Mike and Mike high on the Niners

Originally posted by zillabeast:

Originally posted by cooljon16:

Originally posted by TexasNiner:

On a funny note, during the "Will Alex be the starter all season?" question, Golic mentioned Shaun Hill as still being Alex's backup.

That's a sign to disregard everything he said.

Mike Golic has always been an idiot, and this just continues to prove it. f**k him, f**k the Eagles, f**k Nutrisystem.

Funny! You fat basterd.

Its funny cause me and a couple niner buddys of mine were messing with my cousin whos a huge Cowgirl fan and a couple of his friends that hates the niners with a passion. I told him that i was watching mike and mike in the morning and that they said that with the addition of Brian Westbrook along with VD, Gore, Crabtree, Morgan, Ginn jr, that the 49ers now have weapons of mass destruction lol (didnt really happen obviously). I threw in that they said it just deppens how much destruction they do from the person whos is pulling the trigger (alex smith). Anyway, hes hating cause he really thinks they said that and wishes they had given that nickname to the cowboys offense lol

Nice

I just listened to that podcast. I was completely shocked when I head them. I am all for it but I just don't see it. I think Alex will be a major disappointment. I am hoping for a 10 win season but the it will hinge on the running game and the D being top notch.

Originally posted by Shorteous:

Originally posted by cooljon16:

Originally posted by TexasNiner:
got rocked in our 8 losses in terms of overally points allowed

WRONG

Ya we only had one game where we got blown out and alot of games where we were inches away from a win and a few games where we were blown out and then came back within a few inches of a win and one game where we were truly robbed.

The 1980 49ers were 6-10 and they also had a lot of close games. 5 of those games were decided by 7 or less points. In 1979 they had a record of 2-14. We all know what happened in 1981.

The Saints went 7-9 in 2007 and 8-8 in 2008. In 2008, 6 of those games were decided by 7 points or less.

The 49ers went 5-11 in 2007 and 7-9 in 2008 and finally 8-8 in 2009. 6 of those losses were by 7 or less points.

One could point out that we're mirroring the Saints as far as win/loss and depth of loss. I'm not saying the 49ers are going to win the Superbowl, not that I would mind. But it just goes to show that teams can appear mediocre and come back champs the next season.

But all those very loosely tied together statistics aside, I'm sure there are more teams with a worse record the following season when they had so many close games the previous year.

As always, GO NINERS!

Originally posted by TexasNiner:

Originally posted by cooljon16:

Originally posted by TexasNiner:
got rocked in our 8 losses in terms of overally points allowed

WRONG

Not cumulatively. Without looking up the exact details, the stats they had were we gave up about 56 points in our 8 wins and something like 250 in our 8 losses.

The point being that it was feast or famine overall. And they were right. Against lesser teams, we dominated. Against stronger teams, we often struggled and gave up too many big plays, 3rd down conversions and points, even if we played OK for most of the game.


In 6 of those 8 losses, we gave up at least 24 points. Obviously if we had been just a bit more consistant in our 8 losses, we could have picked up an extra win or two at least, just by allowing one less score. In half of those losses, the final margin was a TD (once) or a FG (3 times). Making ONE more play in each game that stops a drive and prevents a score could have been the difference.

Compare that to our 8 wins, in which we allowed 10 points or less in 7 of them and only 16 in the 8th, and that is a HUGE difference.

That was their point, and it's 100% accurate. We need our D to be more consistant against the better teams.

If we can make that small step forward this year, (giving up at least a FG less to good teams) and if our O can do the same, (score at least a FG more against good teams), we are likely a double digit win team.

But both sides of the ball need that extra level of consistancy, especially against the better teams in the NFL.

Here's another way of looking at it:

6 of our 8 losses were by an average of just over 4 points.
1 loss was by 14 points (got beat pretty good) and 1 loss was by 35 (an absolute blowout).
The 35 point loss is a statistical outlier. We were able to hang tough in just about every game so while I agree that their point (that point being we allowed a lot of points overall) is valid, it is not a solid indicator of how well we actually did - How many points you allowed is one thing but how many points you score is equally as important which is why the differential is, imo, a better performance gauge.