The 49ers gettin no respect, no respect I tell ya!
by David Fucillo on May 30, 2009 8:00 AM PDT
in San Francisco 49ers News
Email
PrintESPN put together their May power rankings, as many teams have completed their initial offseason training activities (thanks to Bob On The Coast). In looking over the rankings, I have to say I'm a bit surprised. I realize it's all just journalists throwing out their ideas, but it still has me thinking.
The 49ers are ranked 26th ahead of Tampa Bay, Cleveland, Kansas City, Oakland, St. Louis and Detroit. Ahead of the 49ers? Denver, Jacksonville, Cincinnati, Seattle, Buffalo, NY Jets, and the Redskins, among many others.
Really? I'm about to head to bed, but I figured I'd at least throw open some conversation on this one. I think Cincinnati is a really tough one to call given the talent and the poor performance lately. Do they bounce back? Personally I think the 49ers are much better than some of those teams ahead of them. Is a Kyle Orton-led Broncos squad better than the 49ers?
104 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
every year (or at least for the past few) the niners are ranked horribly, simply due to the division and our “quarterback situation” not that the talking heads really have any basis, just bias. Then again, nothing will change until we pull together a winning season.
That may be the case, but if it were
would denver jacksonville, cincinatti, seattle, the Jets and Redskins would be ahead of us?? these teams haven’t done much in the past season either and their expectations shouldn’t be higher than ours
M. S. #50
well the Redskins added Haynesworth to a defense that was ranked 4th in the NFL last year…..
not sure on the Jets – maybe new coach Rex Ryan is considered an upgrade over Mangini? Mark Sanchez hype?
Seattle got T.J. Houshmandzadeh & Hasselback might be healthier this season.
Cincy might have a healthy Palmer.
Jacksonville was decimated by injuries (a common theme with the last 3 teams) especially to their offensive line – outside of last season, they’ve had a history of being good (can’t say the same for the 9ers).
Denver is the only other questionable one, but they’re only one spot ahead of the 9ers and it’s not like Kyle Orton is JTO or something.
it’s not surprising that team’s that had major injury problems last season and a history of being good are ranked ahead of us. it’s not a big deal. Seattle could still suck even with Hasselback healthy all season… it’s just prior to the games being played, you’d have to think that if he’s healthy, they’ll be better. it’d be the same for us if say Gore had been out all last season – everyone would all be under the impression that just by getting Gore back we should be better.
by the evil monkey on May 30, 2009 11:20 AM PDT up reply actions
Seattle??
Don’t they have a new Coach?/ how did he do in Atlanta?? and SanFran?? Are you kidding me? The niners should be ranked two in the division not 3. Only because the Cards reached the Bowl, otherwise I’d rank us first, due to 2 new HC’s and a pass happy Offense.
M. S. #50
by rlott#42 on May 30, 2009 9:02 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Seahawks winning the division the last 4 times and making the playoffs 5 times in a row, including a Super Bowl appearance,
and their expectations shouldn’t be higher?
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on May 30, 2009 3:16 PM PDT up reply actions
And 49ers have won 5 Superbowls
What is more relevant? I’m guessing the Seahawks 4-12 record last year.
The latest being well over a decade ago.
Look, how about you try to make some sense? Seattle has been much better over an extended period of time much more recently, it’s only logical their fans would expect much more than a team that hasn’t had a winning season for years.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on May 31, 2009 1:26 PM PDT up reply actions
Regardless..
..Seattle does not have the depth to be talking so much trash, Holmgren is gone, you are the homer.. simp..
by Josh G and the Shaun Hill band wagon on May 31, 2009 1:46 PM PDT up reply actions
The 4-12 record
Is still much more relevant.
Granted you failed miserably last year because of injuries, but who’s to say more injuries won’t occur again?
There is no way that all those injuries were just bad luck, there is something seriously wrong with Seattle’s training/health staff.
by SportsChicken on May 31, 2009 8:11 PM PDT up reply actions
Not concern at all
Espn doesn’t know what’s it talking about .Last year, I believe they finished 20th or 21st. They started out at 28th or worse. I would rated them at 20th/21st before the season starts.Should be able to show better improvement this year if things go according to Sing plans.
cincy can win 7-8 games maybe more if palmer is his old self. do i think they’re better than the 9ers, no, but they have an easier schedule.
cincy 49ers
bronco’s cards
packers seahawks
steelers vikings
browns rams
ravens falcons
texans bye
bears texans
bye colts
ravens titans
steelers bears
raiders packers
browns jaguars
lions seahawks
vikings cards
chargers eagles
chiefs lions
jets rams
im gonna be all up on you like a spider monkey!
by remembering9ergods on May 30, 2009 10:29 AM PDT reply actions
I guess the real issue ...
… is whether we are ranked first, second, third or fourth in the NFC West. As Singletary keeps saying, you get into the play-offs and “who knows what can happen”. I do believe a certain other NFC West team proved last year that when you get into the post-season you can surprise a few people. The Patriots won 11 games last year and didn’t make the post-season; the Niners can probably win nine in ‘09 and get there. Who cares if we’re ranked 20-something in the NFL, as long as we’re the best team in our division, and I think we are, right?
We're ranked third in the division
which is why the whole thing stuck in my craw (that’s old-timer talk).
Actually, my only concern with the rankings is whether or not I’m inflating the talent on the team. I suspect that there’s an East Coast bias in there somewhere.
The thing with the NFC West is that I believe it’ll be tougher this year. Seattle should be better, and so should the Rams. The Niners will definitely be better. I’m not so sure how much better that Arizona will be. Maybe a better running game, but maybe Warner is getting old. Their passing offense wasn’t so hot with Leinart behind the wheel. So I see a little tighter race. Remember, last season the Cards ball-controlled us in the first game and we blew the second game with Martz’s brain farts in the last minute. I’m just saying that we very easily could have one at least one of those games with last year’s roster.
The point is that Arizona won’t waltz through the division this year. If Seattle is better, those games will be tougher against the Cards too.
League-wide, are the Jets, Buffalo and Washington better than the Niners? Does TO make the Bills that much better? Are the Jets going to do better with a rookie quarterback? And I’ll wait to see if Haynesworth on defense is enough to overcome the Skins’ problems on offense. I’m not sold that the Eagles have solved all their problems either, and with their DC out of the loop I wonder if they’ll be able to outscheme their opponents this year. And I think that the Bears are in for a fall. Of course, a lot of what I think is what I feel and how that much translates into reality is in the future.
In any case, sometimes I just want to bust John Clayton in the chops.
by Bob In Beaverton on May 30, 2009 1:30 PM PDT up reply actions
I say......
Who cares?
The chicken-cluckers at the evil empire can talk all the want, not knowing anything about our team. I’m surprised Sando was part of the rankings though, you’d think he’d know enough to put us down there. Seattle bias too, I guess. What are they gonna cry foul when injuries don’t happen and they still suck??? What’s gonna happen to Zona once Warner goes down? The Rams have improved on paper, can they put it to the field?
Seesh. All these teams have issues. I’m not worried about some egotistical journalists in a log cabin in Connecticut writing about my Niners and my Shaun Hill…..
MURS for President!!!!!!!
Sando
He actually ranked us 19th. It was the highest of anybody, with Matt Williamson of Scouts Inc second at 21st.
Voter rankings: http://myespn.go.com/blogs/nfcwest/0-9-134/Power-rankings—How-the-voters-voted.html
by David Fucillo on May 30, 2009 11:19 AM PDT up reply actions
http://www.zackdaddy.com/uploads/thumbs/rodneydangerfield_mod.jpg
im gonna be all up on you like a spider monkey!
by remembering9ergods on May 30, 2009 12:24 PM PDT up reply actions
im gonna be all up on you like a spider monkey!
by remembering9ergods on May 30, 2009 12:24 PM PDT reply actions
That's why...
I don’t watch ESPN, not unless it’s a game. Most of these guys are _________ (fill in the blank).
"The voice of the intellect is a soft one, but it does not rest until it has gained a hearing"
by Jeff_Fuller_49 on May 30, 2009 12:57 PM PDT reply actions
Used dish towels....? ...... I give up
Blind devotion.
by ProfessorBigelow on May 30, 2009 3:41 PM PDT up reply actions
You're...
answers are all correct.
"The voice of the intellect is a soft one, but it does not rest until it has gained a hearing"
by Jeff_Fuller_49 on May 30, 2009 7:44 PM PDT up reply actions
Again
I’m going to be a grammar Nazi here (merely for the sake of the language though, not just to be a [site decorum])… You’re equates to “you are,” so in this case it would be “your” to indicate possession.
I love you! (Did that take away any sting? I felt dirty inside)
ooops,
Your…. thanks.
"The voice of the intellect is a soft one, but it does not rest until it has gained a hearing"
by Jeff_Fuller_49 on May 31, 2009 12:45 PM PDT up reply actions
Rankings
I agree with pwarren85: we’re rated where we are because this is the weakest division in the NFL. The division champ finished with 2 points more than they gave up all season. Barely over .500 The rest were below average to stinky.
We have a journeyman level QB as last season’s finishing starter (albeit one that gets the most out of his talent), and a 1st pick as backup that may or may not have enough talent to become better than a journeyman. Our O line, well, again, I see no improvement.
I withhold my opinion on our head coach. Except to say it would be nice to hire one with a modicum of head coaching experience somewhere, at some level, before he runs the 9ers.
On the other hand even in our glory years, the NFL West was not a very strong division, so maybe if we can feast on those 6 inter-divisional games….. get a break here and there on a few games outside our division…we’ll see.
I think we deserve this ranking, but…that’s why we play’em.
by icantmakeyouthink on May 30, 2009 1:10 PM PDT reply actions
Rankings Schmankings
I aggree with icantmakeyouthink. The rankings only matter to handicapers and dip o’s who don’t know squat about the game and only use them for playing the odds at Vegas and the local football pool. The only rankings that realy matter are where the niners are each week in the devision. As for getting respect i have always belived that “RESPECT IS EARNED” and not given. So if we want respect we are going to have to go out and earn it on the field.
“…. and dats da name of dat tune….”
by WC-Ninerhead on May 30, 2009 1:31 PM PDT up reply actions
"Is a Kyle Orton-led Broncos squad better than the 49ers?"
Why not? Orton would be in the mix for a starting gig in San Francisco, but the main difference is that the Broncos have an elite offensive line, supremely productive ground game, and fantastic targets.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
1-3 not bad
The broncos have a suspect line, and a mediocre ground game. If their ground game was so nice they wouldn’t have 30 RB’s on their roster now. Our ground game will be better this year. A healthy 49er off line will be better, and our wr’s are emerging.
How about we debate using stats and logic?
- Jay Cutler was one of the least sacked QBs last year.
- The Broncos ground-game averaged a ridiculous 4.8 YPC, despite a roundtable of street FAs at RB. They can plug anyone in and have 100 yards rushing.
The 49ers offensive line and WR crew may improve, but they certainly still aren’t on par with the proven great units that the Broncos possess.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on May 30, 2009 8:29 PM PDT up reply actions
No defense in 'Zona, either.
Obviously not the same and personally I don’t think Denver will do well, but if they don’t, it’s definitely not because of their offense, which ranks among the elite.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on May 30, 2009 9:52 PM PDT up reply actions
Elite offense?
Not anymore….
They still have the Line
But it takes a lot of things to have a productive run game (Cutler’s arm strength kept the defense honest)
by SportsChicken on May 30, 2009 11:36 PM PDT up reply actions
Guys come one now, it’s ESPN all they do is favor teams that won last year and what rank teams from “their” best and worse offseason moves. ESPN picked Cinci to win their division last year, they did the same with the Cowboys, Tampa Bay and New Orleans. They even went as far as to say the Lions will be 500 and could make the playoffs. Get real. Take a look at which teams the 9ers lost to by 10 points, Cards twice, Dolphins and Pats, all 3 were playoff teams, not to mention they should have beat the Eagles. Blew a 10 point 4th quarter lead and lost by 14. Good job Nolan.
The Saints, Giants and Cowboys beat the 9ers by 10-14 points and Seattle the 2nd time around had to be a fluke.
With the schedule this year, I bet 10-6 or 11-5 is Shaun Hill starts.
Bottom line ESPN has no clue cause they have some may “Analyst” who all contradict eash other.
“Opinions are like @$$es everyone has one and they all stink.”
"Seattle the 2nd time around had to be a fluke."
So, because you were dominated in all aspects of the game by a team fielded of almost entirely backup players, it surely had to be a fluke, right?
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on May 30, 2009 3:51 PM PDT up reply actions
Wasn't Nolan fired like 5 days before the game?
= very limited game plan.
The cake is a lie.
by Sultan of Seitan on May 30, 2009 4:02 PM PDT up reply actions
Wasn't that the day that VD got sent to the locker room?
Singletary’s first game, the team was in disarray. JTO was benched halfway through it. That game was essentially the end of the Nolan regime.
by Bob In Beaverton on May 30, 2009 6:03 PM PDT up reply actions
To be fair
Rams and Raiders both fired their coaches and won the next week. The rams did have a bye week before their first games, but the raiders did not and beat the Jets before they went into their end season slump. It’s not like they rewrite the playbook mid season after a coaching change, especially when you have all the same cordinators and assistant coaches.
by Mind of no mind on May 30, 2009 6:25 PM PDT up reply actions
Exactly.
Martz’s offense has been solved. Where’s Martz working this year? In his backyard.
by Bob In Beaverton on May 30, 2009 10:51 PM PDT up reply actions
Rankings
The Niners won’t be getting any respect until they prove they can win. I have no issue with it at all. The more they are over looked the better.
49ers and TOOL live, my personal Heaven!!!
Ratings
This list doesn’t mean shit, it’s good that we’re flying under the radar, every year there’s a team that no one expects to do any thing and they have a good or even a great year. let’s wait and see what happens.I think 2010 will be the year the niners start to make some noise, 2010 and beyond we should be competitive year in and year out and win some championships. Any how we only have 2 more months to get through until we have football again ye ha.
by bmcrae83@yahoo.com on May 30, 2009 4:17 PM PDT reply actions
I see no reason to listen to any of these rankings
Fooch is right, it is just journalists throwing out their ideas. They have 31 other teams to cover, and it’s not like they treat all of them equally. None of the national journalists have really paid any attention to the niners since Singletary came in, and the ranking they have given is basically their collective thoughts on us from the past 4 or 5 years.
Look at Arizona. No one talked about them until last year when they went to the Super Bowl. Now they’re even mentioned more than half the teams in this league. And besides, rankings are just predictions. I think it’s more of a quickly put together update than a well thought out list.
The press is good. Everyone wants to have their team mentioned by the media, wants them to be important. But when it really comes down to it, there is no true importance.
49ers fans
And the Seahawks fans say our site is full of homers? Really?
by David Fucillo on May 30, 2009 5:19 PM PDT up reply actions
I'm not trying to stir anything up here and don't mean to sound rude, really, but
at least our fanbase (or at least, at FieldGulls anyway) are perfectly fine with the fact that we’d give our QB unit a C, despite having a 3 time Pro-Bowl, 1 time All-Pro QB and a backup who was more than serviceable in his tenure as starter. Now, if we were going by the way you judged the 49ers QBs, we’d easily score an A+
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on May 30, 2009 6:18 PM PDT up reply actions
I don't want to seem confrontational, but...
Your talent that your QBs once had in the past does not match their level of play now. It was painfully obvious that your QBs are not capable of leading your team in the long run, and as the days continue to come off the calendar, their skill diminishes. Seneca Wallace was a stop gap solution, aided by the fact that he played the 49ers in the midst of a coaching change and a multi-game losing streak, led by a QB that is no longer on the team for obvious reasons.
What I’m trying to say here is that your expectations are generous, at best. C is average, and your QBs are well, well below average. So listen up, o ye resident of a glass house. Put the stones down, and take out a pen and paper…
The 49ers on the other hand have QBs with talent, QBs that are young and on the up-and-up. Our starter (Hill) is 7-3 as a starter, and looking at your QBs last ten starts, Hasselbeck is 2-8, and Wallace is 4-6. Far, far, far from average. Hill is a leader that the offense follows that has produced results at the helm of the offense, Smith has undeniable skill, just needs some stability, Huard is a proven back-up (similar to Wallace) and Davis has a huuuge upside for the future.
So before you try and talk crap, oops, I mean “not sound rude”, try to at least pretend you know something about your rival QBs you are trying to criticize. The fans here are more knowledgeable about their QBs than you know, so it might be smart to defer to their better judgment instead of blindly following the ESPN and NFL network analysts that are more concerned with Brett Favre’s choice of underwear than researching the quality of play for most NFL teams, 49ers and Seahawks included.
But I’m not trying to stir anything up, or anything…
Blind devotion.
by ProfessorBigelow on May 30, 2009 6:51 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Oof... many grammatical errors
I apologize english majors
Blind devotion.
by ProfessorBigelow on May 30, 2009 6:52 PM PDT up reply actions
Of course, no confrontations.
- Wins are not a QB stat. At all. If that were the case, Vince Young would be an elite QB and the no-shit franchise signal caller of the Titans, and that dinosaur Kerry Collins wouldn’t have just been offered a contract extension as the starter.
- Seneca Wallace did well enough to win, but usually there were other circumstances that led to our losses under him, like our underperforming defense. Conversely, Shaun Hill’s 7-3 record isn’t that impressive when you put it into context; he took over when the 49ers had the league’s easiest second-half schedule, playing teams the likes of the Rams, Redskins, Jets, and Bills. Not very fearsome at all.
- Saying the 49ers have QBs with talent is a bit generous. Alex Smith has looked more and more like a bust with each passing season, Shaun Hill was undrafted. And when there’s an open QB competition, the QB situation isn’t good.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on May 30, 2009 8:42 PM PDT up reply actions
Regardless of the team you face you still have to produce
The Redskins had the 4th defense in the league and he had a terrible game and came back from a lousy start. It’s a short career but he is above 60 percent in passing.
M. S. #50
But they had a pretty bad pass-rush that couldn't take advantage of SF's relatively weak line.
Regardless, I think Shaun Hill isn’t terrible but it seems a stretch to think he’s going to take the team somewhere meaningful.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on May 31, 2009 1:32 PM PDT up reply actions
..not more than
..thinking Branch is?
by Josh G and the Shaun Hill band wagon on May 31, 2009 1:41 PM PDT up reply actions
Isn't the Redskin's secondary....
All 1st round picks?
They had a good team at the time.
Don’t try to downplay Shaun Hill’s victories last year.
by SportsChicken on May 31, 2009 8:13 PM PDT up reply actions
"Don’t try to downplay Shaun Hill’s victories last year."
Wins aren’t a QB stat, and the 49ers strength of schedule was the NFL’s easiest when Shaun Hill took over.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Jun 1, 2009 12:53 PM PDT up reply actions
Wins are not a QB stat? wins are the ONLY QB stat who cares if you go 11-24 for 171 yards if ur team wins.
wins
What he probably means is that wins in football are dependent on so many variables that a QBs win/loss record is tough to tell how good that particular QB is.
by David Fucillo on Jun 1, 2009 11:43 AM PDT up reply actions
In that case, Trent Dilfer is better than Dan Marino because he won when it counted.
>Sarcasm<
In that case, why don’t we say Joe Flacco is an elite QB because his team went to the AFC Championship? I mean, his awful stats in the playoffs and the fact that his defense ranks among the NFL’s best carried him there should be overlooked because by golly, he ‘won’ all those games.
Wins are not a QB stat. Why don’t we say Vernon Davis is also 7-3 as a starter in that time frame?
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Jun 1, 2009 12:45 PM PDT up reply actions
I hate Branch as much as anyone because of his injuries and 1st round given up to get him.
But there’s no denying he’s a fantastic talent, plus has had two of some of the best Super Bowl performances by a receiver. He’s not too far removed from a Super Bowl MVP; that alone gives him far more credibility than every WR on the 49ers roster aside from Bruce, who’s nearly 37 years old.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on May 30, 2009 8:32 PM PDT up reply actions
Branch over any WR on the 49ers?
Ok…..
by SportsChicken on May 30, 2009 11:41 PM PDT up reply actions
Who would you rather have?
I’m a big fan of Crabtree but if I were going to bet on who’d be more productive next season over the course of 16 games, it would be Branch no question.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on May 31, 2009 1:27 PM PDT up reply actions
He hasn't played...
more than 14 games in a season since coming to Seattle and 37 year old Bruce had better numbers last year than any of the three Branch has had in Seattle.
I'd rather have Brandon Jones
Over Branch….
by SportsChicken on May 31, 2009 8:16 PM PDT up reply actions
Brandon Jones is arguably the most irrelevant of the 49ers receivers.
Even the Titans didn’t want to keep him.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Jun 1, 2009 3:27 PM PDT up reply actions
credibility..
..for being on a super bowl losing team? um what? having a great day when you win is one thing, having a great day when you team loses in the superbowl. Let’s see um, how much of those preformances were due to a pass happy offense trying to come from behind, sounds like you are basing your 2 best superbowl performances by a reciever pretty low.. this is Jerry Rice country.. take your sorry broken Branch a** out of here, and you think we’re homers pathetic..
by Josh G and the Shaun Hill band wagon on May 31, 2009 12:30 AM PDT up reply actions
No, credibility for being a two-time Super Bowl winner with the Patriots, including winning SBMVP once.
Giving your receivers unit a ‘B’ despite one of the oldest players in the league and a ton of unproven players is being a homer.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on May 31, 2009 1:29 PM PDT up reply actions
Rice and Bruce are still laughing..
..and giving our receiver a B is very accurrate, this is with out even taking into account Crabtree production. This is simply going on how our recievers got better last year. I alrady believe Morgan is better, a will have a better year than Branch.
We don’t care about Branch, we didn’t when he was on the Pats either.
by Josh G and the Shaun Hill band wagon on May 31, 2009 1:36 PM PDT up reply actions
I think..
..most sites are full of homers, but so what. If you are gonna bet money on your team, you need to check your fanhood at the door, but any blogger is gonna be a homer about his team, I think being optimistic about your team, is a good thing, that’s why they play the game on sundays.
So my theory is everyboard is gonna have a majority of ‘homers’, which is why I would never nother to go to another teams blog, you might as well being talking trash the guy who shows up in the jersey a division rivial, sure they have a right to be there, but how many poeple really want him there.
In fact, I appreciate a fan going to an a way game and wearing their teams colors much more admirable, then going to their blog and doing the same. Not taking anything away from Fooch, from my understanding he is somewhat obligated to representing NN on other NFL blogs, so please don;t get those points misconstrued.
by Josh G and the Shaun Hill band wagon on May 30, 2009 6:23 PM PDT up reply actions
I heard that!!!
Those of you who have actually been to a NINER game you KNOW what this is!!!!!
To be said in A BIG VOICE LOUD AND PROUD with as much ATTITUTE as you can.
GO NINERS!!!!!!!
by WC-Ninerhead on May 30, 2009 6:59 PM PDT up reply actions
I liked the pic someone posted on that blog
of Nate Davis with the 13 backwards.
It was funny.
The cake is a lie.
by Sultan of Seitan on May 30, 2009 6:41 PM PDT up reply actions
I posted that, heh.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on May 30, 2009 8:43 PM PDT up reply actions
Much of their site...
seems excited about Branch more than Housh. Branch has gone over 700 yard once since being their and has actually gotten worse every year. Plus he hasn’t even completed a full season since going to Seattle.
But if healthy, Branch is a game-breaking WR. Refer to: Patriots @ Seahawks, Seahawks @ Cardinals last season.
We’re excited about Housh but we sort of have a gauge of what his role is in the offense because we’ve been so used to Bobby Engram for most of the last decade.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on May 30, 2009 8:45 PM PDT up reply actions
But he's not healthy
And he doesn’t stay healthy.
You saying he’s a game breaker is like me saying Marvel Smith is a game breaker when he’s healthy.
by SportsChicken on May 30, 2009 11:42 PM PDT up reply actions
If you read the WR Roundtable, you'd know that Branch hadn't missed many games due to injury before being traded.
Most of injuries have been really freak accidents and bad luck.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on May 31, 2009 1:31 PM PDT up reply actions
That was three years ago.
Nice try but for your team in the last three years he hasn’t been healthy. Marvel Smith was healthy three years ago also playing for another team (Stealers).
Why shouldn't they?
You’re going out of your way to make them think so.
I’ve strongly disagreed with each of our grades thus far, but no one’s going to see that. If it were up to me, our rankings would be:
QB: C-
RB: B+
WR: C+
This.
To anyone from the outside looking in, the 49ers WR group looks pretty average, if even that. I think it’s pretty fair that people see the 49ers WR group as a C, if not closer to a D. It’s all a matter of how much stock you put in “potential.” Considering the infinite amount of players who have “tons of potential” but never get close to realizing it, I’d say that it’s totally fair to believe that Morgan/Hill aren’t better than Average (which is what a C is), and Crabtree can’t be expected to add too much immediately (because WRs tend to take two to three seasons before making an impact, not to mention he’s a bit behind in terms of workouts as it is).
I'd see them somewhere similar to that too.
One could make a case that the QB situation is amongst the worst in the league, if not the worst.
Frank Gore is an absolute stud but not ironman and his durability may be in question. Coffee and Sheets might be good, might not.
WRs almost entirely relying on potential on a position that takes very long for potential to be realized, and a really old player.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Jun 1, 2009 12:51 PM PDT up reply actions
Outsiders
One thing about outsiders is that they don’t see the potential the fans of the team do. Im sure that other people might think that Josh Morgan and Crabtree can be great but they haven’t seen Jason Hill play. So fans of a team not only have a little biased but they are also more knowledgeable about their team than a fan of another team would. Singletary is confident in Shaun Hill but some reporter from New York is going to see that he hasn’t started a season therefore Shaun Hill can’t/won’t be a solid starter.
I'm a 49er fan...
And I know Hill hasn’t been a starter until he found a team with no QB’s. Guess what? He became starter by default.
Well, we're waiting....
Italia1970
are you a Seahawks fan or a Cardinals fan?
by Bob In Beaverton on May 30, 2009 6:05 PM PDT up reply actions
Sweet
Just so that ya know that there are true DIE HARD NINER FANS who are ALIVE AND KICKING
the NINERHEAD said 11 and 5 and on to the playoffs
Go NINERS
by WC-Ninerhead on May 30, 2009 7:53 PM PDT up reply actions
lets see where were ranked after
week 4. thats when its actually based on something that means anything.
I take full responsibility for my irresponsibility.
You know
this is the deadest time of the year for football fans.
Somehow I knew that this topic would gwake people up. Thanks, Fooch.
by Bob In Beaverton on May 30, 2009 10:57 PM PDT reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
