Are we better than Favre-less Vikings?

Originally posted by elguapo:

Originally posted by tjd808185:

Originally posted by hondakillerzx:
were better than the favre-fied vikings and the favre-less vikings. shaun hill and glenn coffee were starters and we shouldve won. with smith and gore it wouldve been a beat down.

Minnesota was just finding themselves offensively during that game. They started the year against 2 door mats and we were their first true test. I wouldn't assume we could beat a Favre led team just because we played them close last season. We make a big deal about chemistry well Minnesota had none of that last year when we played them.

And we wouldn't assume that the Vikes could even be in the game with GORE CRAB and SMITH at their Home. and what about our team chemistry on offense???? What about the niners finding themselves???

Done

You're severely overrating our accomplishments last year. We went 6-8 before we faced 2 door mats who quit in week 4. Our accomplishments were 2 wins over a division rival and 2 close losses on the road.

Minnesota has a top ranked rushing defense for the past 5 years. They've held Gore to 68 and 41 yards in their last 2 meetings. As for Smith and Crabtree. We're not talking about Peyton to Wayne right there. Hill brought his A game that day. I'm not buying that we would have faired any better with Alex at the helm.

You take away that field goal and Minnesota wins that game running away. You take away Harvin's kick return and we win that game. Every game has it's momentum turning plays and there's came last. Who knows what would happen in a rematch.

Originally posted by tjd808185:

Originally posted by elguapo:

Originally posted by tjd808185:

Originally posted by hondakillerzx:
were better than the favre-fied vikings and the favre-less vikings. shaun hill and glenn coffee were starters and we shouldve won. with smith and gore it wouldve been a beat down.

Minnesota was just finding themselves offensively during that game. They started the year against 2 door mats and we were their first true test. I wouldn't assume we could beat a Favre led team just because we played them close last season. We make a big deal about chemistry well Minnesota had none of that last year when we played them.

And we wouldn't assume that the Vikes could even be in the game with GORE CRAB and SMITH at their Home. and what about our team chemistry on offense???? What about the niners finding themselves???

Done

You're severely overrating our accomplishments last year. We went 6-8 before we faced 2 door mats who quit in week 4. Our accomplishments were 2 wins over a division rival and 2 close losses on the road.

Minnesota has a top ranked rushing defense for the past 5 years. They've held Gore to 68 and 41 yards in their last 2 meetings. As for Smith and Crabtree. We're not talking about Peyton to Wayne right there. Hill brought his A game that day. I'm not buying that we would have faired any better with Alex at the helm.

You take away that field goal and Minnesota wins that game running away. You take away Harvin's kick return and we win that game. Every game has it's momentum turning plays and there's came last. Who knows what would happen in a rematch.

Hill's A game was 195 yds against a bottom half pass defense? That alone should tell you that having Smith and Crabtree would have, more likely than not, produced a better offensive game. How would that not make it better? Just Crabtree alone relieves pressure off of Morgon.

They didn't really upgrade the roster too much in the offseason. They added Lito Shepard and drafted a couple of backups. Meanwhile since that game we have added a stronger aremed QB than hill a deep threat in Ginn, Crabtree and most likely Iupati will be starting. Iupati would match up great with those big boys in the middle. May be wishful thinking but maybe if Mays was back there instead of Roman we win that game I like our chances against the Vikings Favre or not.

Originally posted by redmanc07:

Originally posted by tjd808185:

Originally posted by elguapo:

Originally posted by tjd808185:

Originally posted by hondakillerzx:
were better than the favre-fied vikings and the favre-less vikings. shaun hill and glenn coffee were starters and we shouldve won. with smith and gore it wouldve been a beat down.

Minnesota was just finding themselves offensively during that game. They started the year against 2 door mats and we were their first true test. I wouldn't assume we could beat a Favre led team just because we played them close last season. We make a big deal about chemistry well Minnesota had none of that last year when we played them.

And we wouldn't assume that the Vikes could even be in the game with GORE CRAB and SMITH at their Home. and what about our team chemistry on offense???? What about the niners finding themselves???

Done

You're severely overrating our accomplishments last year. We went 6-8 before we faced 2 door mats who quit in week 4. Our accomplishments were 2 wins over a division rival and 2 close losses on the road.

Minnesota has a top ranked rushing defense for the past 5 years. They've held Gore to 68 and 41 yards in their last 2 meetings. As for Smith and Crabtree. We're not talking about Peyton to Wayne right there. Hill brought his A game that day. I'm not buying that we would have faired any better with Alex at the helm.

You take away that field goal and Minnesota wins that game running away. You take away Harvin's kick return and we win that game. Every game has it's momentum turning plays and there's came last. Who knows what would happen in a rematch.

Hill's A game was 195 yds against a bottom half pass defense? That alone should tell you that having Smith and Crabtree would have, more likely than not, produced a better offensive game. How would that not make it better? Just Crabtree alone relieves pressure off of Morgon.

They didn't really upgrade the roster too much in the offseason. They added Lito Shepard and drafted a couple of backups. Meanwhile since that game we have added a stronger aremed QB than hill a deep threat in Ginn, Crabtree and most likely Iupati will be starting. Iupati would match up great with those big boys in the middle. May be wishful thinking but maybe if Mays was back there instead of Roman we win that game I like our chances against the Vikings Favre or not.

We were a different team under Smith and it's hard to project what we would have done if he was starting. You take away the balanced under center attack that we had against Minnesota and go with a more pass happy offense. Does Jarred Allen have a bigger impact if that's the case? It only takes one strip to completely change the outcome of that game.

[ Edited by tjd808185 on Aug 4, 2010 at 07:20:12 ]

Originally posted by jimmy49erfan:

Originally posted by OKC49erFan:

Originally posted by jimmy49erfan:
Hell no. Theyre a hands down better team at every position cept MLB and TE.

You do realize we had them beat if not for a miracle pass at the very end...

We were lucky to even be in the game so late. If it wanst for a blocked kick we arent in it. Im not trying to be a dick but we should really keep thems in perspective. 49ers have issues everywhere from personnel to coaching. We should ask this question again after game 6 this year imho. As it is theyre alot better than us for now in every important aspect of the game.

If it wasn't for a lucky pass, we win the game... What's your point? You statement of them being hands down better at every position other than MLB and TE is complete BS.

Originally posted by RonMexico:
we have depth at RB?

Apparently....and Gore is only slightly behind All Day.

Originally posted by Frisco69ers:
we almost beat them with Shaun Hill and Roman sooo yes

And the Rams almost beat the Saints last year but that doesn't mean the Rams are better than New Orleans does it ? Any given Sunday.

Your argument is very weak. That was week 3, where Favre was still new to that team and developing chemistry with his new teammates. They got better as the season wore on (so did we), however would the game have had the same outcome in Week 10 or 11 as it did in week 3 ? Hard to really say but I think they would have been a tougher team than the one we saw (and likely we would have had Gore for the full game and would have been playing out of our spread style offense).

Not yet, they went deep in the playoffs last year and to the playoffs the year before without Favre, we didn't make the playoffs at all in the past 2 years...not to mention they beat us last year...until proven otherwise, they are the better team

Originally posted by SFVNiner:

Originally posted by BETTERDAYZ9ERS:
One first down away from beating them with Shaun Hill in their house. Or if Dre Bly could catch a damn ball

You got that right.... i really hope he's gone this time though. I've had it with him.

"Dre's gonna be Dre"

well....we were actually beating them last year. THey haven't made in real significant improvements, and they lost chester taylor.

They have some good rookies, but wont be the same team.

Are our rookies better than theirs? I dont know. But, if we can't beat them for almost 4 quarters last year, than this year we wont have one of the all time greats leading a last second drive and heaving a 40 yard bomb into the endzone...

we all know Jackson will never be favre...or even get close.

The only reason any QB including Favre will perform well in that offense is because everyone needs to respect AD, period.

Originally posted by prime21:
The only reason any QB including Favre will perform well in that offense is because everyone needs to respect AD, period.

AD?????

Originally posted by BETTERDAYZ9ERS:

Originally posted by prime21:
The only reason any QB including Favre will perform well in that offense is because everyone needs to respect AD, period.

AD?????

Wow... not much of a football fan huh? All Day. That's AP's nickname.

Hmmm Ok my question is this...If a team beats another they are automatically better? We the Niners should have won the game but they didnt had the Niners won would that mean they're a better team then the Vikings?

Thats like if the Lions beat the Saints,,,would that make the Lions a better team then the Saints cause they beat them?

I Guess I could then say the Lions are a better team than the Cowboys cause a few years bvack they dumped the cowboys...except in reality just cause it happened once doesnt make the team better

Originally posted by superman49er:
QB: I'll give Tavaris a slight edge for now, only bc hes been to the playoffs, but by the end of this year I think Alex will be viewed by everyone as better

I disagree. Tavaris is a bum. Alex > Tavaris.

Originally posted by superman49er:
RB: AP slightly beats out Gore, but they lost Chester Taylor, so we get the win for RB bc of our depth

What depth? Coffee looked awful last season and we haven't even seen Anthony Dixon touch the football in preseason, much less regular season action. Michael Robinson is worthless as a RB. We have no depth.

Originally posted by superman49er:
TE: Vernon > Shiancoe

Agreed/

Originally posted by superman49er:
WR: Rice, Berrian, Harvin RIGHT NOW are better than Crab, Morgan, Ginn, but take away Favre and Rice's breakout season never happened and were right back to level...here is PUSH

Take out Favre and none of those guys look good. NONE. Not just because they don't have Favre, but because Tavaris Jackson is terrible.

Originally posted by superman49er:
O-Line: Vikings have one of the best in football, ours is too young to compete here

Agreed.

Originally posted by superman49er:
Secondary: Push here, neither are very impressive....I could get grilled for this, but I have unimpressed with Nate, I love our young safeties but Dash needs one more year and Mays is a rookie, so hes a mystery

Ours wasn't as bad as everyone likes to think. Still not impressive, but not bad. I'd give us a slight edge.

Originally posted by superman49er:
LBs: Hands down Niners, we have the best LB in the game, we win

Yes.

Originally posted by superman49er:
D-Line: Theres no way we can compete with the Williams Wall even if Franklin gets to camp

You can't compare a 4-3 to a 3-4 line, but they do have more playmakers on their line. Put those same guys in a 3-4 and they probably suffer badly.

All that being said, we seemed to match up very well with their team last year and we should have beaten them then - when they had a respectable QB. Our run defense will keep Peterson in check, meaning Tavaris will have to get it done. He won't.

If the reports about what he was doing on his little videos are correct, the ball will be slipping from his hands and the receivers will refuse to catch it. So, advantage 9ers.