A few things I want to see in the playoffs.

We handled blitzburg pretty well.

Whatever happen to the HB toss.....i would like to see more HB toss to either Hunter or Gore....

Originally posted by Ninerzz:
Can we please see some quick slants to our wide outs. Its a basic and simple pass to complete. Lets see V. Davis run the seam rout and stretch out the defense which will force the coverage to Davis, opening up our WRs which seem to be unable to get open.
I am not an Alex hater, but lets see him complete those one or two passes that he misses every game that could be big plays or touchdowns. Overall the play by Alex is solid, however these one or two passes each game would elevate his play to very good.
Continue to run the fly sweep. We've ran it successfully several times this year and when they playoffs arrive the play action off that play could go for a big gain.The other teams know that we have picked up some crucial third downs with that play and will be waiting on it and we can hit it big with a good play fake by Alex. The screen pass is there also. Id prefer to run it with Hunter because he seems to have the better hands. We've only run a couple of screens this year and I don't want to see a possible big play slip through our hands because Gore drops the ball.
I know we are hurting at receiver but for at least one drive in the first playoff game lets put Kapernick in there and let him run the Tim Tebow tripple option offense. With an anemic offense we don't have anything to use if it doesn't work. Kapernick is capable of running for a big yards or hitting a couple of passes.
But first lets beat the Lambs and get that bye.

Nice list but I'd like to throw in there that our wr's cannot drop 1st downs, big bombs, td's or passes in general.

Also, if they stack the line, screens are good but I'd also like to see us chuck up the halfback pass. Would keep the db's from flying up in run support.

Originally posted by sincalfaithful:
I just want wins

I just want to see the re and gold on the field for a playoff game!

Someone an insider on ESPN? Some columnist Sprow thinks the Broncos and the 49ers are the LUCKIEST teams in the NFL. Not sure what the entire article entails but a good paraphrase should be in order:

Luck isn't just the story of the NFL draft; it's an idea that has essentially hijacked the debate in the NFL. Seriously, what percentage of NFL arguments this season have been centered around not who we know is great -- such as the Green Bay Packers -- but who our eyes tell us is lucky? Add in a dollop of Tim Tebow, and you get the defining storyline of the NFL season with the "success" of the Denver Broncos.

Think about it: You tell a buddy his favorite team sucks, and you're stating the truth. Tell him his team is lucky, and you set off a 600-reply email that might cost you your best man. Call it, "Re: re: re: re: fw: re: re: I hate you."

This is more prominent because the growth of advanced statistical analysis in football means we don't just know what luck looks like; we think we can see it play out in real time. In Week 7, when Tebow led Denver to a two-score comeback win against the Miami Dolphins with fewer than four minutes to play, we knew as it was happening that he had overcome Miami win odds that were higher than 98 percent.

But there are a few problems with simply calling a team "lucky":

1. Lucky teams are usually pretty good: During the past five years, the NFL's luckiest teams have won 12, 10, 12, 14 and 13 regular-season games, 12.2 a year. And they repeat it. Those teams won an average of 10.8 games the next season. So while luck is an argument, it's also granted to greatness.

2. Great QB play defines it: Those luckiest teams were led by Peyton Manning, Eli Manning, Ben Roethlisberger, Peyton again and Matt Ryan. We know that great quarterback is the antidote to many ailments. Denver's luck is clear due to regularly overcoming long odds, but it's also been a product of a quarterback that has dramatically upgraded performance late in games.

3. You can make your own luck, to an extent: Dominating the turnover battle is an indicator of luck, because it tends to even out in a decent sample size. But what if you consistently get early leads, creatively scheme for quarterback pressure because opposing teams have to throw and can sit back and aggressively target interceptions with a packed secondary? Are Green Bay's ridiculous 29 INTs luck, the residue of design, or situational dominance?

Advanced stats tell us a lot, but they can't dismantle the tape. However, given the playoff picture is largely set, and the 15-game sample size can tell us a fair amount, let's align the current playoff seeds with luck factored in, indicate why a team got lucky and determine what it means.

(end of free portion of article)

http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/story?id=7400317&_slug_=the-luckiest-teams-nfl-sometimes-turn-the-greatest-nfl&action=upsell&appRedirect=http%3a%2f%2finsider.espn.go.com%2fnfl%2fstory%3fid%3d7400317%26_slug_%3dthe-luckiest-teams-nfl-sometimes-turn-the-greatest-nfl

i want to see Rihanna's ass during halftime of the superbowl