Should we follow the Seahawks lead? | Page 2

Kilgore_Trout · 2010-10-08T21:35:16-07:00

I'm not going to list all of the Seahawk acquisitions, but in the last two weeks they've added Stokely, and now this week Lynch. Stokely made an immediate impact last week and was a key part of the receiving game. Lynch is sure to do the same this week running the ball. The 49ers have an opportunity to go out and grab some difference makers, guys who could help turn the tide in our favor. Clearly we're on the cusp of something special, we just need a little push. Guys like Bailey and Merriman could do that for us. Maybe even Mankins. Would you be in favor of trading away future picks to make a hard run at the playoffs this year? Or would you rather keep picks and trade up to get a guy like Luck in the upcoming draft? I'm torn. I like the prospect of building through the draft, but I'm so exhausted with losing. What's a fan to want his football team to do?

Oct 8, 2010 at 10:45 PM

#16

cNiner
Veteran
Posts: 6,440

we need a QB , if we got McNab we would be Superbowl mention !

Oct 8, 2010 at 10:45 PM

#17

TheGoldDiggerrrr
Veteran
Posts: 5,073

Originally posted by Leathaface:
I might want to make an upgrade if we weren't, you know, 0-4. Until we win some games, there's no point to trade future assets.

Agreed. The way it's going those picks will be very valuable dare i say first over all...

Oct 8, 2010 at 10:47 PM

#18

Kilgore_Trout
Veteran
Posts: 2,150

Originally posted by TheGoldDiggerrrr:
Originally posted by Leathaface:
I might want to make an upgrade if we weren't, you know, 0-4. Until we win some games, there's no point to trade future assets.

Agreed. The way it's going those picks will be very valuable dare i say first over all...

If we're that bad, I've lost my mind. Me thinks the record has more to do with three road games and a home game against the defending Super Bowl champs than anything else.

Oct 8, 2010 at 10:47 PM

#19

Afrikan
Veteran
Posts: 23,669

Originally posted by Kilgore_Trout:
Originally posted by Afrikan:
Originally posted by Ninersdeep:
I would be ecstatic if we got Bailey.

Without trading the house for him of course

we would have to trade big and sign him to a big contract.

um, I'm done giving huge contracts to CBs... I would rather spend that on pass rushers and have "good" defensive backs instead.

I'm tired of relying on coverage sacks over the years....when a QB has time, it doesn't matter who you have covering for u in the long run.

I'm just one of those people who've always felt its not worth overspending for corner backs.....even before the Nate signing...(and Nate is one of my fav players)

When we got Clements, we weren't on the cusp of anything. If we sign Bailey, we bring him into a team that could win the Super Bowl. For anyone laughing, we just competed with two of the best teams in the NFL while playing way below our potential. Wake up, this team can do some things if it starts winning now and often. Guys like Bailey can be the difference.

I say we trade for a QB before trading for an expensive CB who will just be on the field too much anyway, since our offense can't sustain drives.

we competed in those few games mainly because of our defense. How about we sustain some drives and score some points...then we can see how our defense can play when they are not always on the field.

Oct 8, 2010 at 10:48 PM

#20

sincalfaithful
Veteran
Posts: 27,712

f**k seattle

and f**k rick ankiel too

Oct 8, 2010 at 10:53 PM

#21

Kilgore_Trout
Veteran
Posts: 2,150

Originally posted by Afrikan:
Originally posted by Kilgore_Trout:
Originally posted by Afrikan:
Originally posted by Ninersdeep:
I would be ecstatic if we got Bailey.

Without trading the house for him of course

we would have to trade big and sign him to a big contract.

um, I'm done giving huge contracts to CBs... I would rather spend that on pass rushers and have "good" defensive backs instead.

I'm tired of relying on coverage sacks over the years....when a QB has time, it doesn't matter who you have covering for u in the long run.

I'm just one of those people who've always felt its not worth overspending for corner backs.....even before the Nate signing...(and Nate is one of my fav players)

When we got Clements, we weren't on the cusp of anything. If we sign Bailey, we bring him into a team that could win the Super Bowl. For anyone laughing, we just competed with two of the best teams in the NFL while playing way below our potential. Wake up, this team can do some things if it starts winning now and often. Guys like Bailey can be the difference.

I say we trade for a QB before trading for an expensive CB who will just be on the field too much anyway, since our offense can't sustain drives.

we competed in those few games mainly because of our defense. How about we sustain some drives and score some points...then we can see how our defense can play when they are not always on the field.

Don't just focus on the offensive flaws. Our defense gave up huge stops against Atlanta and New Orleans. If we're trying to win in the playoffs, that isn't going to fly.

Oct 8, 2010 at 10:54 PM

#22

TheGoldDiggerrrr
Veteran
Posts: 5,073

Originally posted by Kilgore_Trout:
Originally posted by TheGoldDiggerrrr:
Originally posted by Leathaface:
I might want to make an upgrade if we weren't, you know, 0-4. Until we win some games, there's no point to trade future assets.

Agreed. The way it's going those picks will be very valuable dare i say first over all...

If we're that bad, I've lost my mind. Me thinks the record has more to do with three road games and a home game against the defending Super Bowl champs than anything else.

I don't think are record reflects the talent we have. But hey maybe sing's trying to let alex tank the season so he can replace him with Andrew luck. lol At least i can hope to see someone besides number 11 disappoint me for the next 6 years.

Oct 8, 2010 at 10:55 PM

#23

Leathaface
Veteran
Posts: 16,735

Originally posted by sincalfaithful:
f**k seattle

and f**k rick ankiel too

Oct 8, 2010 at 10:57 PM

#24

WillistheWall
Veteran
Posts: 22,848

Originally posted by sincalfaithful:
f**k seattle

and f**k rick ankiel too

Oct 8, 2010 at 11:10 PM

#25

LAFortyNinerfan
Veteran
Posts: 3,644

Originally posted by TheGoldDiggerrrr:
Originally posted by Kilgore_Trout:
Originally posted by TheGoldDiggerrrr:
Originally posted by Leathaface:
I might want to make an upgrade if we weren't, you know, 0-4. Until we win some games, there's no point to trade future assets.

Agreed. The way it's going those picks will be very valuable dare i say first over all...

If we're that bad, I've lost my mind. Me thinks the record has more to do with three road games and a home game against the defending Super Bowl champs than anything else.

I don't think are record reflects the talent we have. But hey maybe sing's trying to let alex tank the season so he can replace him with Andrew luck. lol At least i can hope to see someone besides number 11 disappoint me for the next 6 years.

That would be a bad plan on Sings part. Sing would be gone right along with Alex if Alex continues to tank.

Oct 8, 2010 at 11:37 PM

#26

richierich
Veteran
Posts: 191

Originally posted by sincalfaithful:
f**k seattle

and f**k rick ankiel too

no, f**k Pablo Strandemall

Oct 8, 2010 at 11:43 PM

#27

Ronnie49Lott
Veteran
Posts: 8,506

Why follow the Seahawks? They haven't won anything.

Oct 8, 2010 at 11:54 PM

#28

Kilgore_Trout
Veteran
Posts: 2,150

Originally posted by Ronnie49Lott:
Why follow the Seahawks? They haven't won anything.

No, but they've improved a lot in a short period of time. They've definitely made more progress in the last year than we have.

Oct 9, 2010 at 12:03 AM

#29

blunt_probe
Veteran
Posts: 21,282

Originally posted by WillistheWall:
Originally posted by sincalfaithful:
f**k seattle

and f**k rick ankiel too

Oct 9, 2010 at 12:04 AM

#30

qwestlove94
Member
Posts: 583

It would be great if we could get champ bailey, but unfortunatley most of our problems are on the offensive end, to bad we didnt get moss