Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

It really is time to move on.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Fantaztic7
    replied
    Originally posted by Megalodon30 View Post
    It's not an argument at all; I'm asking for your opinion. If SF were starting Flacco the past 7 games, do you think they would be undefeated? Do you think they would be over .500?
    I would have to see Flacco play in SF.

    Leave a comment:


  • Megalodon30
    replied
    Originally posted by Fantaztic7 View Post
    That’s a false argument because Elway failed to draft/develop a quarterback or sign a decent veteran. The Broncos don’t have quality tackles, legitimate TE or a second WR threat. SF ran for 232 yards today including a long run by Coleman. When’s the last time you saw Lindsay or Freeman break a long run in a regular season game? Coleman has the line to open those lanes. Jimmy G only passed for 175 yards today.

    SF’s defense is holding teams to 10 points per game. Did you see them collapse at the end of a close game last weekend? No, they held up.

    Our roster isn’t close to SF...not even in the same discussion.
    It's not an argument at all; I'm asking for your opinion. If SF were starting Flacco the past 7 games, do you think they would be undefeated? Do you think they would be over .500?

    Leave a comment:


  • Fantaztic7
    replied
    Originally posted by Megalodon30 View Post
    If you think that highly of them, let me ask you: if these two teams swapped QBs today, do you really think the Niners would have put up 50? If the Niners had Flacco as their week 1 starter, do you really think they would be undefeated?

    Our o-line sucks, I'll give you that much. We need to move on from Bolles this offseason, for sure. But how much of it is they aren't good and how much is it they are blocking for an old statue? If Rodgers was behind our line, would they look nearly as bad?

    Point is we have a roster that is ready to compete. I cannot honestly say any different. We may not quite be on the Niners level, but I have no reason to believe they are miles ahead of where we are.
    That’s a false argument because Elway failed to draft/develop a quarterback or sign a decent veteran. The Broncos don’t have quality tackles, legitimate TE or a second WR threat. SF ran for 232 yards today including a long run by Coleman. When’s the last time you saw Lindsay or Freeman break a long run in a regular season game? Coleman has the line to open those lanes. Jimmy G only passed for 175 yards today.

    SF’s defense is holding teams to 10 points per game. Did you see them collapse at the end of a close game last weekend? No, they held up.

    Our roster isn’t close to SF...not even in the same discussion.

    Leave a comment:


  • Megalodon30
    replied
    Originally posted by Fantaztic7 View Post
    We get the point about the QB however, it’s a fact we don’t have one. On that aspect alone our roster isn’t close to SF. We do not have a legitimate LT or RT. Bolles is a stone cold bust. James isn’t a good RT because he cannot stay on the field. We need a better RG and center. We do not have a legitimate TE and SF has one.

    Our defense allows 80 more yards and nearly twice the points per game. Although we have a good defense it’s not even close to SF.

    The roster is no where near SF. They beat down the Panthers today with 51 points. It would take this offense 4-5 games to score 51.

    Thinking we were close to winning is what Elway thought over the last few years. The Broncos are 13-27 since 2017. We are not close and comparing the Broncos to a 7-0 49ers is way off base.
    If you think that highly of them, let me ask you: if these two teams swapped QBs today, do you really think the Niners would have put up 50? If the Niners had Flacco as their week 1 starter, do you really think they would be undefeated?

    Our o-line sucks, I'll give you that much. We need to move on from Bolles this offseason, for sure. But how much of it is they aren't good and how much is it they are blocking for an old statue? If Rodgers was behind our line, would they look nearly as bad?

    Point is we have a roster that is ready to compete. I cannot honestly say any different. We may not quite be on the Niners level, but I have no reason to believe they are miles ahead of where we are.

    Leave a comment:


  • TheAsianPA
    replied
    Originally posted by Megalodon30 View Post
    Personally I think our running game can be dominant. Lindsay and Freeman could both be dynamic playmakers in this league. We've seen flashes of it here and there. But when you don't have a QB that can threaten a D, the opponent can stack the box and shut down your running game fairly easily.

    We saw exactly that last week. The Chiefs committed to stopping our RBs and the result was a ton of one and two yard carries. More and more teams are going to be doing just that. They're going to commit to stopping Lindsay and Freeman and making Flacco try and beat them. And that's not a bad strategy to employ against a QB that hasn't thrown a TD in 3 weeks.

    If we had Jimmy G, would we be 2-6? I highly doubt it. If the Niners had Flacco, would they be undefeated? I don't know of anyone that could answer yes with a straight face. QB is the only real difference between us and SF. I really don't think their roster is significantly better than ours.
    I don't think we're nearly as close to the 49ers. I think the offensive line has massive issues that the 49ers aren't dealing with, and that it took 3-4 years of drafting for them to fix. Aside from Risner, you could argue we need an entirely new O-line. On top of that, we don't have a George Kittle receiving or blocking threat. Flacco however I agree is the biggest issue of them all, being immobile, inaccurate, and unable to extend plays is probably the biggest difference of the two.

    Leave a comment:


  • Fantaztic7
    replied
    Originally posted by Megalodon30 View Post
    Personally I think our running game can be dominant. Lindsay and Freeman could both be dynamic playmakers in this league. We've seen flashes of it here and there. But when you don't have a QB that can threaten a D, the opponent can stack the box and shut down your running game fairly easily.

    We saw exactly that last week. The Chiefs committed to stopping our RBs and the result was a ton of one and two yard carries. More and more teams are going to be doing just that. They're going to commit to stopping Lindsay and Freeman and making Flacco try and beat them. And that's not a bad strategy to employ against a QB that hasn't thrown a TD in 3 weeks.

    If we had Jimmy G, would we be 2-6? I highly doubt it. If the Niners had Flacco, would they be undefeated? I don't know of anyone that could answer yes with a straight face. QB is the only real difference between us and SF. I really don't think their roster is significantly better than ours.
    We get the point about the QB however, it’s a fact we don’t have one. On that aspect alone our roster isn’t close to SF. We do not have a legitimate LT or RT. Bolles is a stone cold bust. James isn’t a good RT because he cannot stay on the field. We need a better RG and center. We do not have a legitimate TE and SF has one.

    Our defense allows 80 more yards and nearly twice the points per game. Although we have a good defense it’s not even close to SF.

    The roster is no where near SF. They beat down the Panthers today with 51 points. It would take this offense 4-5 games to score 51.

    Thinking we were close to winning is what Elway thought over the last few years. The Broncos are 13-27 since 2017. We are not close and comparing the Broncos to a 7-0 49ers is way off base.

    Leave a comment:


  • Megalodon30
    replied
    Originally posted by TheAsianPA View Post
    I think across the board the coaching is better, and they have a strong offensive line. The run game is strong for them, and as a result Jimmy G doesn't have to do much. Our run game is mediocre at best, but our passing game may be among the worst in the league.
    Personally I think our running game can be dominant. Lindsay and Freeman could both be dynamic playmakers in this league. We've seen flashes of it here and there. But when you don't have a QB that can threaten a D, the opponent can stack the box and shut down your running game fairly easily.

    We saw exactly that last week. The Chiefs committed to stopping our RBs and the result was a ton of one and two yard carries. More and more teams are going to be doing just that. They're going to commit to stopping Lindsay and Freeman and making Flacco try and beat them. And that's not a bad strategy to employ against a QB that hasn't thrown a TD in 3 weeks.

    If we had Jimmy G, would we be 2-6? I highly doubt it. If the Niners had Flacco, would they be undefeated? I don't know of anyone that could answer yes with a straight face. QB is the only real difference between us and SF. I really don't think their roster is significantly better than ours.

    Leave a comment:


  • TheAsianPA
    replied
    Originally posted by Megalodon30 View Post
    I think you missed my point. We aren't that far removed from the Niners. We have a top 10 defense. We have what should be a formidable rush attack. Yet the Niners are undefeated and were 4 games below .500.

    We don't have a QB that can threaten a defense. Defenses don't have to respect our offense. How did these two teams perform last year? How are they performing this year? Jimmy G is a difference maker under center. We don't have one. That's what separates the Niners and us.
    I think across the board the coaching is better, and they have a strong offensive line. The run game is strong for them, and as a result Jimmy G doesn't have to do much. Our run game is mediocre at best, but our passing game may be among the worst in the league.

    Leave a comment:


  • Fantaztic7
    replied
    Originally posted by Megalodon30 View Post
    Except we have been competing. We've been in every game except the Raiders and Chiefs game. Our defense has been keeping us in games we have no business being in. Our offense is not an NFL offense right now, but we are still competitive. There is one reason for that. Our defense.



    That's what I'm saying. We need a QB to get us over the hump. You want to take today's game as an example, let's do that. If one of our FGs is a TD instead, we win this game. But our QB couldn't execute. Our QB couldn't lead our iffense to more than 13 points. Literally any QB that could score more than 15 points would win today's game for us.

    We are a competitive team. We should be contesting the division and in the conversation for the conference. But without a QB, we can't even win the close ones.

    There's no reason to believe we aren't close. We've been close every game. A decent QB is the difference between us being contenders and us being pretenders.
    We’re pretty much in agreement here. The quarterback is the most important piece. We still need a RT, LT and a legitimate TE. We also need a WR who can take the top off a defense. Sutton is emerging as a top 10 receiver but teams will be able to double him without a TE or another WR threat. We also need a RG - I think Wilkinson can be an upgrade over Leary.

    Leave a comment:


  • Megalodon30
    replied
    Originally posted by Fantaztic7 View Post
    No, we are not close. Saying we can compete and we have nothing remotely resembling an NFL offense are a contradiction.
    Except we have been competing. We've been in every game except the Raiders and Chiefs game. Our defense has been keeping us in games we have no business being in. Our offense is not an NFL offense right now, but we are still competitive. There is one reason for that. Our defense.

    Scapegoating penalties fails to acknowledge 48 minutes of bad offense in nearly every game.

    Today’s game was a perfect example. The offense had opportunities to go up 14-0. They had the chance to drive with great field position three times in the 2nd half. All they had to do was convert a 3rd and 4 and the game was over. Von only needed to wrap up Brissett and the game was over. Yet, we want to blame officiating. How about, “If not for Von blowing that sack we’re 3-5”? Or, “If not for the offense failing to convert a 3rd down we’re 3-5”. The officiating is not a controllable but converting a 3rd and 4 is something they control.

    Who’s failed to shore up the most important position? Elway.

    When you don’t have the most important position filled with a quality player you’re not that close.
    That's what I'm saying. We need a QB to get us over the hump. You want to take today's game as an example, let's do that. If one of our FGs is a TD instead, we win this game. But our QB couldn't execute. Our QB couldn't lead our iffense to more than 13 points. Literally any QB that could score more than 15 points would win today's game for us.

    We are a competitive team. We should be contesting the division and in the conversation for the conference. But without a QB, we can't even win the close ones.

    There's no reason to believe we aren't close. We've been close every game. A decent QB is the difference between us being contenders and us being pretenders.

    Leave a comment:


  • Peerless
    replied
    Elway's first mistake was to hire Vance Joseph over Kyle Shanahan.

    Everyone saying how Elway should have brought in Mike Shanahan this past coaching search is crazy. As much as we love Mike, his offense got stagnant and predictable.

    Kyle, on the other hand, was able to take what he learned from daddy - incorporate it, but also EVOLVE it.

    Look at the 49ers. He's doing a hell of a job (also a shout out to John Lynch).

    Leave a comment:


  • OrangeCrush_304
    replied
    Originally posted by mojo0730 View Post
    Yes. Allegedly Joe felt that with Kyle at the helm it would open the door for Mike to be around the facilities again.

    Speaking of, Papa Shanahan is still available. Just saying...
    What’s even more crazy the Shanny/Broncos relationship got better since then.

    So that’s a poor decision of Ellis to be basing franchise changing decisions off of something as dumb as that.

    Leave a comment:


  • Fantaztic7
    replied
    Originally posted by Megalodon30 View Post
    Are we not? As bad as our offense has been, we're 3 awful penalty calls away from 5-3. Because we have a team that can compete. We just have nothing even remotely resembling an NFL offense. Because of a QB that is past his prime, while never even really having a prime to begin with.

    Wanna tell me how we wouldn't be competetive if we had even an average QB starting for us right now? Our defense is playimg out of it's mind right now. This team should not be 2-6. We have more talent than that. But it will mot be realized until we shore up the most important position in sports.
    No, we are not close. Saying we can compete and we have nothing remotely resembling an NFL offense are a contradiction.

    Scapegoating penalties fails to acknowledge 48 minutes of bad offense in nearly every game.

    Today’s game was a perfect example. The offense had opportunities to go up 14-0. They had the chance to drive with great field position three times in the 2nd half. All they had to do was convert a 3rd and 4 and the game was over. Von only needed to wrap up Brissett and the game was over. Yet, we want to blame officiating. How about, “If not for Von blowing that sack we’re 3-5”? Or, “If not for the offense failing to convert a 3rd down we’re 3-5”. The officiating is not a controllable but converting a 3rd and 4 is something they control.

    Who’s failed to shore up the most important position? Elway.

    When you don’t have the most important position filled with a quality player you’re not that close.
    Last edited by Fantaztic7; 10-27-2019, 06:39 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Megalodon30
    replied
    Originally posted by Sam_Z View Post
    That is the excuse Joe forced onto Pat but it’s not the entirely true reason
    I don't really care about the "true" reason. His defenses were atrocious his last couple years here. We needed a new coach. That much is undeniable. Perhaps they didn't handle his firing as well as they could have, but there's no doubt it was time for a change.

    Leave a comment:


  • Amy-Selic
    replied
    Originally posted by Megalodon30 View Post
    Are we not? As bad as our offense has been, we're 3 awful penalty calls away from 5-3. Because we have a team that can compete. We kust have nothing even remotely resembling an NFL offense. Because of a QB that is past his prime, while never even really having a prime to begin with.

    Wanna tell me how we wouldn't be competetive if we had literally an average QB starting for us right now? Our defense is playimg out of it's mind right now. This team should not be 2-6. We have more talent than that. But it will mot be realized until we shore up the most important position in sports.
    No that last poster was right, we ARE that far removed. Jimmy G isn't anything special but yes he is better than anything we've trotted out onto the field as of late. The special thing the 9ers have going for them is coaching and an absolutely legendary and looking to be unprecedented defense.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X