There are 56 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

2009 49ers acccording to Football Outsiders...

Originally posted by MadDog49er:
About 6-7 wins is about right for 2009. I think their analysis leans a bit too much on the skeptical side, but this team is not ready for the playoffs yet.

The Niners did win 7 games last year, but the majority of wins last season were against teams that were crashing and burning late in 2009.

I think the 7 wins were deceptive, and I could see the team improving in play, and yet still only come up with 7 wins this seaon.

Wins are wins in my opinion. But luck and capitalizing on given opportunities is what makes good teams good. I think with a little luck we can be 9-7 or even 6-10. If we have some bad luck I can see 5-7 wins also. But thats what makes the NFL the NFL.

Originally posted by 49wyztoscore:
Originally posted by MadDog49er:
About 6-7 wins is about right for 2009. I think their analysis leans a bit too much on the skeptical side, but this team is not ready for the playoffs yet.

The Niners did win 7 games last year, but the majority of wins last season were against teams that were crashing and burning late in 2009.

I think the 7 wins were deceptive, and I could see the team improving in play, and yet still only come up with 7 wins this seaon.

Wins are wins in my opinion. But luck and capitalizing on given opportunities is what makes good teams good. I think with a little luck we can be 9-7 or even 6-10. If we have some bad luck I can see 5-7 wins also. But thats what makes the NFL the NFL.


I agree with that. Wins are wins. I laugh when people say "we beat teams that were crashing and burning". SO FREAKING WHAT!?!? Doesn't it say something that we beat them?

I was ecstatic with our comeback win against the Rams. When was the last time we were down two touchdowns and came back to win in the 4th quarter to take the game?

Seriously, I understand why people say we deserve to be ranked in the 20's because we need to prove ourselves. Yet, when we win, some people like to say, that we were lucky to win against a bad team like that. Dude, a win is a win, I'll take it. What, would you rather we win prettily? Give me a break guys. I want to win.

Our wins were not deceptive. We worked harder than the other teams for those wins. Plus, we were the only ones to score more than 24 on the Redskins. Let me guess, rebuttals will be: it was the last game of the season. I highly doubt the Redskins were okay with losing.
In response to the two posts above:
1) Yes, a win is a win. Good teams capitalize on other teams struggling. My point was that the team might play better this year, and still only come up with 7 wins. Does that make them a better team in the win-lose column? No. However, did a qualitatively better performance indicate that a future .500 season or higher is around the corner? More likely.
2) The problem with defeating only teams that are the weak stepsisters of the NFL (the Niners played 5 games against 3 of the 4 worst teams in football last season), or those crashing and burning, is that these are not the teams we must beat to be a contender, or even considered a good team. To be a good team, you must beat the weak teams of the NFL, but also show that you can compete against the better teams. That did not happen in 2008.

Our victories came over:
The worst team in the NFL: Lions
The second worst team in the NFL (2 victories): Rams
The fourth worst team in the NFL: Seahawks
The eleventh worst team in the NFL: Bills
The thirteenth worst team: The Redskins
The 17th worst team: The Jets

The Jets were the only winning team we defeated (9-7), struggled at the end of the season, and they subsequently fired their coach.

As stated before, the Niners have not made substantial upgrades this offseason to automatically make one think that they will be better in 2009. We have possibily added two starters, a RT that is currently recovering from injury; and a fullback. Our top rookie is currently injured, and will probably hold out for some time at camp under contractual issues, and the rest are reserves. The team did not address the pass rush, has lost a starting CB, and still has a QB competition.

It is easy to look at our team optimistically. Every team's fans will complain about their ranking by publications. Nobody ever states: "They have us graded too high". However, somebody has to be the 32nd team in the NFL, and somebody has to finish with a 5-11 or 6-10 record. The Niners have done very little to assure the rest of the NFL that they are incapable of posting such a record. So, while I believe five or six wins is slightly low (I have them with 7 wins in 2009 right now), it is also very possible.
[ Edited by MadDog49er on Jul 15, 2009 at 1:12 PM ]
hill supporters hate when we say this but backed up by an article now

"Much has been made of Hill’s 7-3 record as the 49ers starter, but it is misguided enthusiasm. Two of his wins came against last year’s 2-14 Rams. Two more came against teams with nothing to play for, including the 2007 Bucca­neers, who were actively resting all their players. That leaves Hill with a win over the Bengals in 2007 and vic­tories over the Bills and Jets last year, in which the team scored a combined 54 points. Color us impressed."

dont know last sentence sarcasm or not but either way teams he beat besides two were garbage or playing for nothin.
  • KasparHauser
  • Info N/A
Originally posted by MadDog49er:
In response to the two posts above:
1) Yes, a win is a win. Good teams capitalize on other teams struggling. My point was that the team might play better this year, and still only come up with 7 wins. Does that make them a better team in the win-lose column? No. However, did a qualitatively better performance indicate that a future .500 season or higher is around the corner? More likely.
2) The problem with defeating only teams that are the weak stepsisters of the NFL (the Niners played 5 games against 3 of the 4 worst teams in football last season), or those crashing and burning, is that these are not the teams we must beat to be a contender, or even considered a good team. To be a good team, you must beat the weak teams of the NFL, but also show that you can compete against the better teams. That did not happen in 2008.

Our victories came over:
The worst team in the NFL: Lions
The second worst team in the NFL (2 victories): Rams
The fourth worst team in the NFL: Seahawks
The eleventh worst team in the NFL: Bills
The thirteenth worst team: The Redskins
The 17th worst team: The Jets

The Jets were the only winning team we defeated (9-7), struggled at the end of the season, and they subsequently fired their coach.

As stated before, the Niners have not made substantial upgrades this offseason to automatically make one think that they will be better in 2009. We have possibily added two starters, a RT that is currently recovering from injury; and a fullback. Our top rookie is currently injured, and will probably hold out for some time at camp under contractual issues, and the rest are reserves. The team did not address the pass rush, has lost a starting CB, and still has a QB competition.

It is easy to look at our team optimistically. Every team's fans will complain about their ranking by publications. Nobody ever states: "They have us graded too high". However, somebody has to be the 32nd team in the NFL, and somebody has to finish with a 5-11 or 6-10 record. The Niners have done very little to assure the rest of the NFL that they are incapable of posting such a record. So, while I believe five or six wins is slightly low (I have them with 7 wins in 2009 right now), it is also very possible.

Sorry for stating the obvious, when anyone looks at a situation you can take a positive spin or a negative spin. You, under the guise of being objective, have taken a negative spin.

You mentioned the 49ers beating the Jets, the 17th worst team. Last time I checked there are 32 teams, which would put the Jets as the 15th best team or a team in the top 1/2 of the league. The Bills & Redskins were ranked higher than the 49ers, so one could argue that the 49ers beat better teams. The Rams/Seawaks are division rivals, so you could argue the 49ers beat their division rivals, two teams they were supposed to beat and did.

You also mention the lack of acquisitions during the offseason. Another way to look at it is they added potentially good players, and did lose anything. This is a net gain, and should at minimum make the team equal to last year (7-9), but at best who knows.

So from my perspective you are not being objective, you are being negative. If the glass is filled 50% it is not half empty, it is half full, or exactly 1/2 a glass.
Originally posted by KasparHauser:
Originally posted by MadDog49er:
In response to the two posts above:
1) Yes, a win is a win. Good teams capitalize on other teams struggling. My point was that the team might play better this year, and still only come up with 7 wins. Does that make them a better team in the win-lose column? No. However, did a qualitatively better performance indicate that a future .500 season or higher is around the corner? More likely.
2) The problem with defeating only teams that are the weak stepsisters of the NFL (the Niners played 5 games against 3 of the 4 worst teams in football last season), or those crashing and burning, is that these are not the teams we must beat to be a contender, or even considered a good team. To be a good team, you must beat the weak teams of the NFL, but also show that you can compete against the better teams. That did not happen in 2008.

Our victories came over:
The worst team in the NFL: Lions
The second worst team in the NFL (2 victories): Rams
The fourth worst team in the NFL: Seahawks
The eleventh worst team in the NFL: Bills
The thirteenth worst team: The Redskins
The 17th worst team: The Jets

The Jets were the only winning team we defeated (9-7), struggled at the end of the season, and they subsequently fired their coach.

As stated before, the Niners have not made substantial upgrades this offseason to automatically make one think that they will be better in 2009. We have possibily added two starters, a RT that is currently recovering from injury; and a fullback. Our top rookie is currently injured, and will probably hold out for some time at camp under contractual issues, and the rest are reserves. The team did not address the pass rush, has lost a starting CB, and still has a QB competition.

It is easy to look at our team optimistically. Every team's fans will complain about their ranking by publications. Nobody ever states: "They have us graded too high". However, somebody has to be the 32nd team in the NFL, and somebody has to finish with a 5-11 or 6-10 record. The Niners have done very little to assure the rest of the NFL that they are incapable of posting such a record. So, while I believe five or six wins is slightly low (I have them with 7 wins in 2009 right now), it is also very possible.

Sorry for stating the obvious, when anyone looks at a situation you can take a positive spin or a negative spin. You, under the guise of being objective, have taken a negative spin.

You mentioned the 49ers beating the Jets, the 17th worst team. Last time I checked there are 32 teams, which would put the Jets as the 15th best team or a team in the top 1/2 of the league. The Bills & Redskins were ranked higher than the 49ers, so one could argue that the 49ers beat better teams. The Rams/Seawaks are division rivals, so you could argue the 49ers beat their division rivals, two teams they were supposed to beat and did.

You also mention the lack of acquisitions during the offseason. Another way to look at it is they added potentially good players, and did lose anything. This is a net gain, and should at minimum make the team equal to last year (7-9), but at best who knows.

So from my perspective you are not being objective, you are being negative. If the glass is filled 50% it is not half empty, it is half full, or exactly 1/2 a glass.

Stop the Presses!!!!! The Niners beat one winning team in 2008, and that team stunk at the end of the year. Until we start defeating teams with winning records, we are simply not going to be respected around the league, or in publications which has preseason rankings or predictions.

My argument in this thread is over the tearing of clothes on this board any time a publication puts the Niners in a negative light. It is the greatest sin in the universe.

The reality is that we could be a 9-7 team this season, but we could equally be a 5-11 team in 2009. It is not like we acquired a game-changing player this offseason who is going to dramatically alter our hopes for an improvement. In fact, I believe that a number of teams with worse records than the Niners in 2008 did more to improve their team this offseason than the Niners. So, who knows at this point?

The bottom line is that we are a 7-9 team who defeated a number of weak and morale-less NFL teams at the end of 2008, and added some of the greatest players of all-time this offseason: D. Evans, an injured M. Smith, an aging D. Bly, M. Norris, a WR who will probably be our number 4 or 5 WR, and a number of rookies who will likely produce very little this season. Suddenly, we are better? I'm not seeing a big upgrade in talent in terms of production in 2009. Who is the difference maker from our off-season acquisitions?

There are heaps of issues this team has to address, so a publication predicting a 5-11 record is not unreasonable, nor worthy of hand-wringing.

As for the half-empty, half-full issue, until this team produces a winner, my half-empty philosophy continues to be correct.....many years running. I will never be accused of being a homer. Our team is what it is.

End blind homerism!!!!
[ Edited by MadDog49er on Jul 16, 2009 at 10:12 AM ]
Sounds like someone's hopes have been crushed before, and has ruined his ability to dare to dream again. That's fine by me, and let's face it... we really could end up anywhere from a 5-10 win team this year. I would hazard a guess that if you came to Singletary with that glass half-empty talk, he would break that glass over your head and kick you out on yer arse.

Some choose to be optimistic, and some choose to protect their delicate emotions...
understandable.
[ Edited by oldman9er on Jul 16, 2009 at 10:21 AM ]
I've...sob, gotten...my hopes..choke, up before....blubber... only to have them....cough, shattered, choke, sob, blubber...
I hope we still field a team..

I guess I'll just have to cancel my NFL Sunday Ticket subscription and mow the lawn on sundays.

On the bright side, I'll eat fewer chicken wings and maybe lose a few pounds.
Cardinals + Billy Davis as DC = Niners win two baby

Really the Seahawks are in a deep decline, the Rams and a joke, the Cards have lost both there OC and DC sure we have a boat load of flaws but this division is up for grabs, and we got a real good shot! With a half a season under his belt Singletary has the second longest coaching tenure in the NFC west!
I love how they use statistics "over the past 3 years" to predict how well we do this year. Bro, 2.5 of those three years were under Nolan. New regime. Brave new world under Singletary. We actually play Chilo Rachal and Goldson. We simplify our defense and running system. We shut down the Bills...on the road...in December....a week after the Bills put up 50+ points. We beat the heavily favored Jets by 10 fricking points. If you look at the .5 of a season under Singletary. If you put down your calculator and watched a single game in the second half of the season, you know this is a different team than Nolan's team.

I'm reminded of the Churchill quote. Something like, there are three types, each worse than the previous: lies, damned lies and statistics.
Yes. If things had remained exactly the same as they have been the last 2 and a half, years, the statistics from those years would have more meaning for the year to come.

The quote is: "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." Most people think Mark Twain, but he was borrowing from someone else.
  • Roxy
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 256
Originally posted by Robert:
I love how they use statistics "over the past 3 years" to predict how well we do this year. Bro, 2.5 of those three years were under Nolan. New regime. Brave new world under Singletary. We actually play Chilo Rachal and Goldson. We simplify our defense and running system. We shut down the Bills...on the road...in December....a week after the Bills put up 50+ points. We beat the heavily favored Jets by 10 fricking points. If you look at the .5 of a season under Singletary. If you put down your calculator and watched a single game in the second half of the season, you know this is a different team than Nolan's team.

I'm reminded of the Churchill quote. Something like, there are three types, each worse than the previous: lies, damned lies and statistics.

You got me ready to run through a wall - nice post.
If you understand the assumptions they make about statistics then the projections seem about right. It doesn't rule out a winning season, it just says it's unlikely.
Originally posted by Fhysical:
If you understand the assumptions they make about statistics then the projections seem about right. It doesn't rule out a winning season, it just says it's unlikely.

You know what every year some teams out preforms the expectations, and the sports media starts saying stuff like:

"With emergence of (some player) as a premiere (some position)the (some team) has become a real playoff contender"

Well I can think of a few guys who are ready for that line, Manny Lawson, Vernon Davis, or Morgan seem like they just could be "some player" this year!