezarvet on Nov 10, 2009 8:43 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

I Can't Believe It!

Not one of you ever mention the fact we had the best, B-E-S-T, QB and WR ever to play the game…ever. SOOOOOOoooooo that might need to factored into the equation. I’m just saying.

Through the darkest times we see the brightest lights...

by elvisike77 on Nov 10, 2009 10:29 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

We had the best WR

And one of the best QB’s. I wouldn’t go so far as to lable Joe as hands on the best QB ever.

Of course its difficult, its a shortcut... if it was easy it'd just be "the way."

by chirop1 on Nov 11, 2009 7:18 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

i would

"Pat is still just scratching the surface." - Coach Singletary on LB Patrick Willis

by 49erLou on Nov 11, 2009 12:01 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I would too

Joe was the best QB when it matter the most, ala the SB, 4-0 and he is the ONLY QB to have never thrown an INT in multiple SB appearances, a feet that will most likely never be broken. 4 SB’s not one INT

by danknerd49 on Nov 12, 2009 9:50 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

The ironic thing is that in the famous

game against Dallas in the NFC Championship, the 49er had six (6) turnovers including three (3) Montana interceptions, and he still had the cojones to deliver a clutch pass to Clark (a 10th round draft pick). Ultimate greatness.

Kezarvet

by kezarvet on Nov 12, 2009 2:48 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Maybe both viewpoints are correct:

I remember those great years vividly and the 49ers were very dominant,
But
I am willing to admit that I probably remember a little more dominance than actually existed.

by CorneliusJ on Nov 10, 2009 10:35 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

There was a lot of Joe Montana saving the day with 4th Qtr comebacks.

by bignerd on Nov 10, 2009 10:39 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

It sounds like Smileyman is saying

that the Niners were more “consistently good,” and were able to get the wins, even if by a small margin, than a team that just went out and cleaned everybody’s clocks on a regular basis. However, the SB win against Denver was pretty damn dominant! I think we are looking at two different definitions of “dominant,” both of which could be correct. It just goes to show you that we can interpret stats in different ways to make different points.

Alaska is a state, dammit! Can I get a Niner game on TV up here?

by kinglouie33 on Nov 10, 2009 10:48 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

I guess the word domination is relative...

But I cant think of any teams with at least 10 wins per year for that length of time. I think I catch your drift and generally like your posts. It was especially refreshing after reading those two Sheets abominations.

by Natural Red on Nov 10, 2009 1:07 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

well it is an interesting history.

Thanks for the interesting post, Smileyman.

I think it is true for the most part that the 49ers were not dominant like the 85 Bears, who seemed invincible (and destroyed New England in the superbowl).

They were extremely well-coached, tended to score on their 1st possession (with “scripted plays”) and found a way to win a lot of the time. The lopsided superbowl win against Miami was a surprise ~~people though Marino was better -~~ and had a lot to do with coaching. (Walsh to Montana, regarding running: “if you see it, take it” (because he noticed the Miami line-backers were too slow to catch Montana). The superbowls against Cincinatti were quite close and the defense played a big role (not to ignore “the drive”). I guess against Denver we kinda ran the score up, if my memory serves me well. I do remember a lot of close games and heart-breaking playoff loses.

Walsh had this amazing ability to spot talent. Unparalled, I believe. Found Lott, Eric Wright and Carlson (starting secondary minus Hicks) in one draft. When he looked at Montana, he saw Joe Namath’s feet; he got Rice at “15”, got Steve Young for nothing. He kept the team strong for a long time with low draft picks. Impressive.

What we need now is good drafting and patience. We have an excellent core of exceptional young players to build on.

by zacksf on Nov 10, 2009 3:35 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

49ers vs. 85 bears

I think it is true for the most part that the 49ers were not dominant like the 85 Bears, who seemed invincible (and destroyed New England in the superbowl).

One problem with that comment is it’s sort of comparing apples to oranges. The 85 Bears were definitely dominant, but for the stretch that the 49ers were really good, the Bears were not as good when you look at the entire span. I think people are looking too much into year by year, as opposed to taking the entire work as a whole.

by Fooch on Nov 10, 2009 3:49 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Looking at the entire work as a whole,

I think it was a decade and a half of excellence that is quite exceptional in NFL history. Pittsburg won 4 super bowls, but they did it in 5 years with more or less the same people.

On the other heand, Walsh continued to replace and rebuild even through winning seasons and super-bowl years. I think Coach Wlash was the greatest judge of talent in modern sports history. So, Fooch, I do not disagree at all: looking at the entire work as a whole it is a testament to a great genius, Coach Walsh.

by zacksf on Nov 10, 2009 9:17 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

The 1984 49ers were

the best team in history. You can have your undefeated Patriots. The 1984 49ers had the deepest defense ever on a football field. The defense was coached by George Seifert and DOMINATED the “unstoppable” Dan Marino in the Super Bowl 38-16.

DL – (9) Dwaine Board, Fred Dean, Manu Tuiasosopo, Michael Carter, Jeff Stover, Jim Stuckey, Gary “Big Hands” Johnson, Lawrence Pillers, and Big Louie Kelcher. They obviously rotated their DL to keep them fresh and confuse the offense. It worked.

LB – (8) Dan Bunz, Riki Ellison, Jim Fahnhorst, Keena Turner, Jack “Hacksaw” Reynolds, Todd Shell, Milt McColl, and Ron Ferrari.

Then we get to the defensive backfield. The second string backfield was good enough to start for most NFL teams. It included Jeff Fuller, Mario Clark, Tom Holmoe and Dana McLemore.

The first string defensive secondary included four (4) backs who all made the Pro Bowl. Ronnie Lott, Eric Wright, Carlton Williamson and Dwight Hicks.

This team was 18-1. The only loss came vs. the Steelers at the Stick and it was the result of a 4th down pass interference call on Eric Wright in the end zone that gave the Steelers the ball on the one. The referee later saw the films and admitted he had made a terrible call. Wright, one of the best cover men in Niner history, had reached around the receiver without making contact and batted the ball down. The referee was out of position, hence the bad call robbing the 49er of an undefeated season.

As to being dominant, the Niners really turned it on in week 11 and never stopped. Their scores at the latter part of the season:

41-7; 24-17; 35-3; 35-17; 51-7; final game of the season (meaningless) 19-17.

Playoffs: 21-10; 23-0; 38-16

Smileyman. Your premise makes no sense. The most dominant team in league history with 16 straight seasons with 10 wins or more including 4 Super Bowls during that stretch and one in 1981. That, my friend, is dominance.

Kezarvet

by kezarvet on Nov 11, 2009 5:37 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah

But they didn’t win 50-0 every game and 15 straight super bowls. If you can’t do that, it’s not dominance!

You have been DFiBrillated.

by Dubs fan in Boston on Nov 11, 2009 11:57 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

i agree with you about the 84 team,

but the weird thing is, I am not sure they were heaviliy favored in the super bowl. Am i wrong about that? Anybody recall what the spread was?

People were gaga about Dan Marino and did not understand the greatness of the 49er secondary (not to mention pass rush) which was amazingly great and deep. Holmoe and Fuller as back-ups/nickle- dime. Wow. Thanks for the reminder of that.

by zacksf on Nov 11, 2009 1:38 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

The '84 49ers might've had the deepest defense

ever on a football field, but they certainly weren’t the most dominate.

That of course would be the ’85 Bears.

In a three game stretch in November they outscored their opponents 104-3. 104-3.
This with their pedestrian, back-up QB in those three games (Steve Fuller).

John Madden (who also calls the ‘85 Bears the greaatest he ever saw) broadcast some six games with Pat Summeral that season. In those six games, the Bear defense didn’t allow ONE TD. Not one.

Also, they are the only team to shut-out their opponents in the playoffs. If the great Walter Payton hadn’t fumbled on the second play of the Super Bowl (leading to an easy FG for New England – the fastest score in SB history at that time) there’s little doubt that they would’ve also shut out New England in that game (the late TD for NE came well after garbage time started for the Bears).

The ‘84 49ers defense might’ve been the deepest, but they certainly weren’t the most dominate.

by GeoMak on Nov 11, 2009 8:40 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Geo

Come on man, keep it accurate and real. There have been plenty of shutouts in the playoffs including one way back when that was 73-0.

Also, they are the only team to shut-out their opponents in the playoffs.

In the 1984 NFC Championship Game the final score was: 49ers 23 Bears 0.

In 1985, the Bears were 15-1. Pts for/against 456-198; Playoffs: 91-10.
In 1984, the 49ers were 15-1. Pts for/against 475-227; Playoffs: 82-26.

The 49ers were the deepest. They were both VERY DOMINANT.

Kezarvet

by kezarvet on Nov 12, 2009 2:58 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Free agency

You have to be very calculated and get it right. Half the team leaves over 5 years. You have to figure it out sooner. I know it’s a long season…..’cause thats what the team keeps saying this week.

by zonedogs on Nov 10, 2009 3:42 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Everybody loses some games (well almost)

But I don’t think that wins and loses are the only way to look at it. I do think that people often think of the 49ers ‘glory days’ unrealistically; I agree with that entirely. There was one 15-1 season where they were virtually invincible, but for the most part they were a very good team that could lose like anyone else. They were very consistently good for a very long time, which is very impressive.

Let me preface this by saying I am by no means a stat guru, and this is what I did in 7 minutes…
According to http://www.pro-football-reference.com, from 1981 to 1998 the offense was not in the top ten only twice (when using yards, they were always when it came to points) and the the defense was not in the top ten only 3 times in points and 5 times in yards. Being in the top ten in both offense and defense almost every year for 18 seasons is quite impressive. I didn’t look extensively, but I didn’t see anyone who did the same (not counting when there were 16 teams in the NFL). Whether or not you want to call that ‘great’ or ‘dominant’ is another thing – but IMHO I think consistently performing better than almost every other team in the league on both offense and defense makes for a strong argument.

by Red23 on Nov 10, 2009 9:50 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

But I don’t think that wins and loses are the only way to look at it. I do think that people often think of the 49ers ‘glory days’ unrealistically; I agree with that entirely. There was one 15-1 season where they were virtually invincible, but for the most part they were a very good team that could lose like anyone else. They were very consistently good for a very long time, which is very impressive.

Again, when one talks about the “glory days,” one talks about the great teams. If I waxed poetically about every season in which the Niners were above 10-6, you’d never hear the end of it. Instead, I just say “Ahhh… Joe, Jerry, Steve, Ronnie… those were the days. Hey, remember when they went 14-2 in back to back years and crushing Denver? Yeah…”

No other team has EVER consistently won as we did. No team will EVER do it again. You underestimate the intelligence of fans when you suggest that people think we were 15-1 and dominating every season. Nobody will ever consistently completely dominate the NFL for more than 2-3 years. The Niners did that… in the middle of the greatest 15 year stretch the NFL has ever seen.

I think some people are underestimating how hard it is to consistently even go to the playoffs in the NFL.

You have been DFiBrillated.

by Dubs fan in Boston on Nov 10, 2009 10:46 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Walsh was a genius

I don’t underestimate that. Walsh was a genius, pure and simple.

He saw things no one else could see (and every draft he had to disguise his intentions because he was so respected).

by zacksf on Nov 11, 2009 1:40 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

In my opinion

Smileyman is NOT a 49er fan. No truly loyal Niner fan would ever call the obvious greatness of the 49ers from 1981 – 1998 a MYTH. They don’t even question the greatness.

Some bozo Niner fan might question the dominance factor. I can understand that a little more. This guy became a Niner fan at age 7 in 1984. He starts out with the 70s.

The first game I saw was in 1947 when the 49ers played in the All American Football Conference. They were great back then. Frankie Albert was a stud at QB. His ball handling was amazing and I remember one game when he faked a bootleg and got tackled and the ref blew the whistle while Joe Perry was running free. Kezar exploded.

The Niners played in the AAFC from 1946-49. Their record during that time was 39-15-2. They finished 12-2 in 1948, with the only two losses both squeakers to the undefeated Cleveland Browns who featured Otto Graham. The AAFC merged with the NFL in 1950. Three great teams moved into the NFL while players from the rest of the team were assigned.

The 49ers, Browns and Baltimore Colts moved to the NFL. Because Cleveland already had a team, the Cleveland Rams moved to Los Angeles to establish a natural rivalry withe the 49ers. The Browns won the NFL Championship the first year they merged. It was perhaps because the newer league had gone for black players and at the time they merged the NFL only had 6 in the whole league.

At any rate, those early 49er teams that featured Albert, Tittle, Beals, McElhenny, Perry, John Henry Johnson, Nomellini, St. Clair, etc. were GREAT.

Greatness has permeated this organization from the beginning. We 49er fans accept your apology, smileyman.

Kezarvet

by kezarvet on Nov 11, 2009 2:19 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Did I strike a nerve kezarvet?

Because you seem to be taking this awfully personal. Especially since I’ve explained myself several times in the comments, but you’ve decided to be deliberately obtuse and misconstrue what I meant.

Of course you’re also the guy who thinks that Nate Davis is an NFL star and should be starting this very second, so I guess I can’t expect much from you.

by smileyman on Nov 11, 2009 2:44 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Smiley

Be thankful he didn’t call you classless! Some folks just don’t let others have opinions! I am not agreeing with you or your post in anyway. But I do respect the fact that you have a different view on things. Never the less, I would not question you being a 49er just because of our different viewpoints. To me that is Classless!!! Some just think the word "Sucks" is classless, but I think people actions and what they say to others are what makes one classy or classless.

11-5... My 49ers pre-season prediction!

by Ten-Man on Nov 12, 2009 12:24 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

smileyman is a 49er fan

try to relax, kezarvet. We know you been watching the niners a long time (Kezar veteran, right?), but you are ignoring the nuances of this post,

We all love and revere Coach Walsh, and it is true that before that many of us don’t know everything. But, you know, relax, except for the trolls (smileyman is obviously NOT one of them) we are all niner fans.

by zacksf on Nov 11, 2009 2:51 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs

Actually..

The Rams had already moved to LA. That was the impetus to form the Browns.

But yeah, you’re spot on. 16 straight 10+ win seasons. The next best team had 7.

I’m watching the ’88 NFC title game, where the Niners went to Soldier Field where it was -17 with the wind chill and demolished the Bears.

But because they had a bad rough patch in the middle of the season and went 10-6, they weren’t a great team. Mm hmm.

by Bitter Fan on Nov 12, 2009 4:07 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

You know

I probably did take it personally. I waited patiently for 35 years to experience a Super Bowl win and that 18 years stretch was the greatest experience a fan could have. For someone to question their team’s greatness pisses me off. That was the greatest stretch ever for an NFL team. If that isn’t greatness, there is no such thing. That is not a myth.

Smileyman, sorry if you felt attacked. You’re a good writer. You just need to be careful of your choice of words. The Myth of Invincibility might have been a better title. Peace.

Kezarvet

by kezarvet on Nov 12, 2009 3:05 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

it was the greatest experience.

candlesitck park felt like the center of the world.

I remember around the time we got Steve Young and a friend from new york, a NY Giants fan, said: “this is insanse. you (the 49ers) not only have the best team, you have the two best quarterback in football.”

They (we) won a lot, and always in the superbowl. that was especially cool, to never lose a superbowl. I honestly think Walsh was the greatest coaching genius in the history of sports.

by zacksf on Nov 13, 2009 8:28 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs