Peter King Thinks 49ers will win less than 9 games

fcuk peter king!!!

Originally posted by Crazy4Niners:
F*ck him.

Niners are going to be world champs.....end of story

sing sing peter king

Peter King also said that Barlow was going to rush for over 2000 yards in his first season as the feature back. We all know how that turned out.

Originally posted by tjd808185:
People take this way too seriously. Until we get good QB play you're not going to convince every journalist that you're the sh*t.

You guys all complain that he's a Niner hater and he picks against every year. Guess what he's been right about us every single time too.

Yea that is the painful truth.

I'm actually suprised that this is one of the first analysts that doesn't believe we will be a winning team this season, I figured there would be a lot more like this guy. I'm sure he is basing a lot of his prediction based upon our track record the last 7 years, for people like King they will probably always put us as a mediocre team at best until we actually prove we deserve higher rankings. Let's SHOW him we deserve to have the respect as a winning football team.

Now the whole Seahawks at 11 and us at 19 is ridiculous, I will admit.

Who cares what he thinks or says. He can actually be wrong. Case in point......look at this review and ranking he had prior to last season about the Saints, the eventual Super Bowl Champion.

24. New Orleans
No team with Drew Brees will ever be awful, particularly in a division without an almighty power. The Saints will win two or three 40-31-type of games. But unless Gregg Williams can find a better-than-average pass-rush by maneuvering some average chess pieces -- and unless Jonathan Vilma plays like Superman, and Jabari Greer and Malcolm Jenkins cover like Deion -- this defense is not going to be good enough to win eight games.

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/peter_king/05/10/may11/2.html#ixzz0v58ZRBbr

I rest my case.

Originally posted by m_brockalexander:
Who cares what he thinks or says. He can actually be wrong. Case in point......look at this review and ranking he had prior to last season about the Saints, the eventual Super Bowl Champion.

24. New Orleans
No team with Drew Brees will ever be awful, particularly in a division without an almighty power. The Saints will win two or three 40-31-type of games. But unless Gregg Williams can find a better-than-average pass-rush by maneuvering some average chess pieces -- and unless Jonathan Vilma plays like Superman, and Jabari Greer and Malcolm Jenkins cover like Deion -- this defense is not going to be good enough to win eight games.

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/peter_king/05/10/may11/2.html#ixzz0v58ZRBbr

I rest my case.

Wow, that is funny, if I were him maybe I would focus my football knowledge on other things besides predictions. But in all reality preseason predictions are nearly impossible to predict correctly, besides the obvious few teams. There are always dark horse teams, cinderalla teams, dissapointing teams, undderrated and ovverated teams that always blows these predictions out of the water by Week 3. But when football has such a long offseason people will always try to predict how teams will fare, we all know that this league is truly unpredictable and I believe thats why it is such a great league and sport.

Originally posted by m_brockalexander:
Who cares what he thinks or says. He can actually be wrong. Case in point......look at this review and ranking he had prior to last season about the Saints, the eventual Super Bowl Champion.

24. New Orleans
No team with Drew Brees will ever be awful, particularly in a division without an almighty power. The Saints will win two or three 40-31-type of games. But unless Gregg Williams can find a better-than-average pass-rush by maneuvering some average chess pieces -- and unless Jonathan Vilma plays like Superman, and Jabari Greer and Malcolm Jenkins cover like Deion -- this defense is not going to be good enough to win eight games.

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/peter_king/05/10/may11/2.html#ixzz0v58ZRBbr

I rest my case.

LOL he also had Cinci ranked #28 last year.
Seriously...they have been on the cusp for years. Most people had them, at worst, in the middle of the pack.
I can understand if he ranked both Cinci and the Saints in the 14-20 range but this is just ridiculous.

Originally posted by scopur49er:

Originally posted by m_brockalexander:
Who cares what he thinks or says. He can actually be wrong. Case in point......look at this review and ranking he had prior to last season about the Saints, the eventual Super Bowl Champion.

24. New Orleans
No team with Drew Brees will ever be awful, particularly in a division without an almighty power. The Saints will win two or three 40-31-type of games. But unless Gregg Williams can find a better-than-average pass-rush by maneuvering some average chess pieces -- and unless Jonathan Vilma plays like Superman, and Jabari Greer and Malcolm Jenkins cover like Deion -- this defense is not going to be good enough to win eight games.

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/peter_king/05/10/may11/2.html#ixzz0v58ZRBbr

I rest my case.

LOL he also had Cinci ranked #28 last year.
Seriously...they have been on the cusp for years. Most people had them, at worst, in the middle of the pack.
I can understand if he ranked both Cinci and the Saints in the 14-20 range but this is just ridiculous.

Now you are just nitpicking....with NO he wasn't far off, and they did rush the passer better, get better coverage (and increase their total number of turnovers).

And without Housh and with Palmer's 2008 season there was little reason to believe the Bengals were going to be as good as they were. He may have ranked them too low at that juncture but his logic was understandable.

Originally posted by KRS-1:

Originally posted by scopur49er:

Originally posted by m_brockalexander:
Who cares what he thinks or says. He can actually be wrong. Case in point......look at this review and ranking he had prior to last season about the Saints, the eventual Super Bowl Champion.

24. New Orleans
No team with Drew Brees will ever be awful, particularly in a division without an almighty power. The Saints will win two or three 40-31-type of games. But unless Gregg Williams can find a better-than-average pass-rush by maneuvering some average chess pieces -- and unless Jonathan Vilma plays like Superman, and Jabari Greer and Malcolm Jenkins cover like Deion -- this defense is not going to be good enough to win eight games.

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/peter_king/05/10/may11/2.html#ixzz0v58ZRBbr

I rest my case.

LOL he also had Cinci ranked #28 last year.
Seriously...they have been on the cusp for years. Most people had them, at worst, in the middle of the pack.
I can understand if he ranked both Cinci and the Saints in the 14-20 range but this is just ridiculous.

Now you are just nitpicking....with NO he wasn't far off, and they did rush the passer better, get better coverage (and increase their total number of turnovers).

And without Housh and with Palmer's 2008 season there was little reason to believe the Bengals were going to be as good as they were. He may have ranked them too low at that juncture but his logic was understandable.

He's still a giant douche.

Originally posted by NineFourNiner:

Originally posted by KRS-1:

Originally posted by scopur49er:

Originally posted by m_brockalexander:
Who cares what he thinks or says. He can actually be wrong. Case in point......look at this review and ranking he had prior to last season about the Saints, the eventual Super Bowl Champion.

24. New Orleans
No team with Drew Brees will ever be awful, particularly in a division without an almighty power. The Saints will win two or three 40-31-type of games. But unless Gregg Williams can find a better-than-average pass-rush by maneuvering some average chess pieces -- and unless Jonathan Vilma plays like Superman, and Jabari Greer and Malcolm Jenkins cover like Deion -- this defense is not going to be good enough to win eight games.

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/peter_king/05/10/may11/2.html#ixzz0v58ZRBbr

I rest my case.

LOL he also had Cinci ranked #28 last year.
Seriously...they have been on the cusp for years. Most people had them, at worst, in the middle of the pack.
I can understand if he ranked both Cinci and the Saints in the 14-20 range but this is just ridiculous.

Now you are just nitpicking....with NO he wasn't far off, and they did rush the passer better, get better coverage (and increase their total number of turnovers).

And without Housh and with Palmer's 2008 season there was little reason to believe the Bengals were going to be as good as they were. He may have ranked them too low at that juncture but his logic was understandable.

He's still a giant douche.

With a stupid skunk streak

Originally posted by Crazy4Niners:
F*ck him.

yah he is a hater

Originally posted by redrathman:
This again?

Peter King's 2010 NFL power rankings (49ers 19, Seattle 11)!?!?!?

Peter King says Jerry Rice is not the best WR in history

He must be a Seattle homer. He was in their war room during the draft and I bet he thinks Steve Largent is better than Rice.

What an A-Hole

Peter King's preseason predictions are usually the punchline to jokes by season's end. Consider being on the opposite end of his wisdom a blessing.