2-0
Posted: Sun Sep 19, 2010 9:22 pm
Hell yea that's what I'm talking about. Niners are next. Where is that fag nyeman @? That pastey homo still post here?
Page 1 of 1
Re: 2-0
Posted: Mon Sep 20, 2010 12:27 am
Another sloppy win, but I'll gladly take it....Cassel is still holding onto the ball way too long and when he doesn't he checks down way too early- the freaking FB had 5-6 catches today, and he should almost NEVER have a ball thrown his way. Thank God for Romeo Crennel is all I can say at this point.
Re: 2-0
Posted: Mon Sep 20, 2010 12:44 am
Cassel was pathetic in the 1st half. He actually looked somewhat like a NFL QB in the 2nd, leading some nice drives that ended up in FG's.
The defense won this game, though. Aside from not pressuring the QB much, a very solid effort. And they didn't allow Harrison or Cribbs to light them up like they did last year, which was good to see.
Brandon Flowers is playing great, what a pleasant surprise.
The defense won this game, though. Aside from not pressuring the QB much, a very solid effort. And they didn't allow Harrison or Cribbs to light them up like they did last year, which was good to see.
Brandon Flowers is playing great, what a pleasant surprise.
Re: 2-0
Posted: Mon Sep 20, 2010 2:49 am
kcdave wrote:Hell yea that's what I'm talking about. Niners are next. Where is that fag nyeman @? That pastey homo still post here?
I might be the only Niners fan left posting here.
I've just been biding my time, waiting for the Dorks to sell the team to someone who cares.
Re: 2-0
Posted: Mon Sep 20, 2010 4:01 pm
A win is a win. Really would like to see Charles getting some more touches for sure but damn it feels good to be 2-0 for the first time in several seasons. Scott, I agree it was really looking and sounding like Marty Ball circa 1995. Bring on the 49ers, soon to be 3-0!
Re: 2-0
Posted: Mon Sep 20, 2010 6:42 pm
...enjoy it while you can boys. I imagine Raiduhfan would be screaming Super Bowl about now.
Re: 2-0
Posted: Mon Sep 20, 2010 11:14 pm
I would be really happy with Martyball right now. Hell Im happy with 2 wins in a row? How long has it been for that even? Agreed, JC does need more carries.
Re: 2-0
Posted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 12:30 am
Little too soon to be over confident or looking past anybody, especially with a shaky QB at the helm. They just barely squeaked out both games.rnarn wrote:Bring on the 49ers, soon to be 3-0!
But yeah, being 2-0 the crowd will be large, vocal and not conducive to a 49er win so I like those chances as well.
And I'd love to see Charles getting more touches, especially swing passes and screens, but as long as we win, that's all that matters. Thomas Jones isn't chopped liver and has earned his carries in this league. You know dude isn't going to fumble. I don't begrudge handing him the ball one bit.
But as the season progresses, look for Charles to get more and more involved. Nothing wrong with keeping him fresh, humble, and hungry for now.
Re: 2-0
Posted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 1:31 am
I like seeing KC kicking ass. Rack them
Re: 2-0
Posted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 2:07 am
They gave the reigns to their son Jed. He seems to care and when once he gets adjusted to his senior class schedule, he'll be ready to make a difference.Dinsdale wrote:kcdave wrote:Hell yea that's what I'm talking about. Niners are next. Where is that fag nyeman @? That pastey homo still post here?
I might be the only Niners fan left posting here.
I've just been biding my time, waiting for the Dorks to sell the team to someone who cares.
Re: 2-0
Posted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 3:46 am
Cassel isn't merely "shaky." He is absolutely horrific: 16 of 28 for 176 yards, no TD's and 2 picks. That isn't gonna get it done in the NFL.War Wagon wrote:Little too soon to be over confident or looking past anybody, especially with a shaky QB at the helm.
Count your lucky stars if you win 3 more games this season.
Re: 2-0
Posted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 4:06 am
2nd place says what? 
btw, I noticed you were conveniently absent after last Monday nights game.
Understandable. You were probably on border patrol.
btw, I noticed you were conveniently absent after last Monday nights game.
Understandable. You were probably on border patrol.
Re: 2-0
Posted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 4:07 am
You and Paul belong together.War Wagon wrote:2nd place says what?
Re: 2-0
Posted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 4:13 am
oh great, Rumplewisdom.
I'd ride with Paul before you, that's for sure.
I'd ride with Paul before you, that's for sure.
Re: 2-0
Posted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 4:33 am
Just be lucky there are no pictures on a standings sheet.
SD was a nice win, but we all know that was an emotional primetime game under a newly refurbished Arrowhead stadium. Play it 10 more times at Arrouwhead on Sunday at 3pm with re-grand opening already behind you and SD probably beats you 9 out of the 10.
But, you played them once and you beat them once. That's all that matters right now.
An ugly win against Cleveland is nothing to be excited about. The Chefs are a bigger fraud than the Bucs right now as far as undefeated teams go.
SD was a nice win, but we all know that was an emotional primetime game under a newly refurbished Arrowhead stadium. Play it 10 more times at Arrouwhead on Sunday at 3pm with re-grand opening already behind you and SD probably beats you 9 out of the 10.
But, you played them once and you beat them once. That's all that matters right now.
An ugly win against Cleveland is nothing to be excited about. The Chefs are a bigger fraud than the Bucs right now as far as undefeated teams go.
Re: 2-0
Posted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 12:21 pm
Keep in mind, really shitty teams get the easiest schedules. KC is the poster child for shitty teams along with their red-headed step-sibling the Raiduhs. Add to that being in the shittiest conference, their shitty ass schedule is exponentially shitty.
I can see Kansas Shitty, er City, with 8-9 wins this year.
I can see Kansas Shitty, er City, with 8-9 wins this year.
Re: 2-0
Posted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 1:13 pm
Actually IF, only two games a year are impacted by the previous year's finish. The old "5th place schedule" was eliminated in 2002. Tell me you knew?IndyFrisco wrote:Keep in mind, really shitty teams get the easiest schedules. KC is the poster child for shitty teams along with their red-headed step-sibling the Raiduhs. Add to that being in the shittiest conference, their shitty ass schedule is exponentially shitty.
I can see Kansas Shitty, er City, with 8-9 wins this year.
In 2002, the NFL added a 32nd member, the Houston Texans. The Texans were placed in the AFC, with the Seahawks agreeing to return to the NFC (where they had played in their inaugural season) to balance the membership. This addition also allowed the league to go to a uniform schedule again, and correct some of the geographical confusion that had arisen over the years as teams relocated and the league expanded. The league went to an eight division, four team per division format.
Some of the new divisions maintained old rivalries intact, as the NFC North (Chicago, Detroit, Green Bay, and Minnesota), NFC East (Dallas, NY Giants, Philadelphia, and Washington), AFC West (Denver, Kansas City, Oakland, San Diego), and AFC East (Buffalo, Miami, New England, and NY Jets) continued rivalries that had been ongoing since prior to the AFL-NFL merger. The AFC North kept the northernmost members of the previous AFC Central together (Baltimore, Cincinnati, Cleveland, and Pittsburgh) Others corrected the geographical problems of the previous alignments, and created new divisions among teams that had previously not all been division rivals, including the NFC West (San Fransisco and Saint Louis, joined by Arizona and Seattle), the NFC South (Atlanta, Carolina, and New Orleans joined by Tampa Bay), and the AFC South (Jacksonville and Tennessee, joined by Indianapolis and Houston).
The current schedule format includes home and away division games (6 games), inter-conference matchups against all of the teams from one of the other divisions in the same conference, and against the same place finishers from the other two divisions (6 games), and intra-conference matchups against all the teams from one of the divisions from the other conference, on a rotating basis (4 games).
The rotation of intra-conference pairings is as follows:
2002: AFC West vs. NFC West, AFC North vs. NFC South, AFC South vs. NFC East, AFC East vs. NFC North
2003: AFC West vs. NFC North, AFC North vs. NFC West, AFC South vs. NFC South, AFC East vs. NFC East
2004: AFC West vs. NFC South, AFC North vs. NFC East, AFC South vs. NFC North, AFC East vs. NFC West
2005: AFC West vs. NFC East, AFC North vs. NFC North, AFC South vs. NFC West, AFC East vs. NFC South
The pattern then repeats starting in 2006.
For the inter-conference matchups between divisions, the following schedule is used to determine which divisions will face off each year:
2002: West versus East, North versus South
2003: West versus North, East versus South
2004: West versus South, North versus East
The pattern then repeats starting in 2005.
The playoff format was maintained as far as the number of teams qualifying in each conference. Because of the additional division, the top four seeds are now occupied by a division winner, so that the top wildcard team no longer hosts a game in the wildcard round, as had been the case from 1978 to 2001. Two teams now make the playoffs in each conference as a wildcard.
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/blog/?p=521
Re: 2-0
Posted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 2:10 pm
Yes, and ask anyone if they'd prefer to play Detroit and Cleveland rather than New England and Pittsburgh in those 2 games based upon prior year's finish. I'm pretty sure most would prefer the former. 2 games is 2 games. My prior post, while in some areas is subjective, is not subjective when I mentioned the scheduling breaks a team gets when finishing with a bad record.
Re: 2-0
Posted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 5:14 pm
Is is just me... or does B-Smack's post have the prefixes inter/intra backwards?
Re: 2-0
Posted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 6:47 pm
Your anger is misplaced. Jed York is a life-long Ninerfan and is running the team as such. There's been a huge change in the team environment since he's been brought in. Among other things, he brought in the new front office staff, fired Nolan, hired Singletary and got a stadium referendum passed.I might be the only Niners fan left posting here.
I've just been biding my time, waiting for the Dorks to sell the team to someone who cares.
I won't take this opportunity to take a shot at kcdave though. That'd be like giving a battered wife "two for flinching".
Re: 2-0
Posted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 7:13 pm
Still somewhat of a closet Niner fan here.Dinsdale wrote:kcdave wrote:Hell yea that's what I'm talking about. Niners are next. Where is that fag nyeman @? That pastey homo still post here?
I might be the only Niners fan left posting here.
I've just been biding my time, waiting for the Dorks to sell the team to someone who cares.
I grew up watching the likes of John Brodie, Ken Willard, Dave Parks, Gene Washington, Jimmy Johnson, Dave Wilcox, Bruce Taylor, Cedric Hardman etc., etc.
When I was really young Howard Mudd was a good friend of a family down the street and we saw him around the neighborhood a few times.
The 1980s were definitely the finest decade in pro football, as far as I'm concerned. Seeing that team go from decades of constant mediocrity to one of the greatest in NFL history in the space of about 2 seasons (thank you Bill Walsh) was really something. Kind of hard to follow them closely down here in Charger country but I still check up constantly. They actually looked pretty good last night. Seems like there's hope.
Re: 2-0
Posted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 7:18 pm
If that is the case why didn't he even inquire about a trade for McNabb? Alex Smith isn't going to win a big game on the road anytime soon.Your anger is misplaced. Jed York is a life-long Ninerfan and is running the team as such.
My guess is if the 9ers win the divison that will be good enough for the Yorks. While that may be a step in the right direction, the fact that ownership won't make an obvious improvement surely points to the fact that making a profit is first & foremost for them, and championships are secondary.
Re: 2-0
Posted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 10:43 pm
That's the folks at Pro Football Reference I was quoting. But now that I look at it, they appear to have gotten it dead wrong. I'd sent them a dead fish in the mail to indicate your displeasure.ucantdoitdoggieSTyle2 wrote:Is is just me... or does B-Smack's post have the prefixes inter/intra backwards?
Re: 2-0
Posted: Wed Sep 22, 2010 1:18 am
This is the first season Smith had a shot at starting the season with a decent offensive line, even though they're starting two rookies. Oops, starting center out week one with a broken leg and Rachal (RG) out with a stinger week two. So 2010 starts out with a guard playing center for the first time and a second-stringer at guard. Yeah, everyone has injuries, but JFC their O-line has been snakebit.Joe in PB wrote:If that is the case why didn't he even inquire about a trade for McNabb? Alex Smith isn't going to win a big game on the road anytime soon.Your anger is misplaced. Jed York is a life-long Ninerfan and is running the team as such.
But McNabb? Why the fukk would they want to pay top dollar for a guy who throws for 400yds one game and 3 picks the next...and is never in shape. And in case you haven't been paying attention, McNabb's record in big games is complete dogshit. Well, unless it's a "big game" in October that doesn't mean jack shit.
They drafted Nate Davis in the 3rd round last year, thinking that he would be the long term solution at QB. Davis was originally slated to be a 1st rounder until the story came out about his learning disability. The team put in a shitload of extra time desiging a visual way for him to learn the offense to compensate for his disability. He worked his ass off his first year, and he should have been the clear #2 ahead of David Carr this off-season. But instead of putting in extra time to show his committment, he spent the spring and summer chasing skirts, took a clear step backwards in his progress and ended up getting his ass cut.My guess is if the 9ers win the divison that will be good enough for the Yorks. While that may be a step in the right direction, the fact that ownership won't make an obvious improvement surely points to the fact that making a profit is first & foremost for them, and championships are secondary.
I live in the Bay Area, so I could list off a bunch more things that have changed since Jed York has taken over. But by far the biggest change has been that for the first time in damn near ten years, because of the improvements he's made across the board, when the team takes the field the fans expect them to win.
Re: 2-0
Posted: Wed Sep 22, 2010 11:32 am
Indy's point falls a little flat when you think of it as just a 12.5% difference, but there actually is some merit to what he's said, imo.KC Scott wrote:Worst rationalization for a bad post ever.IndyFrisco wrote: My prior post, while in some areas is subjective, is not subjective when I mentioned the scheduling breaks a team gets when finishing with a bad record.
Your Subjective interpretation accounts for 12.5% of the schedule - Not excatly overwhelming
Two games can make a big difference.
If you get to 8-8 you might be in contention for the playoffs.
A 6-10 record, on the other hand, had you drafting in the top 10 last season.
In 2009 the 'Tardinals made it to the Super Bowl after having a 9-7 record.
Where would they have been at 7-9?
Out of the playoffs and drafting 10th.
Re: 2-0
Posted: Wed Sep 22, 2010 12:31 pm
Or not. The reality is the out of conference and in conference divisional rotations actually have a hell of a lot more to do with strength of schedule changes than anything else.poptart wrote:Two games can make a big difference.
Re: 2-0
Posted: Wed Sep 22, 2010 2:51 pm
Two games is easily enough to make or break a season.KC Scott wrote:Worst rationalization for a bad post ever.
Your Subjective interpretation accounts for 12.5% of the schedule - Not excatly overwhelming
Re: 2-0
Posted: Thu Sep 23, 2010 12:50 pm
Certainly. But six games against the other shit teams in the AFC West is much more significant.mvscal wrote:Two games is easily enough to make or break a season.KC Scott wrote:Worst rationalization for a bad post ever.
Your Subjective interpretation accounts for 12.5% of the schedule - Not excatly overwhelming