Why the 49ers won't win the Super Bowl
by 9erguy on Jun 13, 2009 5:54 PM PDT
Email
Print
I love this team just as much as any fan. I hope every year that this is the year. Still, I know that this isn't the year. You see, this is in all likelihood a 9-11 win team and most fans know that. Now, I'm sure many people will point to the Cards as an example of how far a 9 win team can go. (Almost winning the Super Bowl). The thing is, the team hasn't done enough to upgrade the offensive line nor has it done enough to get some serious pass rushers. Marvel Smith is adequate but still isn't enough to shore up the amount of pressure we allow to get to our quarterbacks. There is no way we win with an o-line that allowed 55 sacks last season and far more pressure than what shows up in the stats. How do you think they'll hold up under the pressure of a Super Bowl?
Defensively, the team has a rock solid linebacking core but still averaged less than 2 sacks per game. (30 in all). To stop someone like Big Ben or Manning (take your pick) running around back there finding their guy, we need a stronger line. On top of that, the ability of Nate Clemens to shut down a top receiver is questionable. Anyone remember what T.O. did to us? He isn't even in my top 10 either. At best, I think we got some really good players to rebuild with and I think we go to the divisionals; baring any major injuries of course. I think you give Crabtree a couple years to develop and get some pieces on defense and the team will be dangerous.
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.
70 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
"the team has a rock solid linebacking core"
just so you know:
Morgan breaks through in 2009!
by grantmp on Jun 13, 2009 8:35 PM PDT reply actions 2 recs
nice
The value of the graphics FanPost! Speaking of which, if you search graphic in our search engine and then click on FanPosts, it’s the second from the top.
As for the FanPost, I’m not really expecting a Super Bowl appearance, but who knows….crazier things have happened….right?
by David Fucillo on Jun 13, 2009 8:55 PM PDT up reply actions
heck, if the Cardinals can make it, so can the Niners
Basically everything would have to break right—Crabtree, Morgan, Goldson, Haralson, Lawson, Chilo, M.Smith, some QB (remember Eli did it too), and some DE (Balmer/Soap/Evans) would all have to be what we all hope they can be, but it isn’t outside the realm of possibility.
I like what we have in our linebacking corps (not ‘core’ hence my post above) generally, but the team is thin at OLB, so some depth there would be great.
Morgan breaks through in 2009!
OLB corps
It is rather thin, but I do think the talent in place could conceivably be enough if things bounced right. If Haralson takes the next step up to double digit sacks, Manny Lawson becomes a decent pass rush threat, while maintaining his coverage ability, then they get one more guy to step up as a threat off the bench (whether it be Moore, Brooks, etc…)
by David Fucillo on Jun 14, 2009 10:42 AM PDT up reply actions
precisely
9-7
or
8-8 could even possibly do it in this division
"Those boos really motivate me to make something happen." - Bonds
did any one actually watch that game.......
Why does everyone blame Nate Clements for Owens monsterous game? If you actually watched the game Clements didn’t guard Owens the entire game. Some plays required the safety to cover deep, and some plays Clements played excellent coverage until Romo escaped the rush. I Think we were 3 sacks away from winning that game. it would be a third down conversion needed, our pass rush would get in romos face but Romo side stepped the def or shrug a would be tackle. That’s the only reason clements broke coverage and allowed owens to get free.
Because SportsCenter anchors would rather think of new ways to say "Clements got burned" than "Clements is was the victim of a poor pass rush and a questionable zone coverage scheme"
And also, people like to forget everything that they witnessed on game day when Stuart Scott makes them giggle.
My pessimism goes to the point of suspecting the sincerity of the pessimists.
You're right, Nate Clements is perfect and completely locked down Terrell Owens and routinely shuts down opponents' #1 receivers.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Jun 14, 2009 8:42 PM PDT up reply actions
Hmm.
Still, I know that this isn’t the year. You see, this is in all likelihood a 9-11 win team and most fans know that
This almost seems contradictory to me. In my opinion, the playoffs are a crapshoot. Things happen, and the better team doesn’t always win. That said, 9-to-11 wins would be absolutely fantastic – and would give us as good a shot to win it all as any other playoff team.
I’m not saying we will win it all (or even that we’ll win that many games). All I’m getting at is that no one should be surprised to see a team that they don’t currently expect, a team with 9-to-11 wins, become Superbowl champions.
My pessimism goes to the point of suspecting the sincerity of the pessimists.
That's kind of what I mean.
9-to-11 wins would be pretty miraculous. Without question a best-case-scenario.
5-to-7 is a practical, realistic expectation.
It figures that the one post in which I’m not defending our crappiness, I get called out for being overly optimistic. This particular post was made only in response to a purely hypothetical situation in which we, or any team, wins between 9 and 11 games – and was meant to express my opinion of that team’s chances to advance through the playoffs.
My pessimism goes to the point of suspecting the sincerity of the pessimists.
Part 33: Why the Lakers won't win the Super Bowl
Also: Why the 49ers won’t go 16-0, Why Shaun Hill will throw one interception, and Why Michael Crabtree won’t be MVP.
Blind devotion.
by ProfessorBigelow on Jun 15, 2009 10:42 AM PDT up reply actions
Boy......your swift.
Rome wasn’t built in a day, neither were the ‘Cards, Steelers, Colts, or anyone else who has lifted the Lombardi tropy. I hate to admit, but, the 9’ers are still in a re-building mode with a new Head Foreman. Give them time. Don’t jump off the Golden Gate bridge just yet. You might be surprised by what is around the corner.
K.C.Edwards -AKA- "THE" DarkkStarr
Maybe I'm just wary because of all the false-optimism of the Nolan era...
…but I really think that the statement “this is in all likelihood a 9-11 win team and most fans know that” is a bit far fetched. A lot of people around here seem to think this team is guaranteed to win 9 games; how exactly? Our out of division schedule is very tough.
+1
9-7 will probably win the NFC west again this year. I think that would be a great season for SF. To get 11 wins SF will have to go 6-0 in division and 5-5 out of division. I have SF going 6-10 based upon the schedule, which I realize is one game worse than last year’s record. I think your team is getting better, but so are Seattle, vikings, chicago, greenbay, and houston. Indy and Tenn as they played last year are already better than anyone in the NFC west. That first game against the Cards will tell us a lot about where both teams are going this year and set the tone for the NFC west race. I can’t wait, baby.
by Drullin'OverDaCards on Jun 15, 2009 3:04 PM PDT up reply actions
drullin'overdaniners
are you logged into seattle,vikings,chicago,greenbay,and houstons websites as well? indy and tenn? are you a die hard cardinal fan? or are you a die hard 49er fan using the cards as a decoy? hmmmm
Nothing wrong...
… with some cross-fanbase chatter. It’d be silly if all the comments on the site were restricted to 49ers fans, I’d think.
So the team got worse from last year?
The Niners are at least a 7 win team.
Don't sweat it. I'm illiterate.
by methodrampage on Jun 16, 2009 10:49 AM PDT up reply actions
How was last years schedule easier?
We played the NFC East and AFC East. I think both last years and this years schedule are pretty equal.
Fans stuck in the 80's are lame. Respect the past, live in the now.
At least 7 wins sounds solid
Im OK with predicting a sweep of the Rams, but neither the Cards or Seahawks. We have no idea where Detroit will be come week 16, but let’s say that’s a win, too. So, say we split our series with the Seahawks and Cards; that gives us 5 wins.
Out of division games we should be competitive in (based on nothing, really), are @HOU, @Minn, @GB, ATL, CHI, JAX. These games will define who the 49ers are this season. I do not like any of our away matchups, GB is the most favorable IMO, and I really don’t think you can guarantee a win against any of those three teams at home. However, I think we can take two of those three.
As of today, Indy, Philly, and Tennessee are clearly a level above us at this point.
Looking at the schedule, 9 wins will be great; but for 10 and up, you’re looking at this team taking a major step forward this season. That would mean alot of wins against playoff-caliber teams.
by InTimmyWeTrust on Jun 16, 2009 12:11 PM PDT up reply actions
RE: @HOU, @Minn, @GB, ATL, CHI, JAX.
I think all of those games are winnable for the Niners. Will they win all of them? No but I’m fairly confident the Niners can win atleast two, probably 3, of them.
Don't sweat it. I'm illiterate.
by methodrampage on Jun 16, 2009 1:32 PM PDT up reply actions
How could you possibly think the 49ers have a chance to step toe to toe with any of those offenses
sans Chicago?
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Jun 17, 2009 11:54 AM PDT up reply actions
Because our defense can handle them.
Didn’t P. Willis hold Peterson to like 3 yards the first time they played?
And JAX doesn’t really have such a powerhouse offense.
by SportsChicken on Jun 17, 2009 3:20 PM PDT up reply actions
I actually have a lot of respect of each of the teams listed there.
However, I have no problem seeing any of those offenses held to under 20 points by a middle-of-the-road defensive unit. We’re a little better than the NFL average on that side of the ball, so going “toe-to-toe” with said squads seems likely.
My pessimism goes to the point of suspecting the sincerity of the pessimists.
Yes, but offenses like Minnesota, Houston, Green Bay, and Atlanta are all top-tier.
Even elite. Especially considering the shortcomings of the 49ers secondary, it’s not hard to imagine any of those teams dropping 25 points with relative ease.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Jun 17, 2009 7:32 PM PDT up reply actions
"Elite"?
That’s giving them way too much credit.
Minnesota currently has no real QB, and we’ve seen theme struggle to come back from deficits. Even if they do manage to get Favre, I’m not sold on their aerial game being all that good. Green Bay has a weak running game. Houston and Atlanta, while good, have offenses nowhere near the caliber of, say, New England, Pittsburgh, or Indy.
My pessimism goes to the point of suspecting the sincerity of the pessimists.
Que?
Okay, let’s nix Minnesota and say Patrick Willis can keep that ground game in check.
Green Bay may have a weak ground game but that passing attack is definitely elite. Aaron Rodgers in his first year as a starter had a season just as good as Matt Hasselbeck’s 2007. Do you really think Nate Clements and co. can hold Donald Driver, Greg Jennings, Jordy Nelson, and whoever else they have in check?
Houston had the #4 offense in the league if I recall correctly, they are dangerous in just about every aspect of offense. Atlanta’s offense was already borderline elite and adding the greatest TE of all time and a young QB getting better isn’t going to hurt them.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Jun 18, 2009 11:18 AM PDT up reply actions
I like HOU the best but
They’re rather inconsistent and beatable. MINN would be a slugfest and if the Niners can stack the box and keep Peterson under 150 yards it’s a winnable game. GB defense is transitioning and I worrying less about their passing offense late in the season in GB. ATL, naming Ryan struggles on the road. CHI the offense is getting old and they are who the Cards thought they were but we won’t let them off the hook. JAX defense isn’t was it once was.
Don't sweat it. I'm illiterate.
by methodrampage on Jun 18, 2009 7:32 AM PDT up reply actions
ATL home vs. away
I agree that ATL is beatable away from home. Atlanta has a surprising home field advantage and this impacts both their ability to get to the quarterback defensively and their rushing game (check Turner’s home/away splits if you don’t believe me).
Morgan breaks through in 2009!
NFC East games were surprisingly winnable.
We almost beat the Eagles, our D gave us countless opportunities against NYG in the 4th quarter (JTO blew every single one), we won against WSH and I don’t care to comment on the DAL game.
As for the AFC East, we won 2 of 4 (could have won 3-4 easily)
This year we are playing the AFC south and we have a very good chance of losing every single game against that division…..
The NFC North would be easier but the way the games are set up makes them harder.
MIN: Favre will be good early in the season
CHI: We’ll play them with only 4 days rest
GB: We play them in the snow
DET: Should be a W
by SportsChicken on Jun 16, 2009 2:29 PM PDT up reply actions
Maybe I'm just out of the loop here.
But I do not see Favre putting on an NFL uniform this year. And that’s not just wishful thinking…I really don’t think it’ll happen.
My pessimism goes to the point of suspecting the sincerity of the pessimists.
Didn't he publicly state that he still wants to play football (again)?
He just said that if the doctor clears him he’ll play for Minnesota.
Childress was even expecting him to attend OTAs.
by SportsChicken on Jun 16, 2009 4:13 PM PDT up reply actions
"So the team got worse from last year? "
It’s not like they hugely improved. Crabtree could be great but relying on a rookie WR to immediately come in and be a productive #1 receiver is lunacy. By all indications, Dre Bly is not as good as Walt Harris. And the 49ers no longer have the league’s easiest second-half schedule to rack up some wins on.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Jun 17, 2009 11:55 AM PDT up reply actions
It actually is improved
The 8 or so games that the Niners won’t have to suffer through JTO is a drastic improvement in itself. Although no big names were brought in during the offseason the Niners have several young players who’s development will also improve the team. Typically when a young team doesn’t lose any impact players they tend to progress and improve.
Don't sweat it. I'm illiterate.
by methodrampage on Jun 18, 2009 7:37 AM PDT up reply actions
Please stop blaming everything on JTO.
My pessimism goes to the point of suspecting the sincerity of the pessimists.
What have I blamed on JTO?
Is Hill not a better QB than JTO? If he is, then the Niners are improved.
Don't sweat it. I'm illiterate.
by methodrampage on Jun 18, 2009 2:01 PM PDT up reply actions
The 8 or so games that the Niners won’t have to suffer through JTO is a drastic improvement in itself.
You, like so many 49er fans, basically blamed the first half of the season on JTO.
Frankly, Hill and Smith really aren’t all that much more promising. Telling people this season will be better simply by taking that one guy out of the equation is kind of like saying that the US economy and foreign relations will experience “drastic improvement” simply by electing someone not named George W. Bush.
My pessimism goes to the point of suspecting the sincerity of the pessimists.
I didn't blame anything on JTO
Stop making stuff up. All I said is that Hill is a better QB than JTO and thusly the Niners will be improved because they should get better QB play through the entire season of ‘09-’10 than they did last year. JTO turned the ball over 17 times in 9 games and any simpleton can recognize that the reduction in TO that Hill will provide will improve the team.
Also, you’re analogy is about as poor as they come.
Don't sweat it. I'm illiterate.
by methodrampage on Jun 19, 2009 9:44 AM PDT up reply actions
Hill is a huge improvement over JTO.
I blame JTO for making too many boneheaded plays and Nolan for keeping him in for far too long. It was probably one of the things that costed him his job.
Fans stuck in the 80's are lame. Respect the past, live in the now.
It was probably one of the things that costed him his job.
I don’t think keeping O’Sullivan in there had very much to do with his job. If that were the case, Singletary would have started Hill from the moment he became the interim, otherwise the 49ers wouldn’t have had any of it.
Singletary did not have a ton of time to prepare for Seattle
I think he had it in his mind that if JTO were to struggle again, then it was over and he made the change right away. He wasn’t going to keep him in there any longer. Nolan should have pulled the plug on him earlier. I don’t think it was the main reason but I do feel it was the last straw for Nolan. He should’ve taken him out in the Eagles or Giants games.
Fans stuck in the 80's are lame. Respect the past, live in the now.
"o-line that allowed 55 sacks"
Credit “Mad Mike” Martz and JTO for most of those sacks. There’s no way we’ll allow 55 with Singletary and Raye calling the shots…not to mention Shaun Hill as our starter.
The Rams o-line didn't give up nearly that many with Martz.
Whereas Detroit’s did. Some of the sacks are indeed a product of Martz’ long-developing plays, but on the other hand, 55 sacks is also telling about the line.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Jun 17, 2009 11:57 AM PDT up reply actions
Did you see JTO play?
He wouldn’t let go of the ball and got sacked time after time.
Another thing you should look at is the number of sacks ALLOWED by the starting offensive line.
quite a few of the sacks weren’t called on the offensive line.
by SportsChicken on Jun 17, 2009 3:22 PM PDT up reply actions
That St Louis team was built by a real offensive genious, naned vermeil
Martz in herited and all-pro offensive line and WR’s. Not to mention Marshall Faulk. Yeah offense would be dangerous, they should have been a dynasty if he was soooo great!!
M. S. #50
Can you be a little more specific?
What stat are you putting him in top 5 at? Total rushing yards? Yards per carry? Total yards from scrimmage including receiving? Rushing tds? League wide I assume right, not NFC only?
I can always be talked into making a small bet or two, but we need to be specific.
by Drullin'OverDaCards on Jun 17, 2009 4:41 PM PDT up reply actions
top 5 hehehe
gore doesnt have the break away speed ,i dont see him being top 5 top 10 yes not 5
He's been a top 5 RB before
He doesn’t have elite speed but he has not problem busting 20+ yard gains.
Don't sweat it. I'm illiterate.
by methodrampage on Jun 18, 2009 7:38 AM PDT up reply actions
plenty break away speed
gore can be ran down from behind hind, but hes broken just as long of a run as willie parker who has some of the fastest wheels in the nfl. speed doesn’t make you the best at any position. gore is a combination of adequate speed power and balance. you get a pile up how often do you see gore come out of that pile sprinting down the middle of the field either trucking a safety or putting a move on a flat footed linebacker. that boys good, it’s undeniable. he just has to stay healthy. top 5 like i said hes done it before.
He may not break many 50+ yard runs...
But it wasn’t long ago that he was among the league leaders in 20+ gainers. He’s great at getting to the second level, even if he’s not fast enough to take it to the house. He’s also a back known for grinding out a regular 3-6 yards in any situation. Put him in a system where he’s the focal point, and it all sounds to me like a pretty good formula for top-5 rushing back.
My pessimism goes to the point of suspecting the sincerity of the pessimists.
lol
Total rushing yards. I know gore won’t wow anyone in terms of tds scored. He can be quite good in yds per carry. without injury top 5 rushing league wide baby. crushing the nfc west.
I'll take that bet.
You are betting F. Gore will be in the top 5 for total yards rushing in the regular season, league wide; I say he will not. How’s $20 sound?
by Drullin'OverDaCards on Jun 18, 2009 2:24 PM PDT up reply actions
what playoffs playoffs
first got make the playoffs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- Peyton Manning’s face on all 32 NFL logos
- Todd Haley could be in for a bumpy ride in Pittsburgh
- Alex Smith caddied for Jim Harbaugh at AT&T Pro-Am
- Boston (in) Common: Kevin Youkilis set to marry Tom Brady’s sister
- Giants to be honored with commemorative NY license plate; some would rather see a 9/11 plate
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.
