49ers @ Falcons Thread | Sunday, 1PM ET

Originally posted by Ensatsu:

Originally posted by 49ersking:
What happened to the vaunted 49ers DLine? MNF game, then travel across the country? Tired? I don't know, but we know the defense is not the main problem right now.

It sounds lame, but yes. I think they were just jet lagged and tired. I'm not really hitting the panic button with the defense.

It's unrealistic to think a DLine with a couple rookies and no Bosa would sustain that level of play through the first 6 weeks. Was Mykel even out there?

Originally posted by Silky:
I've concluded the following was our demise in this order:
1. Brocks horrible interceptions
2. Penalties especially all the DPI ones
3. Jack Jones (could be included with penalties). He is so bad
4. Eddy P
5. Then injuries is last

Took them forever to finally bench Jones and put in Prysock.

Originally posted by VaBeachNiner:

Originally posted by Silky:
I've concluded the following was our demise in this order:
1. Brocks horrible interceptions
2. Penalties especially all the DPI ones
3. Jack Jones (could be included with penalties). He is so bad
4. Eddy P
5. Then injuries is last

Took them forever to finally bench Jones and put in Prysock.

That's a good football name. If he's a stud he can have an original celebration where he pins down and takes off the opponents socks. Then sniffs them. Or simulate all that

Originally posted by Silky:

Originally posted by Ensatsu:

Originally posted by 49ersking:
What happened to the vaunted 49ers DLine? MNF game, then travel across the country? Tired? I don't know, but we know the defense is not the main problem right now.

It sounds lame, but yes. I think they were just jet lagged and tired. I'm not really hitting the panic button with the defense.

It's unrealistic to think a DLine with a couple rookies and no Bosa would sustain that level of play through the first 6 weeks. Was Mykel even out there?

Also that Falcon oline is one of the best in the league. Do peeps not know this s**t? Thats why Penix eviscerated us after their offense settled down.

Originally posted by 49erKing:

Originally posted by Silky:

Originally posted by Ensatsu:

Originally posted by 49ersking:
What happened to the vaunted 49ers DLine? MNF game, then travel across the country? Tired? I don't know, but we know the defense is not the main problem right now.

It sounds lame, but yes. I think they were just jet lagged and tired. I'm not really hitting the panic button with the defense.

It's unrealistic to think a DLine with a couple rookies and no Bosa would sustain that level of play through the first 6 weeks. Was Mykel even out there?

Also that Falcon oline is one of the best in the league. Do peeps not know this s**t? Thats why Penix eviscerated us after their offense settled down.

People think the 49ers should dominate like a state champion varsity squad against an 0-6 JV team, otherwise the team sucks and everyone should be cut.

Originally posted by DrEll:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by DrEll:

Originally posted by jcs:

Originally posted by JimA49ers:

Originally posted by captveg:
Overall, the game I expected. A tired - physically and mentally- team that traveled on a short week with an early game start, and the ball bounced against them, too.

Most teams, even SB winning teams, have a game or two like this each year. Key is to recover from it. One of those games that coaches kinda secretly like despite themselves, because it gives them a lot of material for the team to work on and stay humble.

Like the eagles beat down in 94….

Not at all. That 49ers team was a juggernaut and that loss was a blowout this was a close game and we're essentially a 1/4 of the team that started the year with all the injuries.

Yea awful comparisons to the 94 juggernaut team. Coping mechanism I guess…

Since you're a rams fan, we didn't become a juggernaut until that game

Awful comparison. I mean there's just no other way to spin it.

lol you weren't even born in 94

Originally posted by 49erKing:

Originally posted by Silky:

Originally posted by Ensatsu:

Originally posted by 49ersking:
What happened to the vaunted 49ers DLine? MNF game, then travel across the country? Tired? I don't know, but we know the defense is not the main problem right now.

It sounds lame, but yes. I think they were just jet lagged and tired. I'm not really hitting the panic button with the defense.

It's unrealistic to think a DLine with a couple rookies and no Bosa would sustain that level of play through the first 6 weeks. Was Mykel even out there?

Also that Falcon oline is one of the best in the league. Do peeps not know this s**t? Thats why Penix eviscerated us after their offense settled down.

Penix was sacked 5 times one week ago with that same line.

Originally posted by DrEll:
Penix was sacked 5 times one week ago with that same line.

NFL math is only attractive to casuals. It simply does not add up.

I want to comment on the TD pass to Watkins that was ruled incomplete because he didn't have control all the way. I'm not saying the call was wrong because the way the rule is written it was incomplete. You could see the ball moving as he fell to the ground out of bounds. My problem is with the rule itself.

If a player crosses the goal line with the ball in his posssesion it's a TD even if the ball gets knocked out afterward. We've seen that happen many times. Even if the players feet aren't over the line as long as the ball is it's a TD. Why then isn't it a TD if the player has control of the ball after the catch while in the end zone? Why does it matter if the ball moves a little after he's pushed out? He never actually lost control. It never touched the ground. The rule as written doesn't make sense. It's inconsistent. What's even worse is there was an INT by the Falcons where the player had both feet in bounds when he caught the pass but bobbled it as he fell but it was still an INT. Two very similar situations with different interpretations.

This possesion rule needs to be changed so it's consistent. If a receiver has the ball in his possesion while in bounds it should be a catch. The bobbling rule shouldn't be applied once a player is out of bounds. I don't think it should even apply if the player is bobbling it in bounds if the ball doesn't touch the ground. It's a dumb rule that never should have been implemented.

Originally posted by CatchMaster80:
I want to comment on the TD pass to Watkins that was ruled incomplete because he didn't have control all the way. I'm not saying the call was wrong because the way the rule is written it was incomplete. You could see the ball moving as he fell to the ground out of bounds. My problem is with the rule itself.

If a player crosses the goal line with the ball in his posssesion it's a TD even if the ball gets knocked out afterward. We've seen that happen many times. Even if the players feet aren't over the line as long as the ball is it's a TD. Why then isn't it a TD if the player has control of the ball after the catch while in the end zone? Why does it matter if the ball moves a little after he's pushed out? He never actually lost control. It never touched the ground. The rule as written doesn't make sense. It's inconsistent. What's even worse is there was an INT by the Falcons where the player had both feet in bounds when he caught the pass but bobbled it as he fell but it was still an INT. Two very similar situations with different interpretations.

This possesion rule needs to be changed so it's consistent. If a receiver has the ball in his possesion while in bounds it should be a catch. The bobbling rule shouldn't be applied once a player is out of bounds. I don't think it should even apply if the player is bobbling it in bounds if the ball doesn't touch the ground. It's a dumb rule that never should have been implemented.

Disagree.

Originally posted by Hysterikal:

Originally posted by CatchMaster80:
I want to comment on the TD pass to Watkins that was ruled incomplete because he didn't have control all the way. I'm not saying the call was wrong because the way the rule is written it was incomplete. You could see the ball moving as he fell to the ground out of bounds. My problem is with the rule itself.

If a player crosses the goal line with the ball in his posssesion it's a TD even if the ball gets knocked out afterward. We've seen that happen many times. Even if the players feet aren't over the line as long as the ball is it's a TD. Why then isn't it a TD if the player has control of the ball after the catch while in the end zone? Why does it matter if the ball moves a little after he's pushed out? He never actually lost control. It never touched the ground. The rule as written doesn't make sense. It's inconsistent. What's even worse is there was an INT by the Falcons where the player had both feet in bounds when he caught the pass but bobbled it as he fell but it was still an INT. Two very similar situations with different interpretations.

This possesion rule needs to be changed so it's consistent. If a receiver has the ball in his possesion while in bounds it should be a catch. The bobbling rule shouldn't be applied once a player is out of bounds. I don't think it should even apply if the player is bobbling it in bounds if the ball doesn't touch the ground. It's a dumb rule that never should have been implemented.

Disagree.

Disagree with what? You think the rule as written is correct? Why? At least make it consistent. This crap about the ball wiggled a little so the pass is incomplete is BS. If the ball actually hits the ground and helps the player control the ball then that's a different story.

Originally posted by CatchMaster80:

Originally posted by Hysterikal:

Originally posted by CatchMaster80:
I want to comment on the TD pass to Watkins that was ruled incomplete because he didn't have control all the way. I'm not saying the call was wrong because the way the rule is written it was incomplete. You could see the ball moving as he fell to the ground out of bounds. My problem is with the rule itself.

If a player crosses the goal line with the ball in his posssesion it's a TD even if the ball gets knocked out afterward. We've seen that happen many times. Even if the players feet aren't over the line as long as the ball is it's a TD. Why then isn't it a TD if the player has control of the ball after the catch while in the end zone? Why does it matter if the ball moves a little after he's pushed out? He never actually lost control. It never touched the ground. The rule as written doesn't make sense. It's inconsistent. What's even worse is there was an INT by the Falcons where the player had both feet in bounds when he caught the pass but bobbled it as he fell but it was still an INT. Two very similar situations with different interpretations.

This possesion rule needs to be changed so it's consistent. If a receiver has the ball in his possesion while in bounds it should be a catch. The bobbling rule shouldn't be applied once a player is out of bounds. I don't think it should even apply if the player is bobbling it in bounds if the ball doesn't touch the ground. It's a dumb rule that never should have been implemented.

Disagree.

Disagree with what? You think the rule as written is correct? Why? At least make it consistent. This crap about the ball wiggled a little so the pass is incomplete is BS. If the ball actually hits the ground and helps the player control the ball then that's a different story.

Because with how you want to change the rule it would cause a cascade of interpretations to the rules. So if someone catches the ball gets two feet down while running but never fully controlling then bobble it for the next 3 seconds as they run out of bounds it's a catch? There's no easy change to make it a catch. To me it wasn't a catch cause for the longest time it's you have to survive the ground and once a player is touching out of bounds they are out of bounds so therefore they are the same as the ground. Example is fielding a kickoff with a toe out of bounds on the sideline exploit.

Originally posted by Silky:
It's unrealistic to think a DLine with a couple rookies and no Bosa would sustain that level of play through the first 6 weeks. Was Mykel even out there?

I don't remember him during this game and too pissed off to watch it again right now. Does anyone know if he was out there or was he injured.

Originally posted by NYniner85:

#49ers pressured Falcons QB Michael Penix on 3 of 34 drop backs today.

That 9% pressure rate is their lowest since week 16 of 2024 against Miami (also 9%).

— Nick Wagoner (@nwagoner) October 25, 2026

unacceptable

A huge reason for the loss right here. You only pressure Penix on 3 of 34 drop backs and you're asking for all kinds of trouble. He was way, way too comfortable back there all game.

This, unfortunately, is what winning in the trenches looks like - their OL actually dominated the trenches yesterday. Was not expecting that with how well the Niners' DL has been playing so far this season. Need Bosa back, and hopefully right after the bye.

In addition, would still like to see them trade for an impactful pass rusher to further help this young DL and add more talent to fortify against any future injuries (and hoping Bosa stays healthy after his return).

Originally posted by Silky:
I've concluded the following was our demise in this order:
1. Brocks horrible interceptions
2. Penalties especially all the DPI ones
3. Jack Jones (could be included with penalties). He is so bad
4. Eddy P
5. Then injuries is last

The Black fumble should be 1 with the Purdy INTs
The Osa mental mistake that lead to an easy 3 before the half should be above Eddie