Week 16: Thoughts after rewatching the game...

Originally posted by truekingcarlos:

Originally posted by pwillis52beasty:

Originally posted by hofer36:

Originally posted by 49erJim:
Disagree with you Marvin, Alex Smith would have had a better game vs the Rams and vs the Seahawks. The 49ers would have won one of those games with Alex Smith as QB. He knows both teams way better then Kaep and plays very well in Seattle. This is what happens when you screw around late in the season with the QB's. Jimmy H is not perfect he's made mistakes and this one was huge. We win one of those games and were the 2nd seed, now we need some help to make the 2nd seed.

i think smith vs seattle might not have equated to a win but i think the niners play a different game offensively with him, the pace of the game is slower and the score is much closer than it was

Yup true that. We still lose, but don't lose that bad. Smith handles himself much better in that environment. Also, Alex Smith wins both of those Rams games. Meaning we'd be 12-3. Some may argue that we wouldn't have beaten New England with Smith, which I don't buy at all. Smith can play in shootouts too (Saints game). Anyways, we'd still be 11-4 had Smith somehow not been able to beat New England because he somehow can't make any of those throws That means we'd still be the #2 seed. I'm a fan of Kap and think he has tons of potential, but don't think it was right to put him in as the starter for the 2012 49ers.

Kap needs to learn how to engineer those epic long drives that Alex used to. That would go a long way towards helping the kid out. We need him to step up bad for our superbowl run.

He just came off one of the worst QB performances we've had in years, up there with Smith's Giants debacle earlier in the year. Having him go back to a steady ground and pound like we did prior to the Bears game, and away from all that cutsie pistol stuff would help him out quite a bit.

Erm . . . never mind!

Originally posted by JustaFan45:

Originally posted by pwillis52beasty:

Originally posted by JustaFan45:

Originally posted by pwillis52beasty:
Yup true that. We still lose, but don't lose that bad. Smith handles himself much better in that environment. Also, Alex Smith wins both of those Rams games. Meaning we'd be 12-3. Some may argue that we wouldn't have beaten New England with Smith, which I don't buy at all. Smith can play in shootouts too (Saints game). Anyways, we'd still be 11-4 had Smith somehow not been able to beat New England because he somehow can't make any of those throws That means we'd still be the #2 seed. I'm a fan of Kap and think he has tons of potential, but don't think it was right to put him in as the starter for the 2012 49ers.

Let me play this game too! After seeing the game at New England I think Kaep could of won at Minnesota and could of beat the Giants this year!

Did Kap not give the Rams 10 points in that second game? You can't say Kap would have beat Minnesota and the Giants, because you simply don't know how he would have played. It's relatively safe to say that Alex Smith doesn't give the Rams 10 points, given how protective he is with the football. Also, let's not forget before Smith got hurt in the first Rams game he was playing a very good game and had already thrown a touchdown pass I believe. Once he goes down the offense began to sputter because Kap was not prepared.

Smith throws 3 picks against Giants would you assume Kaep throws 3 picks in that game? I would say no because he hasn't done that!

Would Smith throw 4 tds at New England? Again I would say no because he hasn't done it!

We could go in circles all day the possibilities are endless!

Who knows what Kap does in the Giants game. The point is you can't claim that he would have been able to beat the Giants, because you simply don't know how he would have played. However, you can make a very strong case that Alex Smith doesn't just give the Rams 10 points. The Rams weren't doing a damn thing on offense. They would have had a big goose egg on the board if Kap didn't hand them 10 points. All Alex Smith would have had to do was get us 3 points and we win. It's a lot easier to make the argument that Alex Smith would have been able to win both of those close Rams games that went into overtime than it is to make some kind of argument that Kapernick would have been able to beat the Giants and Vikings which weren't very close games, when our offense as a whole hasn't even improved under Kaepernick.

Originally posted by pwillis52beasty:
Who knows what Kap does in the Giants game. The point is you can't claim that he would have been able to beat the Giants, because you simply don't know how he would have played. However, you can make a very strong case that Alex Smith doesn't just give the Rams 10 points. The Rams weren't doing a damn thing on offense. They would have had a big goose egg on the board if Kap didn't hand them 10 points. All Alex Smith would have had to do was get us 3 points and we win. It's a lot easier to make the argument that Alex Smith would have been able to win both of those close Rams games that went into overtime than it is to make some kind of argument that Kapernick would have been able to beat the Giants and Vikings which weren't very close games, when our offense as a whole hasn't even improved under Kaepernick.

The Rams game was the worst but I blame the coaches more than the players. The one time when the Niners should be conservative and hand it over to the D, they try to get cute and it blows up in their faces. But when we get a lead and should go for the kill, we get all conservative and hope our D bails us out or the clock to run. Our offensive philosophy is backwards.

Originally posted by rondoman:

Originally posted by pwillis52beasty:
Who knows what Kap does in the Giants game. The point is you can't claim that he would have been able to beat the Giants, because you simply don't know how he would have played. However, you can make a very strong case that Alex Smith doesn't just give the Rams 10 points. The Rams weren't doing a damn thing on offense. They would have had a big goose egg on the board if Kap didn't hand them 10 points. All Alex Smith would have had to do was get us 3 points and we win. It's a lot easier to make the argument that Alex Smith would have been able to win both of those close Rams games that went into overtime than it is to make some kind of argument that Kapernick would have been able to beat the Giants and Vikings which weren't very close games, when our offense as a whole hasn't even improved under Kaepernick.

The Rams game was the worst but I blame the coaches more than the players. The one time when the Niners should be conservative and hand it over to the D, they try to get cute and it blows up in their faces. But when we get a lead and should go for the kill, we get all conservative and hope our D bails us out or the clock to run. Our offensive philosophy is backwards.

Oh yeah I definitely agree, it was horrible play calling and a horrible gameplan by our coaches in both of those games. However, we still could have won simply if Kap doesn't give them any points in that second game. I like Kap, I really do. Just don't agree with him being qb for 2012 49ers. Smith gave us best shot at superbowl THIS year in my opinion. I was feeling real confident in our chances at going to and winning the superbowl this year when Smith was at the helm, because I knew we had an experienced quarterback who doesn't make very many mistakes. Maybe he doesn't light up the scoreboard so much either, but he was plenty good enough. Now we have a younger quarterback going through learning experiences and he isn't exactly lighting the scoreboard up as well. He also at this point in time is much more susceptible to turning the ball over and not as efficient at diagnosing defenses. I believe that this risk was definitely not worth the big play potential, which so far hasn't really shown. We can't afford handing teams points in the playoffs. Not saying that Kap will do that, but saying he is more likely to do that than is Smith. And their production so far is nearly equivalent, so a dumb decision in my opinion.

Originally posted by pwillis52beasty:

Originally posted by rondoman:

Originally posted by pwillis52beasty:
Who knows what Kap does in the Giants game. The point is you can't claim that he would have been able to beat the Giants, because you simply don't know how he would have played. However, you can make a very strong case that Alex Smith doesn't just give the Rams 10 points. The Rams weren't doing a damn thing on offense. They would have had a big goose egg on the board if Kap didn't hand them 10 points. All Alex Smith would have had to do was get us 3 points and we win. It's a lot easier to make the argument that Alex Smith would have been able to win both of those close Rams games that went into overtime than it is to make some kind of argument that Kapernick would have been able to beat the Giants and Vikings which weren't very close games, when our offense as a whole hasn't even improved under Kaepernick.

The Rams game was the worst but I blame the coaches more than the players. The one time when the Niners should be conservative and hand it over to the D, they try to get cute and it blows up in their faces. But when we get a lead and should go for the kill, we get all conservative and hope our D bails us out or the clock to run. Our offensive philosophy is backwards.

Oh yeah I definitely agree, it was horrible play calling and a horrible gameplan by our coaches in both of those games. However, we still could have won simply if Kap doesn't give them any points in that second game. I like Kap, I really do. Just don't agree with him being qb for 2012 49ers. Smith gave us best shot at superbowl THIS year in my opinion. I was feeling real confident in our chances at going to and winning the superbowl this year when Smith was at the helm, because I knew we had an experienced quarterback who doesn't make very many mistakes. Maybe he doesn't light up the scoreboard so much either, but he was plenty good enough. Now we have a younger quarterback going through learning experiences and he isn't exactly lighting the scoreboard up as well. He also at this point in time is much more susceptible to turning the ball over and not as efficient at diagnosing defenses. I believe that this risk was definitely not worth the big play potential, which so far hasn't really shown. We can't afford handing teams points in the playoffs. Not saying that Kap will do that, but saying he is more likely to do that than is Smith. And their production so far is nearly equivalent, so a dumb decision in my opinion.

Agreed 100%.

I love Kap, nothing against the guy, but he seems destined to fail this year.

If Kap was to be the Niners starting QB for this years SB run, he should have been the starter out of training camp. You dont go to Super Bowls when your QB is learning in week 16. It just doesnt happen. And that is not Kaps fault, he can only learn and have so many reps based on the situation he is in.

Originally posted by rondoman:

Originally posted by pwillis52beasty:

Originally posted by rondoman:

Originally posted by pwillis52beasty:
Who knows what Kap does in the Giants game. The point is you can't claim that he would have been able to beat the Giants, because you simply don't know how he would have played. However, you can make a very strong case that Alex Smith doesn't just give the Rams 10 points. The Rams weren't doing a damn thing on offense. They would have had a big goose egg on the board if Kap didn't hand them 10 points. All Alex Smith would have had to do was get us 3 points and we win. It's a lot easier to make the argument that Alex Smith would have been able to win both of those close Rams games that went into overtime than it is to make some kind of argument that Kapernick would have been able to beat the Giants and Vikings which weren't very close games, when our offense as a whole hasn't even improved under Kaepernick.

The Rams game was the worst but I blame the coaches more than the players. The one time when the Niners should be conservative and hand it over to the D, they try to get cute and it blows up in their faces. But when we get a lead and should go for the kill, we get all conservative and hope our D bails us out or the clock to run. Our offensive philosophy is backwards.

Oh yeah I definitely agree, it was horrible play calling and a horrible gameplan by our coaches in both of those games. However, we still could have won simply if Kap doesn't give them any points in that second game. I like Kap, I really do. Just don't agree with him being qb for 2012 49ers. Smith gave us best shot at superbowl THIS year in my opinion. I was feeling real confident in our chances at going to and winning the superbowl this year when Smith was at the helm, because I knew we had an experienced quarterback who doesn't make very many mistakes. Maybe he doesn't light up the scoreboard so much either, but he was plenty good enough. Now we have a younger quarterback going through learning experiences and he isn't exactly lighting the scoreboard up as well. He also at this point in time is much more susceptible to turning the ball over and not as efficient at diagnosing defenses. I believe that this risk was definitely not worth the big play potential, which so far hasn't really shown. We can't afford handing teams points in the playoffs. Not saying that Kap will do that, but saying he is more likely to do that than is Smith. And their production so far is nearly equivalent, so a dumb decision in my opinion.

Agreed 100%.

I love Kap, nothing against the guy, but he seems destined to fail this year.

If Kap was to be the Niners starting QB for this years SB run, he should have been the starter out of training camp. You dont go to Super Bowls when your QB is learning in week 16. It just doesnt happen. And that is not Kaps fault, he can only learn and have so many reps based on the situation he is in.

Yup exactly. Just not smart to change your quarterback this late in the season when you have superbowl aspirations, unless the guy on the bench is someone like Joe Montana and your starter is struggling. We just have to hope for the best and hope that Kap starts tearing s**t up and is clutch in the playoffs.

Originally posted by pwillis52beasty:

Originally posted by rondoman:

Originally posted by pwillis52beasty:

Originally posted by rondoman:

Originally posted by pwillis52beasty:
Who knows what Kap does in the Giants game. The point is you can't claim that he would have been able to beat the Giants, because you simply don't know how he would have played. However, you can make a very strong case that Alex Smith doesn't just give the Rams 10 points. The Rams weren't doing a damn thing on offense. They would have had a big goose egg on the board if Kap didn't hand them 10 points. All Alex Smith would have had to do was get us 3 points and we win. It's a lot easier to make the argument that Alex Smith would have been able to win both of those close Rams games that went into overtime than it is to make some kind of argument that Kapernick would have been able to beat the Giants and Vikings which weren't very close games, when our offense as a whole hasn't even improved under Kaepernick.

The Rams game was the worst but I blame the coaches more than the players. The one time when the Niners should be conservative and hand it over to the D, they try to get cute and it blows up in their faces. But when we get a lead and should go for the kill, we get all conservative and hope our D bails us out or the clock to run. Our offensive philosophy is backwards.

Oh yeah I definitely agree, it was horrible play calling and a horrible gameplan by our coaches in both of those games. However, we still could have won simply if Kap doesn't give them any points in that second game. I like Kap, I really do. Just don't agree with him being qb for 2012 49ers. Smith gave us best shot at superbowl THIS year in my opinion. I was feeling real confident in our chances at going to and winning the superbowl this year when Smith was at the helm, because I knew we had an experienced quarterback who doesn't make very many mistakes. Maybe he doesn't light up the scoreboard so much either, but he was plenty good enough. Now we have a younger quarterback going through learning experiences and he isn't exactly lighting the scoreboard up as well. He also at this point in time is much more susceptible to turning the ball over and not as efficient at diagnosing defenses. I believe that this risk was definitely not worth the big play potential, which so far hasn't really shown. We can't afford handing teams points in the playoffs. Not saying that Kap will do that, but saying he is more likely to do that than is Smith. And their production so far is nearly equivalent, so a dumb decision in my opinion.

Agreed 100%.

I love Kap, nothing against the guy, but he seems destined to fail this year.

If Kap was to be the Niners starting QB for this years SB run, he should have been the starter out of training camp. You dont go to Super Bowls when your QB is learning in week 16. It just doesnt happen. And that is not Kaps fault, he can only learn and have so many reps based on the situation he is in.

Yup exactly. Just not smart to change your quarterback this late in the season when you have superbowl aspirations, unless the guy on the bench is someone like Joe Montana and your starter is struggling. We just have to hope for the best and hope that Kap starts tearing s**t up and is clutch in the playoffs.

I want nothing more than to see Kap kick some butt in the playoffs! It's the postseason and we all know every play will be scrutinized and gone over and over again so I just hope if we do lose, it's not a huge Kap mistake that costs us.

Originally posted by pwillis52beasty:

Originally posted by JustaFan45:

Originally posted by pwillis52beasty:

Originally posted by JustaFan45:

Originally posted by pwillis52beasty:
Yup true that. We still lose, but don't lose that bad. Smith handles himself much better in that environment. Also, Alex Smith wins both of those Rams games. Meaning we'd be 12-3. Some may argue that we wouldn't have beaten New England with Smith, which I don't buy at all. Smith can play in shootouts too (Saints game). Anyways, we'd still be 11-4 had Smith somehow not been able to beat New England because he somehow can't make any of those throws That means we'd still be the #2 seed. I'm a fan of Kap and think he has tons of potential, but don't think it was right to put him in as the starter for the 2012 49ers.

Let me play this game too! After seeing the game at New England I think Kaep could of won at Minnesota and could of beat the Giants this year!

Did Kap not give the Rams 10 points in that second game? You can't say Kap would have beat Minnesota and the Giants, because you simply don't know how he would have played. It's relatively safe to say that Alex Smith doesn't give the Rams 10 points, given how protective he is with the football. Also, let's not forget before Smith got hurt in the first Rams game he was playing a very good game and had already thrown a touchdown pass I believe. Once he goes down the offense began to sputter because Kap was not prepared.

Smith throws 3 picks against Giants would you assume Kaep throws 3 picks in that game? I would say no because he hasn't done that!

Would Smith throw 4 tds at New England? Again I would say no because he hasn't done it!

We could go in circles all day the possibilities are endless!

Who knows what Kap does in the Giants game. The point is you can't claim that he would have been able to beat the Giants, because you simply don't know how he would have played. However, you can make a very strong case that Alex Smith doesn't just give the Rams 10 points. The Rams weren't doing a damn thing on offense. They would have had a big goose egg on the board if Kap didn't hand them 10 points. All Alex Smith would have had to do was get us 3 points and we win. It's a lot easier to make the argument that Alex Smith would have been able to win both of those close Rams games that went into overtime than it is to make some kind of argument that Kapernick would have been able to beat the Giants and Vikings which weren't very close games, when our offense as a whole hasn't even improved under Kaepernick.

You do realize we are going in circles? Of course I don't know if Kaep could beat the Giants and YOU don't know if Alex could beat the Rams. You can say "Alex doesn't give the Rams 10 points". I can say "Kaep doesn't throw 3 picks against the Giants". "Alex doesn't throw 4 Tds at New England" and back and forth we go playing a silly game of "What If." The fact is neither one of us knows!

Also I would like to add if Akers makes his field goals in both Rams game we wouldn't be having this discussion but that's another "What If."

Originally posted by JustaFan45:

Originally posted by pwillis52beasty:

Originally posted by JustaFan45:

Originally posted by pwillis52beasty:

Originally posted by JustaFan45:

Originally posted by pwillis52beasty:
Yup true that. We still lose, but don't lose that bad. Smith handles himself much better in that environment. Also, Alex Smith wins both of those Rams games. Meaning we'd be 12-3. Some may argue that we wouldn't have beaten New England with Smith, which I don't buy at all. Smith can play in shootouts too (Saints game). Anyways, we'd still be 11-4 had Smith somehow not been able to beat New England because he somehow can't make any of those throws That means we'd still be the #2 seed. I'm a fan of Kap and think he has tons of potential, but don't think it was right to put him in as the starter for the 2012 49ers.

Let me play this game too! After seeing the game at New England I think Kaep could of won at Minnesota and could of beat the Giants this year!

Did Kap not give the Rams 10 points in that second game? You can't say Kap would have beat Minnesota and the Giants, because you simply don't know how he would have played. It's relatively safe to say that Alex Smith doesn't give the Rams 10 points, given how protective he is with the football. Also, let's not forget before Smith got hurt in the first Rams game he was playing a very good game and had already thrown a touchdown pass I believe. Once he goes down the offense began to sputter because Kap was not prepared.

Smith throws 3 picks against Giants would you assume Kaep throws 3 picks in that game? I would say no because he hasn't done that!

Would Smith throw 4 tds at New England? Again I would say no because he hasn't done it!

We could go in circles all day the possibilities are endless!

Who knows what Kap does in the Giants game. The point is you can't claim that he would have been able to beat the Giants, because you simply don't know how he would have played. However, you can make a very strong case that Alex Smith doesn't just give the Rams 10 points. The Rams weren't doing a damn thing on offense. They would have had a big goose egg on the board if Kap didn't hand them 10 points. All Alex Smith would have had to do was get us 3 points and we win. It's a lot easier to make the argument that Alex Smith would have been able to win both of those close Rams games that went into overtime than it is to make some kind of argument that Kapernick would have been able to beat the Giants and Vikings which weren't very close games, when our offense as a whole hasn't even improved under Kaepernick.

You do realize we are going in circles? Of course I don't know if Kaep could beat the Giants and YOU don't know if Alex could beat the Rams. You can say "Alex doesn't give the Rams 10 points". I can say "Kaep doesn't throw 3 picks against the Giants". "Alex doesn't throw 4 Tds at New England" and back and forth we go playing a silly game of "What If." The fact is neither one of us knows!

Also I would like to add if Akers makes his field goals in both Rams game we wouldn't be having this discussion but that's another "What If."

Yes I do realize that. However, one is much more probable than the other. Rams games went into overtime. You don't think Alex Smith can get 3 points and not turn the ball over against the Rams? Because that's all he had to do to win that game. Didn't he have the longest streak in 49er history without throwing an interception? So it's very probable that Smith wouldn't have turned the ball over vs the Rams, thus the Rams wouldn't have scored. Also very probable he is able to score 3 points. Now how probable is it that Kap is able to make such a difference as to where he can win that Giants and Vikings game? Well we don't know. But we do know that our offense is about the same in productivity. Giants and Vikings games weren't very close games, so how would Kap have made a difference? Especially since our offense isn't more productive with kap behind center. That is why the argument that Smith could have beaten the Rams is much more of a credible assumption than assuming that Kap could have beat the Giants and Vikings. That'd be like me arguing that Alex Smith could have won this past game vs. Seattle.

Just to touch on the Davis hit....it was illegal. The call on the field wasn't helmet to helmet, it was hit on a defenseless receiver. Davis as in the air catching the ball and the DB launched himself into him. The rule says you can't leave your feet to hit a receiver in the act of catching the ball with his feet off the ground. This was something they cracked down on a few years ago, a blow to the head isn't required to make the call.

Originally posted by boomer49er:
Just to touch on the Davis hit....it was illegal. The call on the field wasn't helmet to helmet, it was hit on a defenseless receiver. Davis as in the air catching the ball and the DB launched himself into him. The rule says you can't leave your feet to hit a receiver in the act of catching the ball with his feet off the ground. This was something they cracked down on a few years ago, a blow to the head isn't required to make the call.

Yeah definitely illegal. If Goldson gets fined for that hit on Hernandez, then Chancellor needs to get fined as well, as his hit was much worse in my opinion. He let with is helmet as well, Goldson did not.

Originally posted by pwillis52beasty:

Originally posted by JustaFan45:

Originally posted by pwillis52beasty:

Originally posted by JustaFan45:

Originally posted by pwillis52beasty:

Originally posted by JustaFan45:

Originally posted by pwillis52beasty:
Yup true that. We still lose, but don't lose that bad. Smith handles himself much better in that environment. Also, Alex Smith wins both of those Rams games. Meaning we'd be 12-3. Some may argue that we wouldn't have beaten New England with Smith, which I don't buy at all. Smith can play in shootouts too (Saints game). Anyways, we'd still be 11-4 had Smith somehow not been able to beat New England because he somehow can't make any of those throws That means we'd still be the #2 seed. I'm a fan of Kap and think he has tons of potential, but don't think it was right to put him in as the starter for the 2012 49ers.

Let me play this game too! After seeing the game at New England I think Kaep could of won at Minnesota and could of beat the Giants this year!

Did Kap not give the Rams 10 points in that second game? You can't say Kap would have beat Minnesota and the Giants, because you simply don't know how he would have played. It's relatively safe to say that Alex Smith doesn't give the Rams 10 points, given how protective he is with the football. Also, let's not forget before Smith got hurt in the first Rams game he was playing a very good game and had already thrown a touchdown pass I believe. Once he goes down the offense began to sputter because Kap was not prepared.

Smith throws 3 picks against Giants would you assume Kaep throws 3 picks in that game? I would say no because he hasn't done that!

Would Smith throw 4 tds at New England? Again I would say no because he hasn't done it!

We could go in circles all day the possibilities are endless!

Who knows what Kap does in the Giants game. The point is you can't claim that he would have been able to beat the Giants, because you simply don't know how he would have played. However, you can make a very strong case that Alex Smith doesn't just give the Rams 10 points. The Rams weren't doing a damn thing on offense. They would have had a big goose egg on the board if Kap didn't hand them 10 points. All Alex Smith would have had to do was get us 3 points and we win. It's a lot easier to make the argument that Alex Smith would have been able to win both of those close Rams games that went into overtime than it is to make some kind of argument that Kapernick would have been able to beat the Giants and Vikings which weren't very close games, when our offense as a whole hasn't even improved under Kaepernick.

You do realize we are going in circles? Of course I don't know if Kaep could beat the Giants and YOU don't know if Alex could beat the Rams. You can say "Alex doesn't give the Rams 10 points". I can say "Kaep doesn't throw 3 picks against the Giants". "Alex doesn't throw 4 Tds at New England" and back and forth we go playing a silly game of "What If." The fact is neither one of us knows!

Also I would like to add if Akers makes his field goals in both Rams game we wouldn't be having this discussion but that's another "What If."

Yes I do realize that. However, one is much more probable than the other. Rams games went into overtime. You don't think Alex Smith can get 3 points and not turn the ball over against the Rams? Because that's all he had to do to win that game. Didn't he have the longest streak in 49er history without throwing an interception? So it's very probable that Smith wouldn't have turned the ball over vs the Rams, thus the Rams wouldn't have scored. Also very probable he is able to score 3 points. Now how probable is it that Kap is able to make such a difference as to where he can win that Giants and Vikings game? Well we don't know. But we do know that our offense is about the same in productivity. Giants and Vikings games weren't very close games, so how would Kap have made a difference? Especially since our offense isn't more productive with kap behind center. That is why the argument that Smith could have beaten the Rams is much more of a credible assumption than assuming that Kap could have beat the Giants and Vikings. That'd be like me arguing that Alex Smith could have won this past game vs. Seattle.

Don't see how Alex gets us 3 points in the first Ram game considering Akers has to get you those 3 points. As far as the Giants and Vikings games I referenced the New England game and Kaep throwing 4 tds showing he's capable of getting you back in those games. Anyway that's hindsight I see it one way and you see it another so I'm going to check out for now. Good talking to you!

Originally posted by Marvin49:

Originally posted by JustaFan45:

Originally posted by Jersey9er:
BTW with this loss, i read where some say I have to have the same mindframe as i would of with Alex.

And if this is so, then lets give Kaep the harsh reality that we have when Smith was under center. Just like if a person asks what kind of ice cream flavors u like and u say well it depends on where u go. But thats not answering the main question. What flavor do u like, chocolate, vanilla, strawberry, etc.

in this case i use that example becasue the D let them score 42 points, but lets stop using that as the excuse for Kaeps lack of production. He failed to make something out of nothing period. I mean was Wilson just sitting in the pocket all day picking us off, no. He outplayed us, just like Kaep should of been able to do against their D.

It just came to me now, but I think the reason they went soo much with the pass this last week, because Kaep for starters has the arm. And if they are gonna run the same version of the O that they ran with Smith, then there is no need to put Kaep in. Problem is, when things broke down for kaep he couldnt make things happen. That smart decision making wasnt a factor. That rolling out and getting the 50yd run a game wasnt a factor. I mean s**t, if anything i would of like to had seen Kaep running and making things happen with his feet just as did Wilson.

So overall, please make sure u hear what im saying with no hidden meanings. Yes Kaep doesnt play defense, yes the playcalling was bad at times, and yes he didnt get much help. But now focusing on the offensive aspect, Kaep did nothing to help his team win. When he did get the ball back, and a good call was called, he either audibled out, or we stalled. just that simple.

And im focusing just on this game. not next weeks, not the new england game. Just this one. This was a true test of enviornment and playoff atmosphere. Actually more than New England, because their stadium is no where near the same as Chicken stadium. He failed to do anything until garbage time. Does this mean it will happen in next weeks game, nope. Does it mean he stinks, nope. or even mean he's not the QB of the future, nope.

But everytime someone says about what he didnt do. Can we stop with the Smith wouldnt of done that either, or he didnt score 42 points. Thats just a way of trying to find another out, rather than just taking ownership as we say for the aspect of the game, Kaep didnt help in. thats all tho. nutin personal

Let's see defense and special teams gives up 42 points to a red hot team who is undefeated at home.

Defense allows 28 points in 18 minutes at New England in December. (Oh by the way Kaep throws 4 tds including a game winner.)

Kaep wins against a hot Chicago team in his first start.

He wins at New Orleans against another hot team at the time albeit the defense scored 2 tds.

He puts the team in to position to win against the Rams at home only to see Akers miss the game winner. (Kicking game has been an issue all season).

He overcomes his mistakes at St. Louis to win that game but 2 guys paid to do their job Walker catching and Akers kicking don't come through (I know "Kaepercuses").


So now you want us as Niner fans to stand up acknowledge and nitpick the Quarterback play in a 42-13 loss? Regardless of what I mentioned above recapping what Kaep has accomplished so far is irrelevant and insignificant because of the Seattle game where you're micro analyzing QB play justifying in your mind that Harbaugh made a mistake going with Kaep and the arrogance to think if he stayed with the other guy it would of been a different outcome in the game.

Ok I get it now.

Kaep didn't play well. If said that many times. Nobody is saying otherwise. I mentioned that Smith wouldn't have either not as a defense of Kaep, but as an attempt to the argument that we could have won this game with Alex behind center. It wouldn't have mattered if Montana or Ypung were back there. This is a good Seattle D, they were in the elements, they were playing in the hardest away stadium in the NFL...and oh yeah, the defense never got off the bus. The Seahawks had 2 possessions and a blocked kick and it was already 21-0.

Now Justafan, Marv and I were talking pretty evenly until the gallery commented. Nah, just messin wit ya man, but i will say he and i kept the sarcasm to a dull drip, until u had to bang the drum.

Harbaugh justification, and all that, lemme point out your flaws of the same trap that i said Marv fell into.

I'll be damned again If i didnt say, just this game. Lets talk about this game. Then i'll be damned a third time, if u didnt bring up what happened in past games. ONly thing i said about other teams is that it's louder in Seachick land than in Pats territory. Then u brought up Akers, then Rams, then a partridge in a pair tree.

Thats what i mean. I adressed Marv when just like he said, he felt the need to add in what Smith could or probably couldnt of done. Which shouldnt of even been said because it was Kaep that started and not Smith. He didnt do it, but if Kaep had a bad game. Whats wrong with just saying he had a bad game. Why the need to put Smith in the justification of kaep's failings (or if not justification, then why at all, honestly). (And hope u dont start with the snappy smith comeback, lol)

In the zone, u ever notice that u ask one question about Kaep lately, and the first answer u get is the D, played this, Special Teams played that, he didnt score 42 pts. All right. (once again, just focusing on this game only)

But answer this question for me. If they scored 28pts in the first quarter. What does that have to do with us putting up points. IF we are getting blown out, is it bad to think that our Qb should be able to put some type of points on the board thru the first three quarters. I mean after every drive they scored. WE did get the ball back right. We did have an opportunity to score correct.

I didnt bring up past games, and aint gonna bring up next weeks game.

Seattle was a true test of late in the season, top defense, and a QB who was the equivalent to Kaep, in a noisy environment where true grit and being able to overcome the odds come into play. The D was on the field way too much, just like we used to say in the past, or are u gonna say we didnt say that either.

REgardless if i feel Harbs made the wrong decision, u chose to not adress my other post where i said i'm ride or dying with Kaep, just cuz thats who coach chooses. As a fan I dont have to agree with all decisions made, but im still a true fan none the less.

So once again. I just say Kaep looked more lost and confused in this hostile enviornment. I dont think he has mastered the art of being able to communicate with the silent signal and count, when to change in the right play, or back into the original. Is all this conjecture. Kind of hard to think that he can master the position in 6 games where it takes some years. Buuuuuut.... just like the reason coach made the switch, he is ready to handle the stage now. And if he is, in the middle of the season, when we were winning ,than he will be held accountable. And should be if he's helping take our team to the SB. Now's not the time for growing pains at QB. You deal with that in the offseason.

I hope Kaep helps us win next week. But one thing i did like that Wilson said, (heart hurting as im even giving any of their players credit), "What helps win a game is the GCP (Game Changing plays)." And in my personal opinion, in a game that mattered most, like the playoffs, that you have to win. Through 3 quarters, when he WAS able to make a play, or scramble, or run for 50 yards, or go deep 3-6 times a game he didnt do it. plain and simple. So in a loss, if i dont see anything until MM called it garbage time, then somethings gotta change. As harbaugh said, "maybe he has to simplify the offense a bit". Never heard that any time before till now.

Hello all,
Not that you want to hear it but after reading through this thread I had to throw in my 2 cents.

There seems to be some common themes coming from everyone as follows:

1) The 49ers were tired from the trip to New England followed by a trip to Seattle.

2) The 49ers had beaten Seattle 3 straight times with Smith/Harbaugh and therefore would have logically beaten Seattle a 4th time or at least performed much better than CK did.

3) Seattle got away with holding all day long, it was obvious watching the replays.

4) Seattles corners continually get away with holding, and it never gets called.

5) Not a lot of people mentioned it, but at least one that I read mentioned piped in crowd noise at Century Link.

6) Losing Justin Smith changed the entire game.

My thoughts are as follows:

1) I'm sure it is tough to travel cross country, play your butts off then have another road game the next week. Do you think it would have been easier to host New England on Sunday then travel to Seattle to play a Thursday night game with 2 less days to prepare? Because that is exactly what Seattle did when traveling to San Fran earlier this year. If a team has a full week to prepare then they have no excuses, whether it's back to back road games or not. This is the NFL, the team, coaches, and players should be ready with a full week. I know It's easy for me to say sitting on my butt, but I don't recall a lot of Seattle fans complaining when we lost earlier in the season. We lost. Period. It's a division game and we lost by 7 on a shortened week on the road. Should have played better.

2) Yes San Fran beat Seattle 3 straight times under Harbaugh. He inherited a playoff caliber team, and Seattle has turned over 75% of its roster in the last 2 years. If Seattle had beaten San Fran it would have been a huge upset. Seattles roster is now just about set, and their arrow is pointing up. If people think Seattle is keeping things status quo from last year they're mistaken. The "we always beat them" mentality is pretty comical. Teams and personnel change, if they stayed the same you can expect the same result, but if a team has improved, I don't think you can rest your hopes on "what has been will always be."

3) I learned after Super Bowl 40 that complaining about officiating makes you sound like an a-hole (as most Seattle fans did). The reality is Seattle did get away with a lot of holding.....so did San Fran.....so does every single team every single Sunday. I rewatched the game from Sunday, as I do with every game, and there was nothing out of the ordinary. You could call holding on every single play of every single game if you wanted to. That's the hazards of watching on a DVR. Rewatch the game when San Fran is on offense and you will see the same amount of non called holding on both sides.

4) Seattle corners do seem to get away with holding and down field contact every week. This has been going on for two years, with two separate coaches complaining publicly about it, and sending video to league officials on it. It continues to be allowed. So either it is not against the rules, or it is not something the league is going to enforce. So, does this make Seattle foolish for continuing to do it? Or does it make the rest of the teams foolish for not playing the same way? Kind of like a pitcher figuring out an umps strike zone.....find out how they're calling a game and play to it. You would be foolish not to.

5) There is no artificial crowd noise. It has been analyzed by the league, and there is nothing artificial about it. One is the stadium design, which similar to above, why wouldn't every team building a new stadium be hiring the same design firm? The other is just honestly Seattle fans in general. From the Kingdome, to Century Link Field with the hawks, Husky Stadium, the Sounders, and going back to when we still had the Sonics, they have all been labeled some of the hardest places to play when teams are performing well. Don't ask me why, I don't live in Seattle (hate the liberal city) but they consistently have the loudest fans regardless of sport and venue.

6) If one player makes that much of a difference on your team, then your management has done a poor job of building it. I hated Pete Carrol before he came to Seattle, namely out of ignorance, but have come full circle on him. He and Schnieder have built their team on the next man up mentality. So far it is serving them very well. If Justin Smith is that important to that defense, they have some problems!

Ok, I know you guys are moving on, as you should. But I have just been irked by some of the excuses I've been reading. We have lost to you the 3 times previous. You were better than us period. Well we've gotten better. I don't think 42-13 better, but from here on out I don't think previous records mean anything. It will hopefully be a battle every game.

Here's to an actual competitive division, with a heated rivalry for years to come!

P.S. I do agree with most of you that Sherman is a punk. I have said, if he didn't play for us I would hate him! But he is gooood. You have to give him his due. It isn't cool to see people wishing for injury though. I know you are a classier bunch than that.

Originally posted by Jersey9er:
Now Justafan, Marv and I were talking pretty evenly until the gallery commented. Nah, just messin wit ya man, but i will say he and i kept the sarcasm to a dull drip, until u had to bang the drum.

Harbaugh justification, and all that, lemme point out your flaws of the same trap that i said Marv fell into.

I'll be damned again If i didnt say, just this game. Lets talk about this game. Then i'll be damned a third time, if u didnt bring up what happened in past games. ONly thing i said about other teams is that it's louder in Seachick land than in Pats territory. Then u brought up Akers, then Rams, then a partridge in a pair tree.

Thats what i mean. I adressed Marv when just like he said, he felt the need to add in what Smith could or probably couldnt of done. Which shouldnt of even been said because it was Kaep that started and not Smith. He didnt do it, but if Kaep had a bad game. Whats wrong with just saying he had a bad game. Why the need to put Smith in the justification of kaep's failings (or if not justification, then why at all, honestly). (And hope u dont start with the snappy smith comeback, lol)

In the zone, u ever notice that u ask one question about Kaep lately, and the first answer u get is the D, played this, Special Teams played that, he didnt score 42 pts. All right. (once again, just focusing on this game only)

But answer this question for me. If they scored 28pts in the first quarter. What does that have to do with us putting up points. IF we are getting blown out, is it bad to think that our Qb should be able to put some type of points on the board thru the first three quarters. I mean after every drive they scored. WE did get the ball back right. We did have an opportunity to score correct.

I didnt bring up past games, and aint gonna bring up next weeks game.

Seattle was a true test of late in the season, top defense, and a QB who was the equivalent to Kaep, in a noisy environment where true grit and being able to overcome the odds come into play. The D was on the field way too much, just like we used to say in the past, or are u gonna say we didnt say that either.

REgardless if i feel Harbs made the wrong decision, u chose to not adress my other post where i said i'm ride or dying with Kaep, just cuz thats who coach chooses. As a fan I dont have to agree with all decisions made, but im still a true fan none the less.

So once again. I just say Kaep looked more lost and confused in this hostile enviornment. I dont think he has mastered the art of being able to communicate with the silent signal and count, when to change in the right play, or back into the original. Is all this conjecture. Kind of hard to think that he can master the position in 6 games where it takes some years. Buuuuuut.... just like the reason coach made the switch, he is ready to handle the stage now. And if he is, in the middle of the season, when we were winning ,than he will be held accountable. And should be if he's helping take our team to the SB. Now's not the time for growing pains at QB. You deal with that in the offseason.

I hope Kaep helps us win next week. But one thing i did like that Wilson said, (heart hurting as im even giving any of their players credit), "What helps win a game is the GCP (Game Changing plays)." And in my personal opinion, in a game that mattered most, like the playoffs, that you have to win. Through 3 quarters, when he WAS able to make a play, or scramble, or run for 50 yards, or go deep 3-6 times a game he didnt do it. plain and simple. So in a loss, if i dont see anything until MM called it garbage time, then somethings gotta change. As harbaugh said, "maybe he has to simplify the offense a bit". Never heard that any time before till now.

Bruh I skimmed through this essay you wrote and all I'll say is this, the bottom line is you picked the wrong game to try and build a case for your boy to get back in the lineup. Kaep was the least of the problems in this game.

You and I both know your agenda in all this!