There are 113 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

The Arizona game cost the niners an A+ draft

I was all for tanking the AZ game, I got so much grief on how you always have to play to win. Well the Cards tanked it and got the better draft position. If the niners lost, the niners could have secured,

1. Patrick Peterson
2. Colin Kaepernick (without sacrificing two picks, maybe just one).
3. Got Leonard Hankerson in the 3rd
If we lose all our games, forever, we'll always have the #1 pick! Yes!
Baalke says he values pass rush over DBs, so who knows maybe we would have traded back with a team like the Texans, they would have picked Peterson and we still could have got Aldon.


Fact is this
f**k the Cardinals i never want to lose to them

f**k b***hes Get Money

[ Edited by valrod33 on May 3, 2011 at 08:18:22 ]
Originally posted by valrod33:

Fact is this
f**k the Cardinals i never want to lost to them

Valrod33 = BuzzB28?
I was pissed when won that game. I knew it would cost us come draft time. But really, if teams started losing games for the sake of draft positions, the game would be ruined.
Originally posted by Psinex:
Originally posted by valrod33:

Fact is this
f**k the Cardinals i never want to lost to them

Valrod33 = BuzzB28?

shhhhhh dont tell anybody
I wanted PP7 as much as anyone, but c'mon now... I won't be sad that we won a game over a division rival or anyone else. For all we know, PP7 could end up on I.R. every year and be out of the league quickly. Could be that Aldon Smith becomes our next Charles Haley and we thank the Heavens we didn't have to choose between the two.
Originally posted by Lobo49er:
If we lose all our games, forever, we'll always have the #1 pick! Yes!

This is probably tongue in cheek, at the time the niners were OUT of playoff contention, Andrew Luck potentially could have been entering the draft, and the niners needed upgraded at qb, CB and OLB. You do the math, tanking one game after the season is OVER is not the same thing as losing a whole season.
Originally posted by valrod33:
Baalke says he values pass rush over DBs, so who knows maybe we would have traded back with a team like the Texans, they would have picked Peterson and we still could have got Aldon.

Baalke is absolutely right. We have all heard that "the game is won in the trenches" on both sides of the ball.

If the QB has no time to throw the ball or the RB has no holes to run through, the defense will win every time.

The adjunct to that is that if the DBs only have to cover receivers for 2.5 seconds instead of 5, they will look much more effective.

A good pass rush is the most important component of a good pass defense. The 49ers haven't had that component for years and the pass defense has suffered as a result.

It is obvious that a portion of the criticism of this draft is really disappointment over not getting Peterson, and I understand that. Still, we should temper our criticism of the Aldon Smith pick with the realization that we would have gotten PP only through a remarkable and highly unlikely chain of circumstances. Our focus should be on the understanding that Baalke picked a very high value pass rusher that could improve the overall pass defense more than any other position pick that could have been made.
b***h.
Should have tanked the season.
Originally posted by 9erred:
I was all for tanking the AZ game, I got so much grief on how you always have to play to win. Well the Cards tanked it and got the better draft position. If the niners lost, the niners could have secured,

1. Patrick Peterson
2. Colin Kaepernick (without sacrificing two picks, maybe just one).
3. Got Leonard Hankerson in the 3rd


How does an interim head coach go about asking his players to tank a game . . . when the purpose of tanking would be to improve draft position to get better players to replace some of the players you're asking to tank?

Obviously losing that game would have put us in better position last weekend, but the concept of intentionally tanking a game is completely impractical.
Originally posted by SonocoNinerFan:
Originally posted by 9erred:
I was all for tanking the AZ game, I got so much grief on how you always have to play to win. Well the Cards tanked it and got the better draft position. If the niners lost, the niners could have secured,

1. Patrick Peterson
2. Colin Kaepernick (without sacrificing two picks, maybe just one).
3. Got Leonard Hankerson in the 3rd


How does an interim head coach go about asking his players to tank a game . . . when the purpose of tanking would be to improve draft position to get better players to replace some of the players you're asking to tank?

Obviously losing that game would have put us in better position last weekend, but the concept of intentionally tanking a game is completely impractical.

Yes. Personally I dont fancy the idea of telling players like Willis that I want him to lose the game.
straight loser mentality gets you nowhere. I'm sure the guys didn't want to play hard and play with fire for Tomsula. I really don't know what type of fan thinks like this.
That's f**king retarded