There are 62 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Is David Akers the best kicker we ever had?

Is David Akers the best kicker we ever had?

Originally posted by WINiner:
You don't even go talk to Manning without expecting to pay him big$$. There is no need to even evaluate him after seeing him piss and moan about a contract prior to a season he didn't even play in due to injury, if you aren't prepared to pay the man.

The team would have let Alex walk without a care knowing the guy they have pinned their future on is learning from one of the best all time, instead of one of the all time disappointments. Jim Harbaugh is not at all honest on this point, he is simply doing what he ALWAYS does, which is what he feels he needs to do to win. His comments are for Alex Smiths benefit only. There is not a shred of truth to it.

At the time Manning hit the free agency, many people (including some in the media) believed that Manning could play for cheap. Some numbers got thrown around that time was $12 million/year. That'd have been easy for teams like the 49ers to be in the hunt. However things got serious pretty quick when the first offer the Broncos came out with was already in the $16+ million/year range.
And the Chiefs didn't really want Joe Montana, they just "flirted" with him. They didn't really want him to end their 20 year playoff drought, and take them to two AFC championship games. They didn't REALLY want that, they just liked the idea of it. The fish happened to take the bait, they signed Montana, they said "Meh", and off to the playoffs they went.
. Double post
[ Edited by VaBeachNiner on Jun 1, 2012 at 1:13 AM ]
Originally posted by BrianGO:
And the Chiefs didn't really want Joe Montana, they just "flirted" with him. They didn't really want him to end their 20 year playoff drought, and take them to two AFC championship games. They didn't REALLY want that, they just liked the idea of it. The fish happened to take the bait, they signed Montana, they said "Meh", and off to the playoffs they went.

And the Niners just happened to win their 5th Super Bowl in Montana's 2nd year at KC.
The due diligence evaluation story makes sense. Because we were never real players. Did we offer him $96 million? Did we ever intend to? If not we weren't serious playes like Denver was.
Originally posted by Young2Rice:
Originally posted by JerryRice1848:
Originally posted by Young2Rice:
Yup and the point in hiding was because the QB JH proclaimed as the 2011 starter might get butt hurt, or the media will give you s**t for dissing Alex Smith like that, which is why he had to make up this b******t regarding evaluation vs. pursuit which some of you are eating up like candy.

This is what polititians do against the blind followers.

Did you ask Crabs and VD about the Peyton Manning situation in Cabo San Lucas? I would have loved to hear their opinion on that matter.

I may have to Crabs. I was too drunk to remember what was said. Route running was part of it though. hah!

I didn't talk to VD much at all. Just said hi/hello.

You drunk b*****d lol must have had one helluva time over there
Originally posted by BrianGO:
And the Chiefs didn't really want Joe Montana, they just "flirted" with him. They didn't really want him to end their 20 year playoff drought, and take them to two AFC championship games. They didn't REALLY want that, they just liked the idea of it. The fish happened to take the bait, they signed Montana, they said "Meh", and off to the playoffs they went.

The Chiefs went to the playoffs the season before. Montana did give them the umph in 1993 to last through some games in the playoffs, but it wasn't like they weren't already a decent team.
Lol@ all you that actually believe that this team was going to shell out that much money for a guy that is one good hit from retirement. We would have had no cash to resign the people we needed to keep this team together. Sorry to poke holes in your little conspiracy theories, but signing Manning for what he was among would have been a step backwards. Have to get AB to crunch the numbers, but it would have cost the team in other areas to sign Manning, who it seems was looking for one last big payday and not to contend for another championship.
Originally posted by fastforward:
The Chiefs went to the playoffs the season before. Montana did give them the umph in 1993 to last through some games in the playoffs, but it wasn't like they weren't already a decent team.

You're right, I got the history wrong. But Montana did give them the most successful season in 22 years, and they haven't won a playoff game since he left.
Kind of amazing actually, they've had a lot of good teams over that time span. The playoffs are definitely a different animal.
Harb wanted Manning and so did all of us.
Originally posted by Memphis9er:
Lol@ all you that actually believe that this team was going to shell out that much money for a guy that is one good hit from retirement. We would have had no cash to resign the people we needed to keep this team together. Sorry to poke holes in your little conspiracy theories, but signing Manning for what he was among would have been a step backwards. Have to get AB to crunch the numbers, but it would have cost the team in other areas to sign Manning, who it seems was looking for one last big payday and not to contend for another championship.


this, i kinda find it hard to believe that harbaugh and baalke will sign peyton for 96 mil killing our cap space.
Originally posted by BrianGO:
And the Chiefs didn't really want Joe Montana, they just "flirted" with him. They didn't really want him to end their 20 year playoff drought, and take them to two AFC championship games. They didn't REALLY want that, they just liked the idea of it. The fish happened to take the bait, they signed Montana, they said "Meh", and off to the playoffs they went.

I'm not sure how this applies to the Niners/Manning situation.

1. The Chiefs didn't just "flirt" with Joe. They offered a 1st round pick (18th overall) and signed him to a contract that made him one of the highest paid players at the time. The Chiefs got Joe because they paid the price. The Niners didn't get Manning because they weren't willing to pay the price.
2. The Niners denied heavily pursuing Manning. The Chiefs didn't deny the pursuit of Joe (obviously since they acquired him).
Originally posted by BrianGO:
And the Chiefs didn't really want Joe Montana, they just "flirted" with him. They didn't really want him to end their 20 year playoff drought, and take them to two AFC championship games. They didn't REALLY want that, they just liked the idea of it. The fish happened to take the bait, they signed Montana, they said "Meh", and off to the playoffs they went.

Perhaps THE best reply to this nearly...meaningless thread...
why are we still talking about this?
Were talking about it because its the offseason and we have nothing better to talk about...lol

I honestly think that our front office has a plan, and then a back up plan and then a back up to the back up plan, and they dont give a flying eff what anyone thinks. So if/ when Alex didnt sign right away, the looked at Manning, when Manning wanted what we pay about 9 players they politley declined, in the meantime Alex didnt get the kind of offers he wanted so they got the guy they were after in the first place, and what do you know they got plan C, Josh Johnson for cheap too boot.

It called planning for contingencies...and I much prefer that to the spray and pray method of front office leadership the preceded the Balke/ Harbaugh regime. It might not always look the best in the press, but I am confident we will never be baren of talent under the current watch.
[ Edited by PhillyNiner on Jun 1, 2012 at 6:02 AM ]