There are 69 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Your Concerns And Issues Discussion And Poll

Your Concerns And Issues Discussion And Poll

Originally posted by buck:
Originally posted by linkboy:

Want to know GB had to go to SF last year in the playoffs, the Fail Mary. That game gets called correctly and we're a Wildcard team.


That is not right. If that game gets called correctly, we still win the division. Division winners are not wildcard teams.


No, I am afraid you are wrong and linkboy is right.

If Packers had won one more game, they would have been 12 and 4 which would have beaten the 9ers for the bye with home field advantage. So, yes the 9ers would have ended up as a wildcard team.

Winning the division doesn't guarantee you a bye slot, it all depends on your season record. The Redskins won NFC East and was a wildcard team, likewise the Packers also won NFC North and they were a wildcard team.
  • buck
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 11,380
Originally posted by Rascal:
Originally posted by buck:
Originally posted by linkboy:

Want to know GB had to go to SF last year in the playoffs, the Fail Mary. That game gets called correctly and we're a Wildcard team.


That is not right. If that game gets called correctly, we still win the division. Division winners are not wildcard teams.


No, I am afraid you are wrong and linkboy is right.

If Packers had won one more game, they would have been 12 and 4 which would have beaten the 9ers for the bye with home field advantage. So, yes the 9ers would have ended up as a wildcard team.

Winning the division doesn't guarantee you a bye slot, it all depends on your season record. The Redskins won NFC East and was a wildcard team, likewise the Packers also won NFC North and they were a wildcard team.

No. I was right.

Six team make the play-offs in each conference. The four division winners and two wild card teams.

The two wild cards teams are non-division winners with the best records. There actually can be wild card teams with better records than the division winners.

The two division winners with the best record get a 1st round bye.

The other two division winners, the division winners who do not get a bye, play the two wild card teams in the first round.

Divisional winners are not wild card teams. Those are not my terms; the terms are defined by the NFL.
[ Edited by buck on Sep 19, 2013 at 2:43 AM ]
Originally posted by buck:
Originally posted by Rascal:
Originally posted by buck:
Originally posted by linkboy:

Want to know GB had to go to SF last year in the playoffs, the Fail Mary. That game gets called correctly and we're a Wildcard team.


That is not right. If that game gets called correctly, we still win the division. Division winners are not wildcard teams.


No, I am afraid you are wrong and linkboy is right.

If Packers had won one more game, they would have been 12 and 4 which would have beaten the 9ers for the bye with home field advantage. So, yes the 9ers would have ended up as a wildcard team.

Winning the division doesn't guarantee you a bye slot, it all depends on your season record. The Redskins won NFC East and was a wildcard team, likewise the Packers also won NFC North and they were a wildcard team.

No. I was right.

Six team make the play-offs in each conference. The four division winners and two wild card teams.

The two wild cards teams are non-division winners with the best records. There actually can be wild card teams with better records than the division winners.

The two division winners with the best record get a 1st round bye.

The other two division winners, the division winners who do not get a bye, play the two wild card teams in the first round.

Divisional winners are not wild card teams. Those are not my terms; the terms are defined by the NFL.


Yes, but the 2 division winners with the worst records would still have to play in the wildcard weekend. So, yes strictly speaking the 9ers wouldn't have been named a "wildcard team" per se that's true, but they would still have to play a wildcard team in order to advance. I am just assuming that's what linkboy meant.
  • buck
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 11,380
Originally posted by Rascal:
Yes, but the 2 division winners with the worst records would still have to play in the wildcard weekend. So, yes strictly speaking the 9ers wouldn't have been named a "wildcard team" per se that's true, but they would still have to play a wildcard team in order to advance. I am just assuming that's what linkboy meant.

Look. I did not assume anything. I just pointed that what he said was not correct.

Your claim the Green Bay and the Washington Redskins were wild card teams was also incorrect.

It is simple. He was wrong. You were wrong. Just acknowledge the fact and move on. No excuses. No rationalizations.
[ Edited by buck on Sep 19, 2013 at 2:59 AM ]
Originally posted by buck:
No. I was right.

Six team make the play-offs in each conference. The four division winners and two wild card teams.

The two wild cards teams are non-division winners with the best records. There actually can be wild card teams with better records than the division winners.

The two division winners with the best record get a 1st round bye.

The other two division winners, the division winners who do not get a bye, play the two wild card teams in the first round.

Divisional winners are not wild card teams. Those are not my terms; the terms are defined by the NFL.

Ding!! Ding!! Ding!! Ding....yooouuuurrrrrr'eeee coorrrreeeecccctt sir! Job well done!
Originally posted by buck:
Originally posted by Rascal:
Yes, but the 2 division winners with the worst records would still have to play in the wildcard weekend. So, yes strictly speaking the 9ers wouldn't have been named a "wildcard team" per se that's true, but they would still have to play a wildcard team in order to advance. I am just assuming that's what linkboy meant.

Look. I did not assume anything. I just pointed that what he said was not correct.

Your claim the Green Bay and the Washington Redskins were wild card teams was also incorrect.

It is simple. He was wrong. You were wrong. Just acknowledge the fact and move on. No excuses. No rationalizations.


WTF !! Am I at school here or what ?! LOL.

OK, we need to present you with an award !! Congrats, you were right !! LOL.
Anyway back to the subject. My only concern is our injury list is pretty long this week. I know most of them are not serious injuries, but its only week 3 and we have a long season to go.
Run the f***ing no huddle and don't give their D time to set up!
  • cciowa
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 26,910
Originally posted by 808niner4lyphe:
Anyway back to the subject. My only concern is our injury list is pretty long this week. I know most of them are not serious injuries, but its only week 3 and we have a long season to go.
agree. we lose two d line guys in free agency. gain one in dorsey. draft two who can not play. lose one with a busted ankle. ray has a gimpy ankle, so we sign a fullback. oh well
  • buck
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 11,380
Originally posted by Rascal:
WTF !! Am I at school here or what ?! LOL.

OK, we need to present you with an award !! Congrats, you were right !! LOL.

I do not know if you are a student or not, but this response makes you seem like a petulant juvenile.

I should have said, No excuses. No rationalizations. No attacks.
Originally posted by Rascal:
Originally posted by buck:
Originally posted by Rascal:
Yes, but the 2 division winners with the worst records would still have to play in the wildcard weekend. So, yes strictly speaking the 9ers wouldn't have been named a "wildcard team" per se that's true, but they would still have to play a wildcard team in order to advance. I am just assuming that's what linkboy meant.

Look. I did not assume anything. I just pointed that what he said was not correct.

Your claim the Green Bay and the Washington Redskins were wild card teams was also incorrect.

It is simple. He was wrong. You were wrong. Just acknowledge the fact and move on. No excuses. No rationalizations.


WTF !! Am I at school here or what ?! LOL.

OK, we need to present you with an award !! Congrats, you were right !! LOL.

Because you never admit you're wrong Rascal... ever.
Originally posted by LVJay:
Originally posted by Rascal:
Remember they didn't even have Irvin, Clemons and Harvin in this game. I would say this, for this season at least is safe to say they have our number as I am not hopeful with the home game in December. But, of course we have a lot of draft ammo, provided we use them properly and key in on legit talents, we could come back to challenge them next season. What I am seeing is this Seahawks team have gone through a maturation process and are now beginning to peak. I believe they are only scratching the surface and will be a dominant force to be reckoned with in years to come. They are just too good for us right now.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H08yYqGCTiM

1. Turn your speakers up very loud
2. skip straight to 0:40 and listen carefully
3.

This. Overreaction theater is in the house.
Here's my concern:

The Seahawks are clearly public enemy #1. Their corners are good enough that they can just stack the box. However, their corners aren't speed demons. The Niners need a deep threat next time they play Seattle so they can take some home run shots & keep the safety honest. Manningham is not that guy. Is Baldwin? The Niners should play Baldwin to see what he can do rather than go with a guaranteed sucktastic Kyle Williams.

I'd also like to see more Vance.

Concern #2:

the D-line is extremely thin. Ian is gone; Ray is hurting. The only backup on the roster on Sunday was Dobbs. They seriously need to do something about this. Lack of depth on the DL killed the Niners last year.
BUMPED FOR OBVIOUS REASONS
I think you can now add Kap to the "concerns" list.
...