"Expert" rankings

Originally posted by pdxredandgold:
I hear what your saying, but this is OUR team for the year.

we're still rebuilding, so the way i see it, get behind what we have and hope for the best.

Or you could apply for a position with the niners and then we'll be all set.

Okay, I like MOST of what we have personnel-wise, so bare with me here.

At WHAT point are we going to be done rebuilding this freaking team?!?!

Cause I certainly don't see why we're going to be subjected to a "Smash Mouth" mentality if we don't have the passing game to support it.

Oh and NEWSFLASH the Smash Mouth philosophy has only worked a handful of times in the Super Bowl era. Before that it was called "3 yards and a cloud of dust", even still you had to have a passing game to support the RUn game.

I like Smash Mouth as much as the next guy, but of what I have seen of our passing game thus far we might as well fire the QBs', WRs' and replace them with more Linemen and Backs; and run full time Wildcat instead. It couldn't get any worse than it looks to be right now.

And this is coming from someone who goes into EVERY season hoping for solid results. Anyone that has paid attention to what I post, knows that I'm not the sort to be a Debbie downer.

~Ceadder

Originally posted by baltien:

Originally posted by nvninerfan1:
I just waiting to see if there is smoke and when it clears we have a deep threat this doesn't start with the QB handing the ball off.

You can say it was only preseason, but I saw alot of deep passing and out routes by alot of other teams in the NFL. The only time I saw it for the 49ers was when Nate Davis was in.

However, I did see Shaun Hill emulating some of Al Orters greatest shotput attempts.

I guess though that they are saving that for the season. Maybe they won't even use the passing threat on the first time through the division foes, since we'll be saving it for the second meeting with Seattle, Arizona and the Rams.

Also, we better see alot of zone blitzing on Sunday because they did a very good job of disguising our pass rush during the preseason.

It's funny because if you look around the NFL, Shaun Hill is far from the only QB having a bad preseason. Kurt Warner & Tom Brady come to mind. And while even at his best, Hill isn't nearly as good as either, don't lose sight of the fact that he does WIN US GAMES which to me, is always the most important stat.

Honestly I do think our passing game will struggle at times, but it will be much better than what was shown in the preseason. We already know what our ground game and defense can do -- we'll be fine

We very well may not be an elite team yet, but I don't think we're half as bad as people are making it out to be.

The sampling size of regular season games is too miniscule for Shaun Hill to be compared to Brady & Warner in regards to how they perform in preseason vs regular season. Hill really is still a wildcard, and could be ok or fail miserably as a full time starter. Defenses have a good head start on gameplanning against him now. I don't think the 49er offense is going to try to trick anyone, so they are going to have to outplay their defensive opponents mano y mano. Going with Hill (or Smith or the rookie) as an iffy situation at QB for the 49ers. If Hill was seen as a really good QB by the 49ers, he would have been named starter at the end of last season, not a few weeks ago.

Originally posted by Ceadderman:

Originally posted by pdxredandgold:
I hear what your saying, but this is OUR team for the year.

we're still rebuilding, so the way i see it, get behind what we have and hope for the best.

Or you could apply for a position with the niners and then we'll be all set.

Okay, I like MOST of what we have personnel-wise, so bare with me here.

At WHAT point are we going to be done rebuilding this freaking team?!?!

Cause I certainly don't see why we're going to be subjected to a "Smash Mouth" mentality if we don't have the passing game to support it.

Oh and NEWSFLASH the Smash Mouth philosophy has only worked a handful of times in the Super Bowl era. Before that it was called "3 yards and a cloud of dust", even still you had to have a passing game to support the RUn game.

I like Smash Mouth as much as the next guy, but of what I have seen of our passing game thus far we might as well fire the QBs', WRs' and replace them with more Linemen and Backs; and run full time Wildcat instead. It couldn't get any worse than it looks to be right now.

And this is coming from someone who goes into EVERY season hoping for solid results. Anyone that has paid attention to what I post, knows that I'm not the sort to be a Debbie downer.

~Ceadder

Right now I have zero confidence in Jimmy Raye and Mike Singletary offensive philosophy.

Originally posted by luckofirish:
Don, I couldn't have said it better myself ....oh wait I did and my thread got locked. The Smash mouth approach can only take you so far , look at pittsburgh even they had to win last year via the arm of big ben. I can only name three teams that have won superbowls with this approach since 1980 : Chicago 85 , Ny Giants 90 Baltimore 2000. In the NFL you need to score points and run the ball and play solid D.

22

Pre-camp ranking: 21
San Francisco 49ers
As bad as West Coast football was last season in the NFL, with only the 8-8 Chargers avoiding a losing season -- and it took them all season to get there -- it'd be great to see the 49ers return to relevancy. But I don't have my hopes much higher than 8-8 or so for Mike Singletary's team, because it's built to win low-scoring games with a sound defense and running game. That only takes you so far in today's NFL.

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/don_banks/09/09/pre.regular.season/index.html#ixzz0QjYa2tD3

WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I just happen to have this with me:


Only five teams in the NFL ran the ball more than 50 percent of their offensive plays last season. Here is a look at those teams, along with their percentage of run plays (with overall record in parenthesis):

Ravens 56.0% (11-5)

Falcons 55.4% (11-5)

Panthers 53.7% (12-4)

Titans 52.2% (13-3)

Vikings 51.2% (10-6)

Those teams finished with a 71.3 win percentage during the regular season. (And each of those teams attempted more passes than runs in their playoff defeats.)

There were 10 teams in the league that ran the ball 46-percent or more in the 2008 regular season. Those teams had a combined win percentage of 65.0.

On the other hand, there were six teams that ran the ball less than 40-percent of the time. The combined win percentage of those teams was 40.6 percent. And that list even includes teams with great quarterbacks, such as Arizona (Kurt Warner), Indianapolis (Peyton Manning) and New Orleans (Drew Brees).

The Cardinals are a perfect example of how successful teams run (or teams that run have success). Arizona was a less-than-impressive 9-7 team during the regular season with six of their wins coming over the Rams, Seahawks and 49ers. They ran the ball 34-percent of the time in the regular season. But in the playoffs when the Cardinals caught fire, that number jumped to 44-percent runs.

Originally posted by djfullshred:

Originally posted by baltien:

Originally posted by nvninerfan1:
I just waiting to see if there is smoke and when it clears we have a deep threat this doesn't start with the QB handing the ball off.

You can say it was only preseason, but I saw alot of deep passing and out routes by alot of other teams in the NFL. The only time I saw it for the 49ers was when Nate Davis was in.

However, I did see Shaun Hill emulating some of Al Orters greatest shotput attempts.

I guess though that they are saving that for the season. Maybe they won't even use the passing threat on the first time through the division foes, since we'll be saving it for the second meeting with Seattle, Arizona and the Rams.

Also, we better see alot of zone blitzing on Sunday because they did a very good job of disguising our pass rush during the preseason.

It's funny because if you look around the NFL, Shaun Hill is far from the only QB having a bad preseason. Kurt Warner & Tom Brady come to mind. And while even at his best, Hill isn't nearly as good as either, don't lose sight of the fact that he does WIN US GAMES which to me, is always the most important stat.

Honestly I do think our passing game will struggle at times, but it will be much better than what was shown in the preseason. We already know what our ground game and defense can do -- we'll be fine

We very well may not be an elite team yet, but I don't think we're half as bad as people are making it out to be.

The sampling size of regular season games is too miniscule for Shaun Hill to be compared to Brady & Warner in regards to how they perform in preseason vs regular season. Hill really is still a wildcard, and could be ok or fail miserably as a full time starter. Defenses have a good head start on gameplanning against him now. I don't think the 49er offense is going to try to trick anyone, so they are going to have to outplay their defensive opponents mano y mano. Going with Hill (or Smith or the rookie) as an iffy situation at QB for the 49ers. If Hill was seen as a really good QB by the 49ers, he would have been named starter at the end of last season, not a few weeks ago.

Not really. That was more a coaching decision than proof that Hill really isn't that good. But I do agree that we haven't yet seen what he can do over a full season.

So I suppose that is a reason for some apprehension.

Still, you can't take away the fact that when he was called on to start, he did well enough for us to win games. So, based purely on his time as a starter...he's a winner. Flat out. And sometimes winners don't look so hot in the preseason (refer back to my earlier example of Brady & Warner). It happens.

All I'm saying is, it isn't time to hit the panic button yet. We'll see...

Look at this team. What else is it built for? Maybe if we would have gotten Warner, then some chips would have fell differently in the offseason, but we are what we are and either it works or we will be back to the drawing board in the not-so-distant future. I mean, you could be a fan of one of those teams that wins all the time, but that is boring. Being a 49er fan takes true commitment.

Originally posted by Mex49:

Originally posted by luckofirish:
Don, I couldn't have said it better myself ....oh wait I did and my thread got locked. The Smash mouth approach can only take you so far , look at pittsburgh even they had to win last year via the arm of big ben. I can only name three teams that have won superbowls with this approach since 1980 : Chicago 85 , Ny Giants 90 Baltimore 2000. In the NFL you need to score points and run the ball and play solid D.

22

Pre-camp ranking: 21
San Francisco 49ers
As bad as West Coast football was last season in the NFL, with only the 8-8 Chargers avoiding a losing season -- and it took them all season to get there -- it'd be great to see the 49ers return to relevancy. But I don't have my hopes much higher than 8-8 or so for Mike Singletary's team, because it's built to win low-scoring games with a sound defense and running game. That only takes you so far in today's NFL.

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/don_banks/09/09/pre.regular.season/index.html#ixzz0QjYa2tD3

WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I just happen to have this with me:


Only five teams in the NFL ran the ball more than 50 percent of their offensive plays last season. Here is a look at those teams, along with their percentage of run plays (with overall record in parenthesis):

Ravens 56.0% (11-5)

Falcons 55.4% (11-5)

Panthers 53.7% (12-4)

Titans 52.2% (13-3)

Vikings 51.2% (10-6)

Those teams finished with a 71.3 win percentage during the regular season. (And each of those teams attempted more passes than runs in their playoff defeats.)

There were 10 teams in the league that ran the ball 46-percent or more in the 2008 regular season. Those teams had a combined win percentage of 65.0.

On the other hand, there were six teams that ran the ball less than 40-percent of the time. The combined win percentage of those teams was 40.6 percent. And that list even includes teams with great quarterbacks, such as Arizona (Kurt Warner), Indianapolis (Peyton Manning) and New Orleans (Drew Brees).

The Cardinals are a perfect example of how successful teams run (or teams that run have success). Arizona was a less-than-impressive 9-7 team during the regular season with six of their wins coming over the Rams, Seahawks and 49ers. They ran the ball 34-percent of the time in the regular season. But in the playoffs when the Cardinals caught fire, that number jumped to 44-percent runs.

Exactly. None of them had QB's with huge numbers. I just know that we had a -17 turnover ratio and we were still 7-9. All homerism aside there is no reason we don't have the possibility to go 9-7.

Originally posted by baltien:

Originally posted by djfullshred:

Originally posted by baltien:

Originally posted by nvninerfan1:
I just waiting to see if there is smoke and when it clears we have a deep threat this doesn't start with the QB handing the ball off.

You can say it was only preseason, but I saw alot of deep passing and out routes by alot of other teams in the NFL. The only time I saw it for the 49ers was when Nate Davis was in.

However, I did see Shaun Hill emulating some of Al Orters greatest shotput attempts.

I guess though that they are saving that for the season. Maybe they won't even use the passing threat on the first time through the division foes, since we'll be saving it for the second meeting with Seattle, Arizona and the Rams.

Also, we better see alot of zone blitzing on Sunday because they did a very good job of disguising our pass rush during the preseason.

It's funny because if you look around the NFL, Shaun Hill is far from the only QB having a bad preseason. Kurt Warner & Tom Brady come to mind. And while even at his best, Hill isn't nearly as good as either, don't lose sight of the fact that he does WIN US GAMES which to me, is always the most important stat.

Honestly I do think our passing game will struggle at times, but it will be much better than what was shown in the preseason. We already know what our ground game and defense can do -- we'll be fine

We very well may not be an elite team yet, but I don't think we're half as bad as people are making it out to be.

The sampling size of regular season games is too miniscule for Shaun Hill to be compared to Brady & Warner in regards to how they perform in preseason vs regular season. Hill really is still a wildcard, and could be ok or fail miserably as a full time starter. Defenses have a good head start on gameplanning against him now. I don't think the 49er offense is going to try to trick anyone, so they are going to have to outplay their defensive opponents mano y mano. Going with Hill (or Smith or the rookie) as an iffy situation at QB for the 49ers. If Hill was seen as a really good QB by the 49ers, he would have been named starter at the end of last season, not a few weeks ago.

Not really. That was more a coaching decision than proof that Hill really isn't that good. But I do agree that we haven't yet seen what he can do over a full season.

So I suppose that is a reason for some apprehension.

Still, you can't take away the fact that when he was called on to start, he did well enough for us to win games. So, based purely on his time as a starter...he's a winner. Flat out. And sometimes winners don't look so hot in the preseason (refer back to my earlier example of Brady & Warner). It happens.

All I'm saying is, it isn't time to hit the panic button yet. We'll see...

Out of the what slim pickins the 49ers have gone with at QB, I much prfer Hill over th others. Yes, statistically he is a winner. I am not trying to bash the guy, but it is fairly common in fnadom to get overhyped about a backup QB becoming starter. Everyone wants the Cinderalla story. I am more of the opinion, let's see how it all played out after 16 games. It is a fresh start, and Sunday is really day one of his starter career in an official capacity.

I am not really down on Hill, but I do think the 49ers FO have been, and still are a bunch of numbnutz for not doing everything they can to improve the QB situation, going back several years now. They have been passive, and look like fools.

I have to agree with Don Banks. I only see them winning six to eight games and those will all be close games. What I would give to see another blow-out administered by the 9ers to anyone, but I doubt that's going to happen any time soon and certainly not until a legitimate QB is in place.

Originally posted by Mex49:

Originally posted by luckofirish:
Don, I couldn't have said it better myself ....oh wait I did and my thread got locked. The Smash mouth approach can only take you so far , look at pittsburgh even they had to win last year via the arm of big ben. I can only name three teams that have won superbowls with this approach since 1980 : Chicago 85 , Ny Giants 90 Baltimore 2000. In the NFL you need to score points and run the ball and play solid D.

22

Pre-camp ranking: 21
San Francisco 49ers
As bad as West Coast football was last season in the NFL, with only the 8-8 Chargers avoiding a losing season -- and it took them all season to get there -- it'd be great to see the 49ers return to relevancy. But I don't have my hopes much higher than 8-8 or so for Mike Singletary's team, because it's built to win low-scoring games with a sound defense and running game. That only takes you so far in today's NFL.

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/don_banks/09/09/pre.regular.season/index.html#ixzz0QjYa2tD3

WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I just happen to have this with me:


Only five teams in the NFL ran the ball more than 50 percent of their offensive plays last season. Here is a look at those teams, along with their percentage of run plays (with overall record in parenthesis):

Ravens 56.0% (11-5)

Falcons 55.4% (11-5)

Panthers 53.7% (12-4)

Titans 52.2% (13-3)

Vikings 51.2% (10-6)

Those teams finished with a 71.3 win percentage during the regular season. (And each of those teams attempted more passes than runs in their playoff defeats.)

There were 10 teams in the league that ran the ball 46-percent or more in the 2008 regular season. Those teams had a combined win percentage of 65.0.

On the other hand, there were six teams that ran the ball less than 40-percent of the time. The combined win percentage of those teams was 40.6 percent. And that list even includes teams with great quarterbacks, such as Arizona (Kurt Warner), Indianapolis (Peyton Manning) and New Orleans (Drew Brees).

The Cardinals are a perfect example of how successful teams run (or teams that run have success). Arizona was a less-than-impressive 9-7 team during the regular season with six of their wins coming over the Rams, Seahawks and 49ers. They ran the ball 34-percent of the time in the regular season. But in the playoffs when the Cardinals caught fire, that number jumped to 44-percent runs.

Any of those teams win the SB recently ?

Originally posted by luckofirish:
Don, I couldn't have said it better myself ....oh wait I did and my thread got locked. The Smash mouth approach can only take you so far , look at pittsburgh even they had to win last year via the arm of big ben. I can only name three teams that have won superbowls with this approach since 1980 : Chicago 85 , Ny Giants 90 Baltimore 2000. In the NFL you need to score points and run the ball and play solid D.

22

Pre-camp ranking: 21
San Francisco 49ers
As bad as West Coast football was last season in the NFL, with only the 8-8 Chargers avoiding a losing season -- and it took them all season to get there -- it'd be great to see the 49ers return to relevancy. But I don't have my hopes much higher than 8-8 or so for Mike Singletary's team, because it's built to win low-scoring games with a sound defense and running game. That only takes you so far in today's NFL.

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/don_banks/09/09/pre.regular.season/index.html#ixzz0QjYa2tD3

What about the patriots?

Originally posted by ZRF80:

Originally posted by Mex49:

Originally posted by luckofirish:
Don, I couldn't have said it better myself ....oh wait I did and my thread got locked. The Smash mouth approach can only take you so far , look at pittsburgh even they had to win last year via the arm of big ben. I can only name three teams that have won superbowls with this approach since 1980 : Chicago 85 , Ny Giants 90 Baltimore 2000. In the NFL you need to score points and run the ball and play solid D.

22

Pre-camp ranking: 21
San Francisco 49ers
As bad as West Coast football was last season in the NFL, with only the 8-8 Chargers avoiding a losing season -- and it took them all season to get there -- it'd be great to see the 49ers return to relevancy. But I don't have my hopes much higher than 8-8 or so for Mike Singletary's team, because it's built to win low-scoring games with a sound defense and running game. That only takes you so far in today's NFL.

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/don_banks/09/09/pre.regular.season/index.html#ixzz0QjYa2tD3

WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I just happen to have this with me:


Only five teams in the NFL ran the ball more than 50 percent of their offensive plays last season. Here is a look at those teams, along with their percentage of run plays (with overall record in parenthesis):

Ravens 56.0% (11-5)

Falcons 55.4% (11-5)

Panthers 53.7% (12-4)

Titans 52.2% (13-3)

Vikings 51.2% (10-6)

Those teams finished with a 71.3 win percentage during the regular season. (And each of those teams attempted more passes than runs in their playoff defeats.)

There were 10 teams in the league that ran the ball 46-percent or more in the 2008 regular season. Those teams had a combined win percentage of 65.0.

On the other hand, there were six teams that ran the ball less than 40-percent of the time. The combined win percentage of those teams was 40.6 percent. And that list even includes teams with great quarterbacks, such as Arizona (Kurt Warner), Indianapolis (Peyton Manning) and New Orleans (Drew Brees).

The Cardinals are a perfect example of how successful teams run (or teams that run have success). Arizona was a less-than-impressive 9-7 team during the regular season with six of their wins coming over the Rams, Seahawks and 49ers. They ran the ball 34-percent of the time in the regular season. But in the playoffs when the Cardinals caught fire, that number jumped to 44-percent runs.

Any of those teams win the SB recently ?

The Niners need to walk be for the can run, for the super bowl that is.

Originally posted by Mex49:

Originally posted by luckofirish:
Don, I couldn't have said it better myself ....oh wait I did and my thread got locked. The Smash mouth approach can only take you so far , look at pittsburgh even they had to win last year via the arm of big ben. I can only name three teams that have won superbowls with this approach since 1980 : Chicago 85 , Ny Giants 90 Baltimore 2000. In the NFL you need to score points and run the ball and play solid D.

22

Pre-camp ranking: 21
San Francisco 49ers
As bad as West Coast football was last season in the NFL, with only the 8-8 Chargers avoiding a losing season -- and it took them all season to get there -- it'd be great to see the 49ers return to relevancy. But I don't have my hopes much higher than 8-8 or so for Mike Singletary's team, because it's built to win low-scoring games with a sound defense and running game. That only takes you so far in today's NFL.

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/don_banks/09/09/pre.regular.season/index.html#ixzz0QjYa2tD3

WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I just happen to have this with me:


Only five teams in the NFL ran the ball more than 50 percent of their offensive plays last season. Here is a look at those teams, along with their percentage of run plays (with overall record in parenthesis):

Ravens 56.0% (11-5)

Falcons 55.4% (11-5)

Panthers 53.7% (12-4)

Titans 52.2% (13-3)

Vikings 51.2% (10-6)

Those teams finished with a 71.3 win percentage during the regular season. (And each of those teams attempted more passes than runs in their playoff defeats.)

There were 10 teams in the league that ran the ball 46-percent or more in the 2008 regular season. Those teams had a combined win percentage of 65.0.

On the other hand, there were six teams that ran the ball less than 40-percent of the time. The combined win percentage of those teams was 40.6 percent. And that list even includes teams with great quarterbacks, such as Arizona (Kurt Warner), Indianapolis (Peyton Manning) and New Orleans (Drew Brees).

The Cardinals are a perfect example of how successful teams run (or teams that run have success). Arizona was a less-than-impressive 9-7 team during the regular season with six of their wins coming over the Rams, Seahawks and 49ers. They ran the ball 34-percent of the time in the regular season. But in the playoffs when the Cardinals caught fire, that number jumped to 44-percent runs.

Ummmmm Mex? How many of those teams hoisted a Lombardi over their heads at the end of their respective seasons? Teams that you didn't mention also were the '85 Bears, Steelers gift wrapped season as well as the Giants. Oops I ALMOST forgot Riggins and the Redskins(though they had a fairly balanced attack).

In any case the Super Bowl is 40+ years old and one would be hard pressed to find more than 25% of its winners held to a Run, Run, Run, Pass system.

We're speaking of WINNERS here bro. Not season win percentage. Though your point is important, it doesn't hold up to what the actual topic is about.

~Ceadder

Originally posted by Ceadderman:

Originally posted by Mex49:

Originally posted by luckofirish:
Don, I couldn't have said it better myself ....oh wait I did and my thread got locked. The Smash mouth approach can only take you so far , look at pittsburgh even they had to win last year via the arm of big ben. I can only name three teams that have won superbowls with this approach since 1980 : Chicago 85 , Ny Giants 90 Baltimore 2000. In the NFL you need to score points and run the ball and play solid D.

22

Pre-camp ranking: 21
San Francisco 49ers
As bad as West Coast football was last season in the NFL, with only the 8-8 Chargers avoiding a losing season -- and it took them all season to get there -- it'd be great to see the 49ers return to relevancy. But I don't have my hopes much higher than 8-8 or so for Mike Singletary's team, because it's built to win low-scoring games with a sound defense and running game. That only takes you so far in today's NFL.

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/don_banks/09/09/pre.regular.season/index.html#ixzz0QjYa2tD3

WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I just happen to have this with me:


Only five teams in the NFL ran the ball more than 50 percent of their offensive plays last season. Here is a look at those teams, along with their percentage of run plays (with overall record in parenthesis):

Ravens 56.0% (11-5)

Falcons 55.4% (11-5)

Panthers 53.7% (12-4)

Titans 52.2% (13-3)

Vikings 51.2% (10-6)

Those teams finished with a 71.3 win percentage during the regular season. (And each of those teams attempted more passes than runs in their playoff defeats.)

There were 10 teams in the league that ran the ball 46-percent or more in the 2008 regular season. Those teams had a combined win percentage of 65.0.

On the other hand, there were six teams that ran the ball less than 40-percent of the time. The combined win percentage of those teams was 40.6 percent. And that list even includes teams with great quarterbacks, such as Arizona (Kurt Warner), Indianapolis (Peyton Manning) and New Orleans (Drew Brees).

The Cardinals are a perfect example of how successful teams run (or teams that run have success). Arizona was a less-than-impressive 9-7 team during the regular season with six of their wins coming over the Rams, Seahawks and 49ers. They ran the ball 34-percent of the time in the regular season. But in the playoffs when the Cardinals caught fire, that number jumped to 44-percent runs.

Ummmmm Mex? How many of those teams hoisted a Lombardi over their heads at the end of their respective seasons? Teams that you didn't mention also were the '85 Bears, Steelers gift wrapped season as well as the Giants. Oops I ALMOST forgot Riggins and the Redskins(though they had a fairly balanced attack).

In any case the Super Bowl is 40+ years old and one would be hard pressed to find more than 25% of its winners held to a Run, Run, Run, Pass system.

We're speaking of WINNERS here bro. Not season win percentage. Though your point is important, it doesn't hold up to what the actual topic is about.

~Ceadder

Like I said before we need to walk before we can run, for the super bowl that is.

Originally posted by pdxredandgold:
Let them play one game before getting all high and mighty about why you think the coach/system is wrong.

Watch, have hope, have fun and be a fan.

Nicely said, vary eloquent.