There are 165 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

If you had to pick one 49er team...

Originally posted by JoseCortez:
Anyone who says 94 must be too young to remember the 80s. That 94 team had problems on defense. I would have to go with the 89 team, followed closely by 84.

94 team had drastic changes which took time to get use to. Didn't they had like 8 new starters?

- The Secondary was arguibly the greatest in San Fran history
- The defensive line with Young, Stubblefield, Ricky Jackson & Dennis Brown. I guess a speed rusher woulda been nice
- LB's were the weakness of the group and still had Norten, Plummer & Woodal


But offensively? Greatest offense of all time
RB - check
TE - check
Oline - check
QB - check


Remember Ed McCaffrey was a backup on that team
The 1989 49ers team was top to bottom the best NFL team I've ever seen to this day. I'd take my chances with that team against any team, any time, anywhere.
Originally posted by KEGster:
Originally posted by JoseCortez:
Anyone who says 94 must be too young to remember the 80s. That 94 team had problems on defense. I would have to go with the 89 team, followed closely by 84.

94 team had drastic changes which took time to get use to. Didn't they had like 8 new starters?

- The Secondary was arguibly the greatest in San Fran history
- The defensive line with Young, Stubblefield, Ricky Jackson & Dennis Brown. I guess a speed rusher woulda been nice
- LB's were the weakness of the group and still had Norten, Plummer & Woodal


But offensively? Greatest offense of all time
RB - check
TE - check
Oline - check
QB - check


Remember Ed McCaffrey was a backup on that team

I would argue the "Greatest Secondary" thing.

Yeah, they had Deion and McDonald was awesome, but I always thought Davis was overrated (look at all of his performances against the Cowboys) and as much as I loved Merton, He wasn't a GREAT player.

I'd take Wright, Williamson, Lott and Hicks over that group any day.
[ Edited by Marvin49 on Feb 2, 2012 at 3:17 PM ]
Originally posted by SonocoNinerFan:
The 1989 49ers team was top to bottom the best NFL team I've ever seen to this day. I'd take my chances with that team against any team, any time, anywhere.

This.

The '94 team was great and I'd say maybe more dominant against average to pretty good teams as the Young offense was a bit more efficient than the Montana offense, but I argue that Craig/Rathman was better than Floyd/Watters, and John Taylor was better in '89 than '94. Maybe Brent Jones is better in '94 than '89 but not by much.

Defensively, the '89 defense felt more like a core D just like '11 has, whereas '94 was a "dream team" that worked. The '89 team I feel could rush the passer better and stop the run better. Secondary I also feel was more solid ('84 might have been the very best secondary).

Just look at the '94 NFCC game against the Cowboys. Watching that game objectively as a non homer, I get the feeling that the '89 team would have fared better.

I have some learning to do about '84. For people to speak so highly of that team without Rice, Taylor, and Brent Jones is saying A LOT.
I pick 84, cause they beat a team that everyone said was unstoppable. It took the niners to show how to not only stop them but demolish them.
Originally posted by JTsBiggestFan:
Originally posted by SonocoNinerFan:
The 1989 49ers team was top to bottom the best NFL team I've ever seen to this day. I'd take my chances with that team against any team, any time, anywhere.

This.

The '94 team was great and I'd say maybe more dominant against average to pretty good teams as the Young offense was a bit more efficient than the Montana offense, but I argue that Craig/Rathman was better than Floyd/Watters, and John Taylor was better in '89 than '94. Maybe Brent Jones is better in '94 than '89 but not by much.

Defensively, the '89 defense felt more like a core D just like '11 has, whereas '94 was a "dream team" that worked. The '89 team I feel could rush the passer better and stop the run better. Secondary I also feel was more solid ('84 might have been the very best secondary).

Just look at the '94 NFCC game against the Cowboys. Watching that game objectively as a non homer, I get the feeling that the '89 team would have fared better.

I have some learning to do about '84. For people to speak so highly of that team without Rice, Taylor, and Brent Jones is saying A LOT.

I think teh '89 team was by far the best. Not just the starters either. The DEPTH was insane.
89 or 94
Originally posted by JoseCortez:
Anyone who says 94 must be too young to remember the 80s. That 94 team had problems on defense. I would have to go with the 89 team, followed closely by 84.

I understand where you are coming. I think the problem was more of continuity and not talent. A d-line of Stubby, Young, Brown, Harris, Jackson too bad Dent didnt play. Then add Plummer, Norton Woodall. And then the four DB's. 94 probably wasnt the best but something about that year makes me want to pick them.

Wow I didnt read page 2 and Marvin's post before I put this up. Kind of the same arguement, sorry.
[ Edited by facestabber on Feb 2, 2012 at 3:25 PM ]
Originally posted by WildBill:
I pick 84, cause they beat a team that everyone said was unstoppable. It took the niners to show how to not only stop them but demolish them.

Wanna hear something Funny.....

Dan Marino set the single season Passing record in 1984....and lost to the 49ers in the Super Bowl
Drew Brees set the single season Passing record in 2011....and lost to the 49ers in the playoffs.

Bring on the passing champions. We eat them for lunch.
Originally posted by facestabber:
Originally posted by JoseCortez:
Anyone who says 94 must be too young to remember the 80s. That 94 team had problems on defense. I would have to go with the 89 team, followed closely by 84.

I understand where you are coming. I think the problem was more of continuity and not talent. A d-line of Stubby, Young, Brown, Harris, Jackson too bad Dent didnt play. Then add Plummer, Norton Woodall. And then the four DB's. 94 probably wasnt the best but something about that year makes me want to pick them.

Thats the thing they lacked....a dominant pass-rusher. Fred Dean and Charles Haley filled that role in the 80's.
Originally posted by Marvin49:
Originally posted by WildBill:
I pick 84, cause they beat a team that everyone said was unstoppable. It took the niners to show how to not only stop them but demolish them.

Wanna hear something Funny.....

Dan Marino set the single season Passing record in 1984....and lost to the 49ers in the Super Bowl
Drew Brees set the single season Passing record in 2011....and lost to the 49ers in the playoffs.

Bring on the passing champions. We eat them for lunch.

Nice one.

Hope that gets brought up everytime these QBs get glamorized.....awesome season, but how did it end??

And to whom??
Originally posted by Marvin49:
Thats the thing they lacked....a dominant pass-rusher. Fred Dean and Charles Haley filled that role in the 80's.

I'd have to agree. Harris, Jackson and Brown at that stage didnt match up with what Dean and Haley did back in the day.
Originally posted by Marvin49:
Originally posted by facestabber:
Originally posted by JoseCortez:
Anyone who says 94 must be too young to remember the 80s. That 94 team had problems on defense. I would have to go with the 89 team, followed closely by 84.

I understand where you are coming. I think the problem was more of continuity and not talent. A d-line of Stubby, Young, Brown, Harris, Jackson too bad Dent didnt play. Then add Plummer, Norton Woodall. And then the four DB's. 94 probably wasnt the best but something about that year makes me want to pick them.

Thats the thing they lacked....a dominant pass-rusher. Fred Dean and Charles Haley filled that role in the 80's.

Agreed on the pass rushing front. Why did Tim Harris have to go again???

Plus as much as I loved all the premier names (Dent, Mann, Jackson), they were no longer superstars, just good players hungry for the ring. Only Deion and Ken Norton Jr. were names that were at the very top of their game.

Maybe the Eagles should get tape of '94 49er season to see how a "dream team" is supposed to behave.
Originally posted by Marvin49:
Originally posted by JTsBiggestFan:
Originally posted by SonocoNinerFan:
The 1989 49ers team was top to bottom the best NFL team I've ever seen to this day. I'd take my chances with that team against any team, any time, anywhere.

This.

The '94 team was great and I'd say maybe more dominant against average to pretty good teams as the Young offense was a bit more efficient than the Montana offense, but I argue that Craig/Rathman was better than Floyd/Watters, and John Taylor was better in '89 than '94. Maybe Brent Jones is better in '94 than '89 but not by much.

Defensively, the '89 defense felt more like a core D just like '11 has, whereas '94 was a "dream team" that worked. The '89 team I feel could rush the passer better and stop the run better. Secondary I also feel was more solid ('84 might have been the very best secondary).

Just look at the '94 NFCC game against the Cowboys. Watching that game objectively as a non homer, I get the feeling that the '89 team would have fared better.

I have some learning to do about '84. For people to speak so highly of that team without Rice, Taylor, and Brent Jones is saying A LOT.

I think teh '89 team was by far the best. Not just the starters either. The DEPTH was insane.

The 89 team featured Walsh's epic 1986 draft class coming into its own. You add that to a core group of Hall of Fame players and you could name any position group and you'd find an All-Pro/Pro-Bowler backed by depth that could be starting anywhere else in the league. The only mercenary type free agents I can recall were Millen and Burt. Other than that it was a home grown team.